0

Dick's stores suspend rifle sales nationwide

PITTSBURGH— A sporting goods chain says it's suspending sales of modern rifles nationwide because of the school shooting in Connecticut.

Dick's Sporting Goods also says it's removing all guns from display at its store closest to Newtown, where the massacre took place.

Authorities say a gunman killed 26 people, mostly children, with a military-style rifle at Sandy Hook Elementary School on Friday after killing his mother. He then killed himself.

A statement posted on Dick's website expresses sympathy for the victims' families. It says sales of modern sporting rifles will be suspended during "this time of national mourning."

Dick's declined to answer Associated Press questions about how long the suspension would last or which weapons were being pulled.

Pittsburgh-based Dick's Sporting Goods Inc. has more than 500 stores in 44 states.

Comments

TOWG 1 year, 3 months ago

I will never spend another dime in a Dick's Sporting Goods store.

4

BurritoJones 1 year, 3 months ago

Temporarily ending sales of some of guns out of respect to the event isn't really any different than lowering a flag to half-mast. It's a gesture. They've never said they're getting out of the gun business.

Chill out.

1

dudley4141 1 year, 3 months ago

Good, someone like you TOWG should be prohibited from owning any kind of gun. You have no compassion what so ever for the loss of life that has taken place.

1

gwinnettresident1 1 year, 3 months ago

Its people like you that have no idea what is happening..His statement has nothing to do with or without compassion. Why do we ban Lake Lanier it killed a couple of children this year in a boating accident...Where is your compassion Why not ban or remove swimming pools they took several childrens lifes this year in Georgia. Where was your compassion then.

4

micronmike 1 year, 3 months ago

Lake Lanier did not kill anyone, a drunk fool did.

0

R 1 year, 3 months ago

EXACTLY - Lakes don't kill people, people kill people...

0

news2me 1 year, 3 months ago

dud ... this article is about a business reacting to tragedy. It is obvious they are only trying to please and coddle people like you that don't care about responsible gun ownership. I guess because only 8 children died during the 9/11 terrorist attacks that event isn't as important as this in your opinion? Did you demand that 747's and other airplanes be banned after the horrific 9/11 terrorist attacks?

A mental nutjob killed those 20 kids and 6 adults in Newtown. Religious freaks / terrorists killed on 9/11. Criminals and the mentally ill will find ways to commt crimes regardless of the "weapon" used in a massacre.

People are the problem and our politically correct society where we want to mainstream mental cases and let anyone into our country are major parts of the problem.

So dud - you have NO compassion for life if you support ANY of the above mentioned.

3

DavidBrown 1 year, 3 months ago

I commend Dick's for their sensible and compassionate decision. We cannot simply do nothing when 20 of our children are massacred in their own school building.

3

gwinnettresident1 1 year, 3 months ago

Mr. Brown please tell me what this will do? I fail to see a point here.

2

gwinnettresident1 1 year, 3 months ago

This was the worst school massacre in history Waco was second look how many innocent children were killed that day. Oh thats ok because they were killed by the goverment

May 18, 1927 : In the deadliest mass school murder in United States history, former school board member Andrew Kehoe set off three bombs in Bath Township, Michigan killing 45 people and wounding 58. Kehoe killed himself and the superintendent by blowing up his own vehicle.

2

kevin 1 year, 3 months ago

It isn't the fault of all of us for this killing. It's the fault of the parents that didn't help their kid or lock him up. His mom owned the guns. He just had access to them. Blame the mom, not law-abiding "citizen" that have all the right in the world to own all the guns they want to. Maybe you should ask yourself why a Liberal state like CT didn't allow certain folks at the school to carry a weapon for such emergencies? Blame the CT legislature. Everyone is mad about this simply because the people responsible cannot stand trial and now U.S. citizens must take the heat. Give me a break.

