I agree. If these guns show up in the homicide of the owners ex-wife or business partner. They will say but they were stolen last month.

Alibi? This points up to the stupidity of these weapons being in someone's home in the first place. if you get your immature kick out of firing one of these off, then store it at the firing range.

People are paying attention to this irresponsible behavior and are getting sick and tired of it. Your world of gun rights without responsibilities is coming to an end. Enjoy whatever weird thrill you get out of it or build up of your masculinity while it lasts. People have stopped treating Wayne LaPierre with fear and and now regarding him for the putz that he is.

So Keith from your post I see you are card carrying member of the "I want a dictator society". This owner was a idiot I agree. But as soon as the mandatory registration or confiscation hits then what. You look like your are old enough to remember what happened during WW2 when the Nazis confiscated the civilians guns or had them "Stored" in general areas, How about Soviet Unions gun confiscation? Where did those get the Civillians?
Why not stop calling names and proving that you are ignorant via your keyboard and work for a solution that doesn't infringe on others Constitutional rights?

Ignore Keif. He is hung over from a day long bender of drinking Walgreens vodka yesterday while he chanted Recall Walker in his studio apartment while wearing his soup stained khakis from wal mart.

I think the irresponsibility of Liberals is a far BIGGER story. The gun story here is a claim . What the facts are is far from known.

Richard, I agree with you. The other responders are way off base. This man thinks that there will be a 'confiscation' effort in the future, and he is preparing to throw up his hands and say that his fiearms were stolen (just look at the report that was filed!!). I don't agree, but I understand. The man still has the firearms.

Bob McBride –

While I agree that something simply does not pass the smell test here, there is not an overabundance of facts to deal with. While there are responsible gun owners and those who are not – this person clearly not – that does not make this guy a “potential” accessory to whatever crimes these guns may eventually be linked, if any. Besides, as far as I know, it is not a crime in Wisconsin, yet, to be stupid.

I do think you are correct to put some well-deserved focus to the “responsibility” side of gun ownership; we consistently hear a very lopsided media addressing all the “freedoms” and “rights”, some real some imagined, about gun ownership, but precious little about the duties and responsibilities that go with that ownership.

A little balance is long overdue.

Funny I saw nothing about kids in the article. Why don't you go back to your rants about your fully semi automatic, fed by clipazines scary looking rifle rants and bring on the ridicule you deserve.

Jason, your education on firearms is nill. You have proven this in your past blogs and propaganda.

Jason J ... your an idot !

The mention of a friend of the victim and her three children being in the house while the burglar was presumed still there is in the penultimate paragraph.

Wow Bucky talk about the pot calling the kettle black. it should be "you're" or you are not your... idiot

The story two down from this one could be used to argue, i suppose, that computers, smart phones and tablets should be kept out of the home in a secured, centralized facility because we have a few parents who can't seem to keep their kids from using them to arrange to be sexually assaulted.

Bucky
4:42 pm on Sunday, February 24, 2013
►Jason J ... your an idot !◄

you're

idiot is a funny word to choose

Defense against what? You do know paranoia is a treatable condition.

oak creek resident –

The Constitution is only a guide, an ever-changing guide, one that will be interpreted differently by various people and our Supreme Court, only that and nothing more. The billionaires’, millionaires’ multi-national corporations and their lobbyists, who buy our representatives and compel them to write laws that favor their interests, rule this nation.

It is more than a bit naive to believe that the Constitution rules anything; that is the pablum we feed to our grade school children.

John, the Constitution is meant to be our highest law. If it is mearly a guide, then what of all the laws enacted by the Congresses? Are they just suggested rules that we should follow?

Many of us believe that, while flawed, still provided the solid framework that has allowed us to function for over 200 years. We must follow all of it, or none of it is valid.

It amazes me how many people scream and yell about their fist amendment rights turn around and try to deny others of their second amendment rights. Or, in the case of the Blue Fisters that took over the Capitol building and denied everyone else the right to be heard while screaming about their first amendment rights.

Liberals like clinging to their rights, but don't give a damn about anyone else's!!!

The Anti-Alinsky -

Not surprisingly, you completely miss the point, and only want to degrade the discussion with superfluous name-calling and absurd accusations.

The Constitution is a body of fundamental principles or established precedents to which a state, organization or group of people acknowledge to be governed. [i.e., Guide]

Congress, through our bought-and-paid-for Representatives create individual laws and the Supreme Court, based on precedent, intelligence, creativeness, knowledge of the law, and allegiance to a political party decides if a particular law meets the fundamental principles of the Constitution. [i.e., Guide]

Later, the federal government and each state have to decide how faithfully and vigorously, if at all, they will both follow and enforce the law.

John Wilson wrote: "...Later, the federal government and each state have to decide how faithfully and vigorously, if at all, they will both follow and enforce the law."

And that's the whole problem isn't John. Rather than having a law that is consistently upheld from inception, we pick and choose which ones to follow. Johnny likes his pot so he will acquire and smoke it even though it is against state and federal statues. And since his Liberal friends that are supposed to up the law agree with him, they look the other way. Of course, as soon as a Conservative tries it they are vilified and hauled off to jail.

