What are your thoughts on Ted Cruz blaming democrats for the Colorado shooting? ?

Everytime i hear or see ted cruz mentioned I know its time to change the channel I'm watching.

Cruz is a clown. 

Typical cuckroach. Blame others for their own doing. If a cuckroach commits murder, call it a false flag and blame it on us honest, God fearing, patriotic Liberals.

I don’t like Cruz. He’s a Trump lackey. And I hate Trump. 

That said, he’s right about one thing. Many Democrats are trying to remove ALL guns from society. Guns ownership is a constitutional Right. If that were to happen, what is to say that ANY of the bill of rights are safe. If this constitutional right is to be viewed as a mere privilege, than all constitutional rights are nothing more than privileges as well that can be removed if any one party doesn’t like them. 

Remove the right to own ARs or other “assault weapons”? First you have to define what an assault weapon actually IS? Problem is there are a lot of these firearms already in private hands. How do you remove them from citizens’ homes, ie citizens who have legally bought and keep them. They haven’t committed any crimes. The term “assault weapon” is ridiculously hard to define because any definition you assign to it in order to remove an AR will automatically loop other firearms in putting many non-assault weapons on that same list. List semi autos as a definition: practically 85% (making a point, don’t know the actual number) of all handguns bought every year are semiautomatics. Will they outlaw those too? If you remove such weapons, you are virtually saying that no American has the Right to defend themselves using a firearm. Most folks would not appreciate being told they can only legally use a stick to defend their lives, homes, and families. 

High capacity? What the public doesn’t get is that your definition of high capacity is NOT the same as the manufacturer. Many/most semi autos are designed and built to hold more than what gun control people define as “high capacity”. A full sized pistol might be made to hold NORMALLY 17 or 18 rounds. That’s NOT considered high capacity. That’s NORMAL capacity for that firearm. High capacity is when you put aftermarket parts on or buy bigger magazines than the manufacturer meant for that firearm. So when people say ban pistols with “high capacity”, usually referred to as more than 10 rounds, you are actually doing two things 1) you are making people carry a gun half loaded and 2) dictating to manufacturers to modify their guns with crippling features. How would you feel buying a car with a 15 gallon fuel tank, but is modified so it can only carry 7 gallons at any one time? I would shop elsewhere is what I would do. And how do you confiscate millions (billions?) of magazines in households across the country? And let’s not forget that since the last year, there are WAY more brand new gun owners. So many that stores have literally run out of guns and ammunition to sell. So many are first time gun owners. That means there are even more guns in private homes than ever before. I’m sure they won’t be happy to learn that their purchase is now considering illegal. 

I know this is a horrible human tragedy and I feel for the families. But punishing legal gun owners isn’t the answer. Thing is, you could put every law you ever dreamed of on the books, and there will STILLS be another shooting somewhere. There will always be just like there will always be another murder at some point. The vast majority of Criminals don’t jump through any of the legal hoops of buying a gun. Gun store owners are already audited and threatened to have their license to sell pulled for even the slightest infraction or discrepancy. They don’t sell to criminals knowingly. And knowing is a federal background check problem. So all these legal hurdles and new laws only inhibit law abiding citizens. Apply this thinking to DUIs. No law actually stops someone from actually drinking and getting behind the wheel in the parking lot of a local bar, driving and killing someone. Doing so is already illegal and a crime, but can only come to bear AFTER the fact. So what do we do? We apply ever more laws on alcohol sales AND on cars that ONLY affect the people who don’t do that kind of thing. Eventually the only thing gun critics can then do is outlaw all of it. Banning ALL alcohol and car ownership is the only tool they would have left. How reasonable is that? Doesn’t affect you, you say?

It’s like folks who commute to work on public transportation saying “I don’t need a car, hence NO one else does either. That would save thousands of lives if no one had a car. It’s just makes common sense”...unless you own a car and use one and don’t appreciate metro commuters dictating to you how or when you can use and own a car. And keep in mind: a car legally is NOT a right, it’s a PRIVILEGE. Gun ownership is an actual right. 

People keep saying “oh there’s no laws on the books” BS. There are probably more gun laws than there are car laws already. How much more legislation can you throw at this? In many states you can’t buy any firearm without going through an FFL already. Unless the Boulder shooter had been submitted at some point to health folks for mental issues at some point in his adult life, no background check would have stopped him. Background checks are good, but only as good as the amount of information it has access to. Many places REQUIRE you to have a permit BEFORE you buy a gun. Now if you are going to actually take advantage of your Rights to carry, you have to go through x-hours of training and then apply for a permit, all out of your own pocket and usually at prohibitively high costs. You do this in order to receive a state permission slip (permit) that allows you to ACTUALLY practice your constitutional rights. What other Right do we have that requires us to get training, pay money, and receive a state granted/approved permit (aka perMISSION) to practice that right. The very idea that we would need state permission to practice our constitutional  rights is already problematic. Yeah, no rights are absolute, granted, but gun owners have to jump through more legal hoops to buy and own a firearm already than we have to do in order to buy a car. We are already approaching “unreasonable” legally prohibitive encroachment on the rights to own a firearm. What if these requirements applied to freedom of speech or voting rights? There would be an outcry by the same folks trying to legislate guns out of existence. I guess only “some Rights are worth defending, but others, ehh” is the attitude. 

He doesn't have any solution. To anything. But he does have a Plan B: head straight to Cancun if the s*** hits the fan.

No doubt he HAS a solution:  thoughts and prayers.  Also, ever notice how gun people always say "now is the time for grieving; we'll propose a solution later" but then never do?

Why not? Democrats blamed republicans for the Georgia shooting 

Jesus Christ has the solution.  Only Christ can change the heart of man to stop the killings.  Guns don't kill, people do.

The grocery store was NOT a "gun-free zone".  Kroger asked its customers to not bring their guns into the store but they never put anything in place to enforce it.  Not that it matters because no mass shooting in U.S. history has ever been ended by an armed citizen shooting the mass shooter to end it. 

@Ron is lying again. Republiqanon George W. Bush is the one who invited the shooter into the U.S. to start with, not Democrats.

Cruz and Republiqanons won't propose a solution to the problem of gun violence in the U.S. because they NEVER, EVER have any solutions to any of our problems.  Never!

Do you know how many laws are already on the books.

The guy didn't past a federal background check - The guy got a gun anyways. -

Oh the grocery store is a gun free zone. 

Why didn't  he just read the signs?

How are we going to stop all those shootings in Chicago.