0

jjbod1 1 year, 3 months ago

I am siding with TOWG, I also will never step foot into one of there stores again, and I stand my ground when I say that. I stopped shopping at Sears over 20 years ago, Starbucks 7 years ago for personal reasons. I also have only shot a gun twice in my lifetime, never have really been into them myself. But I also have never been against them either. Guns are not the problem, people are. If that kid was not able to obtain a gun, he would of figured out another means of killing. He could of built a bomb, he also could of stolen a truck and then drove it straight through a wall, running over and crushing those along his path. The whole point is, criminals will always find a way to hurt the innocent. If Dicks choose to stop selling guns, it wont prevent guns from getting into hands of criminals, but may stop guns from getting into future responsible gun owners. Again, i do not own a gun, but i am now seriously considering getting one and learning, so i can protect myself in the future if I need to.

5

davewfence 1 year, 3 months ago

I also have enjoyed going to Dick's, and in fact I have spent a considerable amount of money there. But, now, I will never walk through the doors again. This is akin to Package Stores stop selling alcohol because of drunk drivers. This is dumb, and Dick's will see that their sales will drop like a rock. And, in closing, this simply allows more gun sales at other stores.

4

micronmike 1 year, 3 months ago

How is an assult rifle a sporting good? A hunting rifle, shot gun...those are sporting goods for hunting. Assult rifles are not sporting goods. Dick's shouldn't sell them anyways.

2

BufordGuy 1 year, 3 months ago

Moronmike, what is the definition of an "assult (assault) rifle"? Are there even guns described or marketed or names "assault rifles"?? If the guy would have used a Remington 7400 in .30-06, with multiple filled 5-shot clips, how many lives do you think he would have taken? Are you saying if he would have used a single shot rifle and only killed one kid, that would have been acceptable to you? The Second Amendment does NOT define which arms the citizens may bare, nor does it allow any infringement of that right--bans on particular designs, are by definitions, infringements and unconstitutional. By the way, Einstein, guns are designed, built, and owned for one purpose, and one purpose only---to KILL. However, they can't kill unless someone uses them, just like a hammer is useless unless someone is swinging it!

2

kevin 1 year, 3 months ago

Assault weapons protect citizens from our government. I know many, many soldiers that have come back from the war and they own such guns as well. Take it out on our soldiers if you will. Felons will get their hands on guns any time they want to so stop taking it out on law-abiding citizens. Why isn't the country upset about Obama & Holder selling guns into Mexico which killed thousands of people there. This is simply a situation where the Liberals and their media are trying to get all the mileage then can out of this tragedy, which should be a crime in itself. Think this through my friend.

0

Don_Coyote 1 year, 3 months ago

Dick's can apparently jerk their knee.

2

ACC12_SEC13Booster 1 year, 3 months ago

Fellas, I wouldn't necessarily be too down on Dick's Sporting Goods for this move as Dick's is not the only corporate entity under intense public pressure to discontinue sales of firearms and/or distance themselves from even the slightest hint of violent imagery in the wake of last week's tragedy.

Any and every retail outlet that sells firearms outside of gun stores is under very intense public pressure to discontinue sales of firearms and limit or discontinue sales of violent movies and video games no matter how big or small of a role those items may have actually played in the Connecticut school massacre.

Even stridently pro gun-rights politicians and organizations (most notably the NRA) are under intense public pressure to embrace restrictions on firearms that they may not be comfortable with as liberal "gun control" (gun restriction) advocates on the left are using this tragedy as a golden opportunity to push for restrictions on firearms that they have always wanted to push that the public as a whole would likely not fully embrace otherwise under normal circumstances.

1

Jan 1 year, 3 months ago

Everyone needs to step back and think. Dicks did over react by removing all guns from sales; however, anyone that is of the opinion that this is a reason to avoid shopping at Dicks, they are equally misguided. Are you really going to insist that a store must sell guns for them to get your business? That would eliminate Office Depot, Home Depot, Kroger, Ingles and most other stores. A more appropriate response from Dicks would have been to withdraw from sales assault type weapons and limited weapons sold to those appropriate for hunting. Please, someone tell me why it is okay to outlaw switch blade knives but we cannot instigate reasonable regulation on firearms. Why does anyone need a weapon that allows them to easily slaughter a couple of dozen people.

0

Jan 1 year, 3 months ago

Seems like I and others did not absorb the full article. Dicks only temporarily suspended sales of all guns in the area of the shooting and that the withdrawal from sales of assault style weapons may also be temporary. Surely no one is so gun hungry that they feel a need to boycott a store for temporarily exercising a modicum of common sense so I assume those threatening a boycott also overlooked dome of the details.