If a law is not worth enforcing, it's not worth having on the books.

And if you think the Constitution is still just a guide, tell that to Captain Teague:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6OvsJqimfg

The Anti-Alinsky -

"If a law is not worth enforcing, it's not worth having on the books."

I agree with you there, however, legislatures, like many people are afraid to admit a mistake, and hence they simply remain, “on the books.” There are probably tens of thousands of archaic laws on the books in the 50 states, and they will probably remain there until the fire sale.

“In Connorsville, Wisconsin, it's illegal for a man to shoot off a gun while his wife orgasms.”

Marijuana laws will change, and they will change across the nation; until then, the Constitution [i.e., Guide] guarantees the right of civil disobedience. Granted I must be willing to accept the consequences of my actions, and I am certainly willing to do that.

Please, do not site anymore YouTube garbage as your sources of profound information; I never follow your references to YouTube, so it is a waste of your time, and the Patch’s space.

Finally, the laws of the land apply to all the people, Democrats, Republicans and all the people with a multitude of other or no political persuasion. I am a humanist, who does not belong to any political party, and I am not persecuted by law enforcement for my Marijuana use; I would doubt that the law enforcement community would be out there, just targeting Republicans or conservatives.

John Wilson wrote: “In Connorsville, Wisconsin, it's illegal for a man to shoot off a gun while his wife orgasms.”

I would love to know the reason why that ordinance was written.

John also wrote: "Please, do not site anymore YouTube garbage as your sources of profound information; I never follow your references to YouTube, so it is a waste of your time, and the Patch’s space."

Kind of like your diatribes, but with alot more information and less space!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRnq-PFboMI

People rule this nation. The Constitution is a great outline on how it should work.

The 2nd amendment was a huge failure. It is awkwardly written. Way too broad to be accurately interpreted.

The hunger for rising up agianst the Government is more of a problem then the paranoid ideas people have about liberty and freedom.

I would like someone to describe to me this huge usurpation of power and the denial of Liberty & Freedom.

A Negro gets elected POTUS and all hell breaks loose on the Paranoid Right Wing.

This is not Iraq, Libya or Syria. The whiners in this country have no idea what the lose of Freedom and Liberty are. The whiners have skewed their thinking to the dark side and live in a constant state of anger and fear.

Under British rule, colonialist had to buy guns and powder from the Brits. The Colonialist were limited to the number of guns and the amount of gunpowder. 2nd amendment, the Founding Fathers, in an attempt to be ready for the British who retreated to Canada.
The new Government, at the time had about 80 remaining men in the Colonial Army, and needed to have the ability to rise up against a very serious British attempt to reclaim the Colonies.

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

The Founding fathers had to clarify the need for a Militia, but first they had to erase the restrictions of the British gun laws. You have a single statement. Whereas the amendment reads, to some people, as 2 separate statements. The need for a Militia, and the need to allow people to have guns, becasue with out guns no militia.
And here we are arguing over arming the country to the teeth, pushed by Gun Manufacturers desires to sell as many guns as possible.

The NRA is a front. La Pierre's silliness, in the wake of the death by a military weapon of 20 Children God turned his back on, that guns should remain easy to purchased by every paranoid Right Wing Nut in America, stirred on by lies from the NRA and Right Wing politicians. We are way beyond the Hunting Defense. Particularly with the innocent people who die by a Great White Hunter's Military Weapon.

My sarcasm and satire fell on deaf eyes.

Facts do not apply when we are talking about a subject rooted in some mystifying fascination with guns and the pulp history of the West and the Colonial uprising against the British. It all appears to be so romantic. The US Calvary "defending" the settlers, and those brave "Minute Men" of Concord. Many who fled once the British returned fire. I anticipate the same with the Macho Militias, they will have their share of members who will run the other way when the full force of the US Military comes a calling.

It is refreshing to finally hear the Extreme Right declare guns are necessary to stand up to the Central Government. I can see the Walmart armed Rebels confronting the US Military. No contest. Unless they have contacted an enemy of America for better weapons.

The danger with the Extreme Right is their ability to fulfill their own prophesies.

^one last thing: even if gun control does end up happening--do you really think that that is going to stop crime? pull your head out from underneath the dirt. bad people (ie those who end up killing other people by using guns etc) do not necessarily get these weapons through legal means. so, in the end, gun control does nothing besides making Jefferson lurch in his grave.

john segundus –

That is a rather specious premise “…do you really think that that is going to stop crime?”

Gun control laws (i.e., Gun Safety Laws) are not meant to “stop crime”; they are mean to reduce the readily availability of guns to felons and mentally impaired individuals from obtaining them in the first place, to highlight what the “Gun Culture” is doing to America, and to reduce the amount of carnage on our streets and in our homes.

If you could somehow, magically, make all firearms disappear from America immediately, you would still have plenty of crime.

Mr Lundt –

"Gun control has proven to disarm and make vulnerable law abiding citizens."

Prove it that statement, as it applies to America… I mean the Wild, Wild, West.

Pease cite me a source?

Also, how many people in America have been disarmed?

Alcohol control has eliminated all alcohol and drunks from the American population; hence, there really is not any need for Alcohol Treatment Centers or AA…