It is preposterous to allow gun sales for rapid fire weapons that are suitable for war.

Yes, the right to bear arms is guaranteed, but not the sale of multiple-murder weapons.

Put the issue on the ballot and let Americans vote on the issue, rather than letting the lobbyists determine what is to be done. 

Control through registration and screening before allowing ownership should be required nationally.  A waiting period should be required, which can be effective if there is current rage.  Imagine the possible effect on the Gabriel Giffords assassination attempt and those who were shot and those who were killed. 

The existence of assault weapons has permitted the smuggling of such weapons over the border, to be used by the drug cartels.  This also threatens the US itself, inside the US.

The point is to fix the problem and not to engage in the rhetoric of blame, below

PLACING BLAME - See comments on pundits and politicians, on Main Page.

A reasonable person would probably agree with the imbattled

Placing blame is another part of inciting rhetoric that is complaining about rhetoric being inciting.  It is not fair to attribute a "blood libel" (to hold a person libel for causing blood) on any one individual, especially without proper evidence.  The speaking of a political figure in

St. Petersburg Examiner, January 10, 2011

Immediately following the tragic shooting of Arizona Congresswoman Gifford and killing of several others, including a child, what are the first words out of Keith Olbermann’s mouth about the deranged psychotic who did the shooting?  That it is Sarah Palin’s fault!  That her party should “repudiate her” and “dismiss her from politics.”  And if they don’t, they are as guilty as she.  (The Speech; some good points, but ask yourself if this is positive, contributory, non-hostile, non-biased rhetoric - righteousness?  Focussing on one person's error in rhetoric (a bulls-eye) to the excluion of many, many other examples, on both sides, not one.  He did, however, to his great credit, acknowledge his own offenses in that area, and that anyone can make inadvertent errors.   On Jan. 8, he attributed "death fantasies and dreams of blood lust" to the Tea Party movement and to the Republican Party in general (as if "all" people in  those contingents had that view)  See Digital Journal

It may be free speech but it does not have to go this far, on either "side".