1

BurritoJones 1 year, 3 months ago

I think you underestimate the skull density of some of our fellow readers.

0

SickandTired 1 year, 3 months ago

Everyone seems to forget the Columbine High School massacre occured during the assault weapons ban. In the United States assault weapons were banned from 1994 through 2004. Columbine happened on April 20, 1999.

2

NewsReader 1 year, 3 months ago

Jan, stop acting like you are an authority on the intelligence of the American people when you have none of your own. We read it, we thought about it, and our position on the matter remains the same.

I find it ironic this morning that your dear ruler, Barrack Obama, has appointed another liberal idiot, Joe Biden, to spearhead an effort to institute a ban on assault weapons, all the while it is OK to run a program called "Fast & Furious" to sell our assault weapons to the Mexican drug cartel so that they can use our very own weapons against us, including, but not limited to, US Law Enforcement. You know, it's a hypocritical, irresponsible, entitlement sorta thing.

The worst school massacre to ever occur in US History was not with guns, but explosives. And it was done so by a disgruntled ex-board member at the Bath School District in Michigan in 1927. He was crazy. Adam Lanza was crazy. We don't have a gun problem in this country. We have a lunatic problem, and that problem needs to be addressed appropriately. Instead of slapping a Band-Aid on what is a mental health hemorrhage, let's identify the problem (i.e. mental health) and treat the problem instead of the symptom.

2

BurritoJones 1 year, 3 months ago

You're right. We should demand our representatives go back to congress and immediately begin work on providing everyone in the country with adequate access to health care.

1

Jan 1 year, 3 months ago

And yet no one can explain the hypocrisy of banning switch blade knives but demanding a "right" to carry an assault weapon. They seem to prefer using terms like "idiot" because they can find no sane reason why any sane person would need an assault weapon. While it is true that a ban will not magically make all assault weapon evaporate, it will cut done on future ownership of such deadly devices. You cannot justify allowing this method to be extremely easy to acquire just because other methods have been used in the past. We have had better success in stopping planned bombings because that method requires more advanced planning and special purchases that usually set off red flags for the authorities. People that snap, as apparently happened in this case, use whats available and will not take the time required for obtaining material and building a bomb. To argue that we should do nothing about guns, large capacity clips and ammunition because other methods of death are available is like saying we should not worry about keeping our car brakes in good repair because accidents happen anyway. Please make some attempt at a reasonable argument if you want to defend the right of lunatics to possess assault weapons.

1

news2me 1 year, 3 months ago

Please make some attempt at a reasonable argument if you want to defend the right of lunatics to possess assault weapons.

Where have you seen anyone say that lunatic Lanza or any other crazy should have access to an AR? NO ONE has posted anything near what you are suggesting.

1

R 1 year, 3 months ago

"attempt at a reasonable argument if you want to defend the right of lunatics to possess assault weapons."

I don't have to defend the rights of "lunatics" and firearms but the Constitution does defend the right for CITIZENS of the United States to do so.

0

dmlswim 1 year, 3 months ago

The problem is not gun control, but Dick's made a gesture of support in this time of mourning. The problem is mental health, and that is a very large issue to tackle. The government needs to funnel more money into education and health care so that mental health issues can be identified and treated early on. The government needs to address the rising health care costs so that parents can actually afford treatment for their children.
There is no 'one-size-fits-all' answer to this tragedy. The entire country is mourning, and it remains to be seen how the government will respond. But for anyone to stop shopping at a store for something like this is just ignorant, and clearly demonstratesa lack of morality and values.

0

RedDawn 1 year, 3 months ago

Evidently you haven't seen the knives that are now available. Switchblades are for girls.

0

toby 1 year, 3 months ago

Dick's prices are too high anyway.

1

SuxBeanU 1 year, 3 months ago

That's what keeps me out of their stores too.

1

news2me 1 year, 3 months ago

Academy has the better prices for sure. I might go by the Snellville location today actually ..

1

toby 1 year, 3 months ago

Bought a .38 at Academy for $100 less than what the gun show wanted. Academy is the #1 seller of firearms in the country now because of so many store. I love that store.

