Man Shot While Serving on President's Gun Violence Commission

Full story: NBC29 Charlottesville

A Fluvanna County man is recovering from gunshot wounds at the University of Virginia Medical Center.
Comments
1 - 20 of 50 Comments Last updated May 23, 2013
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

“Equal Opportunity Not Results!”

Since: Nov 08

Charlottesville

#1 May 16, 2013
"If anything, this inspired me to work a lot harder on gun violence prevention and definitely work harder for the folks who may not have a chance to speak out or fight for this the way that I do," he said.

The people who shot you will not abide by tougher gun laws.

Judged:

23

15

8

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
WVU

Purcellville, VA

#2 May 16, 2013
How can this happen in DC as they have some of Americas strictest gun control law.Does anyone truly believe a criminal who has no issue with killing or robbing will be concerned about another gun law.Yet politicians think we need more instead of enforcing those currently on the book.
If gun control worked Chicago,Newark and Detroit would be vacation destinations.
As the number of Virginia citizens with concealed weapon permits increased violent crime has decreased.

Judged:

19

15

9

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Eaglescout1984

Charlottesville, VA

#3 May 16, 2013
The reason this man was shot is not because someone simply had a gun. It is due to the culture of violence that the thugs that shot him subscribe to. People like that feel it is okay to just open fire on a car, bystanders be damned, if someone in that car just offended you, or lives a few streets away, so they are automatically a "rival gang member."

If you want to stop inner-city gun violence, you need to stop the problem of young people becoming romanticized by the idea of violence and using weapons to "be a man". You need to have leaders in those communities stand up and declare a war on gangs, drugs and the violence that is tearing that community apart.

I don't know how this whole idea of it's cool and hip to kill and injure people walking down the street came from, but it's the reason so many people are the victims of gun violence.

Judged:

11

10

9

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Cruz

Charlottesville, VA

#4 May 16, 2013
He was in a district with the second Toughest gun laws in the nation and you were shot while in an area that should be avoided. They have laws on the books now so why did the shooter not turn themselves in and all would be grand in Obammy Land? WAIT, why did the shooter fire the gun? the law plainly says they can not shoot at people! BECAUSE THEY ARE CRIMINALS AND THEY DO NOT FOLLOW THE LAW AND THAT MAKES THEM CRIMINALS! People are called law abiding citizens because they follow the laws that are already on the books! It is that simple and the Laws need to be enforced and judges held accountable!
huck

Charlottesville, VA

#5 May 16, 2013
C-Ville Patriot wrote:
"If anything, this inspired me to work a lot harder on gun violence prevention and definitely work harder for the folks who may not have a chance to speak out or fight for this the way that I do," he said.
The people who shot you will not abide by tougher gun laws.
They will have to contend with less availability however, and gun violence has decreased for other countries with those laws.
Please let us know about your hard gun violence prevention work.
Blaaaa, blaaaa, blaaaa...

Judged:

10

10

6

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
god-fearer

Martinsville, VA

#6 May 16, 2013
GUN control opponents fail to state the list of specific RESPONSIBILITIES attach to the RIGHTS that they claim. All common sense people realize that rights require responsibilities. EXCEPT gun radicals want to have NO reponsibilities. Whenever someone starts ranting about their gun RIGHTS, ask them about their gun RESPONSIBILITIES!

Responsibilities are not just 'don't shoot random people walking on the street'- like this man. Responsibilities ought to include: the gun that you legally own should NEVER be out of your control; owner can LOCK the gun away; owner can put a ID-required trigger on the gun; owner can NEVER allow anyone else to hold, handle, or move the gun; etc. BUT gun radicals don't want even this simple level of responsibility, that is required for car drivers. Further, gun owners can never handle a gun when impaired in any way: not when drinking or drugging (including legal narcotics), not when rationally impaired (road rage, when you find out your spouse is cheating on you, when you get fired at work, etc.). People who drink are required to be responsible when drinking (not to drive, not to use equipment, etc): but gun radicals don't even want that simple level of responsibility.

Correct?
Liberalace

Charlottesville, VA

#7 May 16, 2013
huck wrote:
<quoted text>
They will have to contend with less availability however, and gun violence has decreased for other countries with those laws.
Please let us know about your hard gun violence prevention work.
Blaaaa, blaaaa, blaaaa...
First, guns will not be less available. Metallurgy technology makes it easier than ever today to actually make firearms. If we can make meth in labs in rural areas, thugs will be able to have guns made in urban areas. What happened with prohibition? Really cut back that evil alcohol use, didn't it. I hear the lefties cry about an "ineffective, losing drug war" that has failed to eradicate illegal drug use, but somehow they think if there is a war on firearms that illegal guns will all but disappear.

Now, can you explain what, specifically, "those laws" are in those other countries? The gun laws in this nation were much more lenient in the 1950s and 1960s, yet gun violence was not as pervasive. What has changed in our society?

Background checks are a good thing, but do we trust Uncle Sam with databases, etc.(especially in light of recent IRS developments)? Do we want to sit by while gun control advocates politicize events like Sandy Hook and deal with legislation on emotion versus logic?

