Rupert Murdoch tweets his support for new gun control laws

As far as we know, alleged shooter James Holmes had neither a criminal record nor a psychiatric record. Given that, what Murdoch is proposing would not have prevented the Aurora, Colo., shootings.

  • TugboatPhil

    Must be nice to come here from another country and want to further trash our Constitution.

    We already have thousands upon thousands of local, state & federal laws about firearms purchases, transportation, usage and storage. Guess what, we also have laws against igniting smoke or chemical bombs in public, against firing short and long guns inside a building, towards people, rigging your house with explosives and even against murder.

    Here would be a novel idea, forget what motivated this cowardly POS. Give him a trial next week. Convict him regardless of the evidence. Take him immediately into the public square and execute him on TV.

    Wow. It’s easy to trash the Constitution, Mr Murdoch. Now I understand why you want to do it.

  • tomtom1983

    I pray he doesn’t fall ill with liberalitis, if he breaks from his conservative base so to will his strong conservative base break from him.

  • dr paul david tom

    not only is rupert ignorant about the intent of our 2nd amendment (, he apparently doesn’t know much about hunting rifles either (

  • peteee363

    a nut does not need a gun to kill people, they are just the weapon of choice for many wackjobs. they still murder people in the u.k., and they already make it illegal to own a gun. so rupert stick to what you know, and leave our guns alone!

    • Flagramma


  • John Hanover I am so over this is a screaming case proving we need ” gun control “. Oslo Norway where there is ” gun control ” and yet the man cut off the island campers from help and gunned them down with guns he should not have had based on their laws. The suspect in this horrific tragedy was working on his PHD should we ban colleges now?

  • Snarky D

    I’m looking forward to seeing liberals grudgingly praise Murdoch. That’ll be fun.

  • Lidsamy

    I agree with John Hanover. There are crimes related to alcohol but when they tried banning alcohol that just created a different crime and didn’t stop the first set. People die in car accidents and we don’t ban driving. Had anyone been packing in the theater, it’s possible the amount of victims might have been lower.

  • Roderic Deane

    Despite the fact that Murdock owns Fox News, he’s very wrong on this. Our 2nd Amendment trumps anything that Murdock or his minions can suggest. Get used to it, dillweeds, American citizens can be legally armed!

    • TonyMontana3

      Our 2nd Amendment doesn’t mean we should have AK47s.

      • Brett Haines

        But what people like you don’t seem to get, my friend is that banning something doesn’t stop people from getting them. Banning something only promotes the illegal trade of that item, which means more cops are going to get killed trying to enforce the ban. Criminals, on the other hand, will still get their guns.

      • Roderic Deane

        Yeah, your interpretive skills are right up there with Chief Justice John Roberts.

      • Andrew Gutsch

        There is nothing about an AK or AR that makes it inherently more dangerous than your typical hunting rifle. If anything, they are usually chambered in weaker calibers. Full auto and large mags don’t really make a difference when you are shooting up a theater.

        I would rather face someone with an AK-47 than a person with a semi-automatic deer rifle.

  • Josh Timko

    if we get our guns taken away because its the law whats going to stop the criminals from using their guns they are already breaking the laws

  • Bob Smooper

    if you read the tweet he is advocating a pistol/handgun should be legal for self-defence, but not machine guns.

    • SDN

      Except that we already require a special license for fully automatic weapons… and oh BTW the shooter wasn’t carrying one. #FAIL.

  • Dwayne P Theriot

    If you make any guns illegal, only the law biding citizens will NOT have access to these guns. The criminal element like the psycho from Aurora will get there theirs hand on them, and we will be out gunned. An Assault Rifle against a Handgun? No Contest. That’s the part of the argument these Gun Control Nuts leave out.

    • TonyMontana3

      Most shooting happen because normal law biding citizens go crazy. If the gun laws are strict, it’s not going to be easy for them to have a gun.

      • Brett Haines

        But they will STILL be able to get them. The Aurora shooter didn’t buy his guns on an impulse. He planned this thing out, took his time getting his guns, and jumped through all the legal hoops to get them. Even the most twisted mind sometimes have the patience to wait as they carry out their evil plans. And a gun BAN won’t stop criminals from getting guns either. Prohibition anyone??

        • Lefty

          Or makeshift weapons, such as, oh, fuel bombs, etc. Not like anyone would consider making those and booby-trapping an apartment or anything.

      • Flagramma

        That not the case though . Look at Chicago very strict gun laws and its not working there it really does not work any where its tried

      • Lefty

        Actually, Tony, I don’t know where you get that stat. It doesn’t show up anywhere I’ve ever looked. And I do quite a bit of research on the subject.