0

SickandTired 1 year, 3 months ago

Plus Dick's customer service sucks. Ever try to get someone in that store to help you? Next to impossible. On a differrent note, I think the term "assault" weapon is thrown around to easily. Isn't every gun technically an "assault" weapon? Whether a person owns a gun for personal protection or sport - if you use it you're assaulting someone/something (human or animal). In reality, assault rifle is a misnomer as it connects an action with a weapon. Any assault involving a rifle by definition means one is using an assault rifle.

2

jack 1 year, 3 months ago

Assault weapon?

Hell, a rock or a stick can be an assault weapon.

1

toby 1 year, 3 months ago

Planes, trains and cars, hammers, baseball bats, super glue, draino, saw, hands, boots, belts, lot of water, law enforcement, military, cliffs, motocycles, sling shot should be included. Outlaw everything. The tragedy was that the parents of those kids were'nt the ones that got to kill that SOB with a very slow and painful death. The coward did it himself,

0

Don 1 year, 3 months ago

Everyone on here seems to be having some kind of knee jerk reactions.

Have we all forgotten Oklahoma City and the child care center that Mcvey blew up? and that was a huge loss of lives! Have we forgotten 9/11 ? Have we forgotten Fort Hood?

Let me say this I own many guns and even an Ar-15 and Ak-47 type and have large capacity magazines as well as other pistols and rifles, even have my concealed carry permit. Do I think we need to do some more on gun control yes but it does not involve banning guns or "assault rifles," We need to focus on the used gun market where there is no regulation (paper work) required. The only question that I am suppose to ask if the person buying the gun can legally own one. Does anyone think a felon is going to say yes so I will not sell him a gun?

It is well proven that gun strict regulation on trying to prevent gun ownership does not decrease gun violence. New York and Washington DC and Chicago have some of the strictest regulations but have the highest crime rate with guns. Australia did a buy back program and banned guns yet their gun crime rate has gone up!

The issue here is that of mental health. We need to focus more on this segment of society rather than legal gun owners. We have totally destroyed our states mental health facilities and the ability to serve this segment of society. Lets go back to local mental health facilities that serve these people and not try to mainstream them to fit into society. Lets put more emphasis in our schools to identify people with mental illness and offer and avenue to treat them!

It is my humble opinion that if a mentally sick person wants to do a sick deviated thing as killing innocent children he/she will find a way. Therefore we we need to get them out of the mainstream and help protect others lives.

Oh, and let it be known that a gun owner must attempt to restrict access of their weapons to others. If a parent can be charged for a child getting a gun and injuring himself then we need to have a hard look at Lanza's mother and her role in this. Yes the rifle was legal for him to have but the handguns were not, under 21 and handguns are illegal. Mom has some liability in this case!

0

Award88 1 year, 3 months ago

Those so called assault weapons that were used in the Newton and in Aurora, CO would not even be legal for deer hunting. And why wouldn't they be legal you ask? Because they aren't powerful enough. The facts are simple. Since World War II, every mass shooting (more than 3 victims) in this country, with the exception of one, has occurred in a gun free zone. Each decade since the 70s has seen a decline in gun homicides and during the same time period the gun laws have become less restrictive. Kennesaw, GA passed a law in 1982 mandating every head of household own a firearm, if they were not precluded from otherwise legally owning one. In those 30 years, there have been 4 gun homicides in Kennesaw. 3 of them occurred in a gun free school zone. Sounds to me like the best solution is to make the laws less restrictive on law abiding citizens so that they have a means to protect themselves and those who are unable to protect themselves.

1

Jan 1 year, 3 months ago

BufordGuy claims the 2nd amendment did not limit weapons. One should note that for a period of 100 years, the only weapons allowed under for anyone to own were single shot muzzle loaders. The writers of the 2nd amendment had not even envisioned the weapons in use today. If your argument is a claim that the second amendment does not allow limitations of weapons, then you are arguing that shoulder fired missiles must be allowed also. In fact, arms would also include tanks and missiles, even nuclear ones. Of course we don't allow these. Reasonable people recognize that a line must be drawn to limit the severity of weapons allowed. Fortunately these mass shooters have not been able to acquire hand grenades since these are also banned. If a hunter is a true sportsman, he/she would not use automatic or semi automatic weapons nor require more than 3 bullet clips. How fast can one aim and shoot? Obviously the requirement to use a bolt action to reload the chamber and switching clips more often would slow the killing just as forcing other means, like a knife or hammer as some have suggested. With these alternate methods, he would also have to chase down victims one at a time giving more time for the police. I have still seen no arguments for a reason someone, other than a deranged killer, would require a semi automatic, large capacity weapon.