The problems with violence in our society have to do with what goes on in homes, in cities and in certain cultures. Until those are changed, a war on guns will mirror the war on drugs.

R.I.P.: Charlton Heston

Judged:

13

11

6

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

Since: Apr 13

Location hidden

#8 May 16, 2013
Liberalace wrote:
<quoted text>
First, guns will not be less available. Metallurgy technology makes it easier than ever today to actually make firearms. If we can make meth in labs in rural areas, thugs will be able to have guns made in urban areas. What happened with prohibition? Really cut back that evil alcohol use, didn't it. I hear the lefties cry about an "ineffective, losing drug war" that has failed to eradicate illegal drug use, but somehow they think if there is a war on firearms that illegal guns will all but disappear.
Now, can you explain what, specifically, "those laws" are in those other countries? The gun laws in this nation were much more lenient in the 1950s and 1960s, yet gun violence was not as pervasive. What has changed in our society?
Background checks are a good thing, but do we trust Uncle Sam with databases, etc.(especially in light of recent IRS developments)? Do we want to sit by while gun control advocates politicize events like Sandy Hook and deal with legislation on emotion versus logic?
The problems with violence in our society have to do with what goes on in homes, in cities and in certain cultures. Until those are changed, a war on guns will mirror the war on drugs.
R.I.P.: Charlton Heston
You nailed this. Thank you for saying it so well.
huck

Charlottesville, VA

#9 May 16, 2013
Liberalace wrote:
<quoted text>

Now, can you explain what, specifically, "those laws" are in those other countries?
http://www.businessinsider.com/canada-austral...

Charlton Heston was a douche.
Allen

Duluth, GA

#10 May 16, 2013
Would not shock me if I found out this was just a ploy to gain support for tougher gun laws.
huck

Charlottesville, VA

#11 May 16, 2013
douchette
hondacivic

Charlottesville, VA

#12 May 16, 2013
Liberalace wrote:
<quoted text>

Background checks are a good thing, but do we trust Uncle Sam with databases, etc.(especially in light of recent IRS developments)?
What part of the background check bill that says there will not be a registry do you not understand? I would be more concerned with trusting my reading comprehension.
Civil Discourse

Charlottesville, VA

#13 May 16, 2013
huck wrote:
<quoted text>
They will have to contend with less availability however, and gun violence has decreased for other countries with those laws.
Please let us know about your hard gun violence prevention work.
Blaaaa, blaaaa, blaaaa...
Exactly, Huck! I respect Greg Jackson for his commitment to join in this difficult work.
When law-abiding gun owners agree to common-sense prevention measures, ie. universal background checks, mandatory reporting of lost or stolen guns, etc, we'll see less availability of guns for the criminal. If a gun owner has nothing to hide, he/she should'nt mind these measures.
Freedom Rings

Charlottesville, VA

#14 May 16, 2013
See, if YOU had a GUN on you, you could have
shot back and taken a waste of life off this earth!
Intelligence

Charlottesville, VA

#15 May 16, 2013
How about keeping guns away from the CRIMINALS and not law abiding citizens! The person shot you not the gun it didn't pull its own trigger!
Colt 45

Charlottesville, VA

#16 May 16, 2013
How about a complete story on this,was the shooter caught? did he own the gun legally and if caught what was his punishment?Not that it makes any difference, we have the death penalty for murder
but they still happen every day.
I live here

Charlottesville, VA

#18 May 16, 2013
And I have NOT been shot in my 16 years as a volunteer firearms instructor for the NRA. Ironic, isn't it?
Me myself and I

Charlottesville, VA

#19 May 16, 2013
Cruz wrote:
He was in a district with the second Toughest gun laws in the nation and you were shot while in an area that should be avoided. They have laws on the books now so why did the shooter not turn themselves in and all would be grand in Obammy Land?
I'm not entirely sure if you're actually an idiot or are just trolling.

All this demonstrates is that state controls on guns can't work when you have neighboring states without such controls. Your point is merely an argument for better federal controls.
Me myself and I

Charlottesville, VA

#20 May 16, 2013
Freedom Rings wrote:
See, if YOU had a GUN on you, you could have
shot back and taken a waste of life off this earth!
Or, given the shooter wasn't aiming at the person he hit, this guy could just as easily killed or injured yet another innocent passer-by had he responded in kind.
huck

Charlottesville, VA

#21 May 16, 2013
his color helped

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Charlottesville Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Albemarle seeks input on changing rules for rur... Aug 26 Buffalo jim 3
NAACP Urges People To Bring Cameras Wherever Ar... Aug 26 Rock 6
Another Example Of A No Tollerence Antis, This ... Aug 22 Clyde Frawg 1
Missing Persons Case Has a Few Twists (Jun '13) Aug 20 Heatherstamper 3
Fletcher Askew dermatologist, pervert Aug 19 Shantane 4
3rd man sentenced in theft of Va. Guard equipme... (May '12) Aug 18 firsthandknowledge 13
Scottsville Man Arrested for Homicide, Child Abuse Aug 13 test 1
•••
•••
•••

Charlottesville Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Charlottesville People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Charlottesville News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Charlottesville
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••