        Spend some time reading the PDF at and get back to us.

      • Martha Carney

        you are mistaken, law abiding citizens dont normally go crazy. anyone who has gone crazy is no longer a law abiding citizen and will get their guns illegally, in the street, unlike a law abiding citizen. the only one hurt here is the law abiding citizen, gun control does not stop criminals.

      • Dwayne P Theriot

        That argument is about as weak as “Wet Paper Towels”.

  • TonyMontana3

    But it would prevent many future shootings.

    • MPR1776

      How do you figure that, since most criminals don’t register their guns. Reports indicate the shooter used 1 AR-15, a shotgun (not an assault weapon) and 2 pistols (also not assault weapons)!

      Gun shows are NOT a primary source of illegal guns for criminals.
      According to two government studies, the National Institute of Justice
      reported in 1997 (National Institute of Justice, “Homicide in Eight U.S. Cities: Trends,
      Context, and Policy Implications,” Research Report (December 1997), p.
      99.)that “less than two percent [of criminals] reported
      obtaining [firearms] from a gun show.” And the Bureau of Justice
      Statistics revealed in 2001 that less than one percent of firearm
      offenders acquired their weapons at gun shows.( Caroline Wolf Harlow, “Firearm Use by Offenders: Survey of Inmates in
      State and Federal Correctional Facilities,” Bureau of Justice Statistics
      Special Report (November 2001), p. 1.)

      The CDC study examined gun and ammunition bans, waiting periods, background checks, lock-up your safety laws, plus much more. The inescapable conclusion was that the “evidence was insufficient” to show that such gun restrictions reduced crime rates. [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “First Reports Evaluating the Effectiveness of Strategies for Preventing Violence: Early Childhood Home Visitation and Firearms Laws,” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (October 3, 2003), vol. 52(No. RR-14):14-18.] It should be noted that Dr. John’s Lott research—made widely available in More Guns, Less Crime —was part of the data examined by the CDC. The agency concluded there was no evidence to support the idea that “shall issue” carry laws reduce crime. Despite the agency’s vote of no confidence in Lott’s data, his research has been verified by other independent works, such as the one published in the Stanford Law Review. [Florenz Plassmann and John Whitley, “Confirming ‘More Guns, Less Crime,’” Stanford Law Review (April 16, 2003), vol. 55:1313.]

      One of the authors of the University of Chicago study reported on the study’s findings in John R. Lott, Jr., “More Guns, Less Violent Crime,” The Wall Street Journal (28 August 1996). See also John R. Lott, Jr. and David B. Mustard, “Crime, Deterrence, and Right-to-Carry Concealed Handguns,” University of Chicago (15 August 1996); and Lott, More Guns, Less Crime (1998, 2000).

  • Shirlene Denny

    Did Murdock ever stop to think,that if the law required people to tote a gun while in public that maybe this would not have happen.If idiots like Holmes knew that someone had a gun they may think twice before doing such a massacre

    • Martha Carney

      exactly. he knew these people were “sitting ducks”. that’s whay we have school shootings these days, because criminals know they are federal “gun free zones” and thus, victims are defenseless.

  • browneyes825

    Guns are not what needs to be blamed for people dying. It’s like blaming cars when someone decides to drink and drive. The knife that was used to stab someone. It’s the person who is in control of that tangible object, whatever it may be. People are still going to find a way to access guns, knives, drive cars even though they they arent supposed to. I’m so sick of hearing about gun control!

  • RDRR

    The gun grabbing left in the country ALWAYS leap to the conclusion that if they just disarm the law-abiding populace, then then gun crimes will stop. Complete idiocy!

  • Psycho Sock Puppet

    More peopel are killed using cars than guns. Maybe we should ban them, too?

    • conservativechick

      Rich people don’t want to be targets, so they often say what is “politically” correct. I say get rid of PROGRESSIVES and their agenda. That’s what makes people CRAZY in the first place. :)

  • Lefty

    We already have 20k+ “gun control laws” and wow, are they ever effective. I can see how more really will make a difference. /sarc

    Laws do not stop crime. Laws only spell out consequences for behaviors if you are convicted of violating said law.

    Law abiding citizens, when given the opportunity to be responsible for themselves, make the difference.

    Can we ban stupid? I know that means that Libs and Dems would be banned, but I’m willing to let that happen…send them to Mexico, where guns are banned completely.

  • lillymckim

    I just deleted my auto renewable “paid app” “The Daily” from my iPad.

  • Michael Lawson

    Do YOU want to start losing customers Mr. Murdoch? Keep up with that load of crap and you will!!!

  • James Walker

    No fool like an old fool Rupe.