0

R 1 year, 3 months ago

@ Jan I'm fascinated
Could you link the portion of the Constitution or Bill of Rights that mentions Nuclear munitions?

Actually I believe it IS legal to own a tank or a half track... just good luck fueling it!

0

Don 1 year, 3 months ago

Jan- your logic would also limit the horsepower a car could have. I mean if a 70 horsepower car can go 70mph then is there no need for a larger engine in a car? Should we ban all cars with a horsepower of a certain number over what it takes to make the legal speed limit?

Has it ever occurred to you that some people shoot not only for hunting? Many of the competitive shooting tournaments have rapid fire and multiple rounds on targets. even the Olympics do. Some avid shooters do not even hunt but compete in matches.

Just remember more people are killed in car accidents per year then gun shootings, even more children. Should we ban cars since people get killed by DUI drivers? No that would be insane right? Yet people who are mentally ill can shoot innocents kids and we need to ban guns and certain types of magazines. We need to use the sane logic as in my earlier car and DUi deaths.

It is a very small minority of people who commit these violent insane and horrific killings just as DUI drivers are the minority.

0

R 1 year, 3 months ago

@ Don The EPA IS headed in that direction for vehicles...

0

Don 1 year, 3 months ago

No they just care how many MPG"S and do not care about hp or speed.

Oh, lets not forget Obama's "Fast and Furious " program on gun control and Eric Holders unwillingness to say anything. Now he wants to tell me I can not own certain guns, give me a break.

The nation is going off the fiscal cliff and he wants to worry about five round or fifty round magazines. He is the king of diversion to keep his incompetence from showing.

2

Jan 1 year, 3 months ago

Once again we see the same absurd argument arise. By your argument, we should stop airport security since terrorist use car bombs. But since you seem intent on comparing driving cars to firing guns, let's look at DUI, the number one cause of deaths on the road, and speeding, number 2 cause. We have the technology to prevent a car from running if the driver isn't sober. It is a simple device that one must blow into before the car will crank. I don't drink but would be willing to accept the inconvenience of such a device if I knew it would also be on cars of the intoxicated fools that try to drive. We can also require a device that senses current speed limit and limits speed to a set amount, I would propose 5 mph over the speed limit.

Fast and Furious was an operation first started under GW Bush.

0

jack 1 year, 3 months ago

Jan- Fast and Furious started in Oct. 2009. For someone purporting to have the facts, you obviously know that F&F links to Bush have been completely debunked by most fact-checking groups.

But, as one who's solution to a national tragedy is to further erode the freedoms of law abiding individuals, I can understand why you'd choose to perpetuate this falsehood.

2

Jan 1 year, 3 months ago

You are correct. Thank you for calling me on it. I must, however, plead not guilty to eroding peoples rights. In my opinion, allowing people that have not passed extensive background checks and passed a certified gun safety and usage class to carry weapons is eroding my freedom to living in a safer environment. I walked out into my backyard a few years back. Didn't turn on the lights because I wanted to look at the stars. My neighbor saw a shadowy figure, grabbed his revolver and fired in my direction. I ran around the house back to my carport and turned on the light. He didn't see me go into the carport but noticed the light come on and came up and bragged about chasing a prowler out of my yard and wanted to know if I wanted him to call the police. Shouldn't people be taught a little common sense before owning a gun? For those that like the car comparison, we do require passing a test, both written and performance, to insure someone is reasonably competent in handling a car before a license is issued to drive it.

0

kevin 1 year, 3 months ago

Let's suspend drug sales and see if that stops criminals from getting them. Who needs Dick's? Law abiding "citizens" have a right to protect themselves against a government.

0

kevin 1 year, 3 months ago

Let's suspend drug sales and see if that stops criminals from getting them. Who needs Dick's? Law abiding "citizens" have a right to protect themselves against a government "gone wild."

