Security very important???

Due too the recent shooting in Arizona and some saying it could have been prevented is going to be a problem. Where security is very important for safety there is going to become a point where we are not going to be able to have that safety zone of security around us. The costs of security is a bill taxpayers are going to find staggering. Where and who are the most important people and where does government draw the line. The example in Arizona there are enough witnesses that seen the shooting and the shooter but yet the taxpayers will be burden with a very expensive trial. Maybe we need to look at how we treat criminals and the costs of keeping there sorry a$$e$ the rest of their lives in prison. The penalty for people that commit serious crimes is not working with life sentences any longer. Some prisoners are living in better conditions than some Americans that have fell on hard times and it time to stop it.

Well, we could go with a tried and true method.....kill all of the lawers. Saves time, money, and effort.

Limit number of appeals.

Once guilty verdict reached, warm up the chair, firing squad, or needle crew.

Let family members control the death switch. Have a game show and bet to see if they have the nads to pull the switch.

The old standby, impaling on local tv and leave the body at the entrance to the city as a warning. I am a Vlad fan.l

Allowing a crazy person to legally buy and conceal a semi-automatic is part of having a "well-regulated militia," isn't it?

Crazy people tend not to consider the punishment for their crimes...especially when they plan on comitting suicide shortly thereafter. I believe (but may be wrong) that was the intention of the perp in this case - but he chickened out

This wouldn't be a problem if the mob still ran things.

We could remove hate speech on the public airwaves, fine candidates who use gun metaphors in their ads, and/or speeches, fully fund mental health and so forth, but I am sure all of these common sense measures will fail so we are probably left with extending secret service type protection to members of congress and federal judges at an astronomical cost as the first poster suggested.

And repeal the First Amendment! No thanks. Rather, we should all refuse to support anyone who engages in violent political rhetoric.

Commercial speech doesn’t enjoy the same level of first amendment protection that non-commercial speech does. So while an individual would always be free to engage in violent rhetoric, someone who makes a business out of violent rhetoric could not.

I'm curious - how exactly would you word this law?

j

I'm from the government and I'm here to help,

just give up some more of your rights and I will help I promise.

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety..

Really is sad when either side tries to restrict FREE SPEECH...

Gotta question a person smarts when he wants any kind of speech outlawed...