0

CD 1 year, 3 months ago

A Tale of Two Cities, by CD.

Once upon a time, there was a city, a large city, named New York. The city had some of the most restrive gun laws in the nation, and as of late, violent crime is at an all time, historic low.

While a second city, Detroit, which had equally draconian gun ownership laws, continued deeper into a cesspool of crime and violence. Murders, rape, theft, arson, and crooked leaders were all the rage.

So are restrictive gun laws really the answer? Or is is something else?

0

Jan 1 year, 3 months ago

Until it is a nation wide law guns will be smuggled into areas that have the restrictive laws. Without information on smuggling and enforcement, the pure statistics you cite are insufficient data to draw a conclusion. Logic does predict less crimes involving guns if their are less guns available.

1

Don 1 year, 3 months ago

Jan- illegal drugs are readily available so same goes for guns. I do like how you thought fast and furious was Bush, Obama tried to lie his way out of that but was caught red handed and Holder is using his 5th ad. right! Oh and he used assault weapons as well!

Place a loaded gun of any type on a table and it will never shoot anyone! Guns are not the problem but people are!

0

Jan 1 year, 3 months ago

With over 800 accidental deaths by guns every year, your conclusion that "guns don't kill people" is obviously false. Add to that 11,000 homicides and 19,000 suicides and it becomes obvious that insufficient controls are placed on guns. I know the ridiculous argument of using other means, such as a knife. Please consider, committing suicide with a knife takes much more resolve and gives more time to change ones mind. Killing someone with a knife gives the victim a chance at self defense, can't use a knife with a drive by or from hiding at a distance. The argument that guns will still be available is lame. Australia had a gun problem. After gun control legislation was passed and enforced, they had great reduction in gun associated deaths. Unless you are purchasing illegal drugs, how do you know their availability? If you know where to purchase them, Why don't you tell the police? Is it some false loyalty to criminals or just plain fear?

1

Don 1 year, 3 months ago

Jan:

You may want to look at this article on the effects of the gun ban in Australia.

http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=17847

Great more violent crimes there.

As far as your drug comment you do not need to know who and where drugs are being sold just read the paper and look at the busts going on and the drug abuse in this country.

By the way i have turned in dealers and received rewards for doing so once the case was prosecuted.

Just another fact on something we need to get the government involved in. So in 2011 561 children under the age of 12 were killed by guns yet 349 deaths occurred the same year for falling furniture and televisions. So under this logic should be ban flat screen tv's and high furniture such as dressers? Maybe Obama needs to get Biden to head up a committee for this as well.

Maybe we need to talk more about gun safety in schools, learn how to respect a gun and what it has the capability of doing rather than try not to talk about them. When something becomes "taboo" kids become intrigued with these things and want to experiment with them. I think pot is one of the best examples of this and I do not condone using it. same goes for alcohol for teens I think.

0

Jan 1 year, 3 months ago

I am impressed that you actually looked up information! The thing I find strange is that you seem to believe that 349 dying by falling furniture makes it okay to ignore the 561 young children dying by gunshot. What your statistics should be saying to you is improving the safety of furniture and televisions. This could be through better education or simple brackets to secure them to the wall. When I buy high furniture susceptible to being tilted, I buy brackets, locate a suitable stud and secure it with long screws. I have never said that all guns should be banned. I am for required gun safety programs prior to gun ownership. I am for plugging the gun show loophole. I am for banning large capacity clips. As a compromise, we might have different levels of licensing such as learners, allowing low caliber rifles only and requiring accompaniment by licensed hunter, hunter, allowing standard hunting weapons limited to clips holding no more the three rounds, pistol, for small clip hand guns and professional license allowing up to 9 rounds in pistols (rifles should be limited to 3). Each level requiring more training. Surely you believe that people with guns should be trained in their use. I am not opposed to more gun safety taught in school; how are you going to fund it? Your link makes false conclusions. It points out the drastic increase in other violent crimes and a reduction of gun associated crimes of 31.9%. The rational for it not working is a comparison with the USA in a time period that included the more strict regulations on licensing and prohibition of assault weapons in which the USA had 31.7% reduction. Since other violent crime rose much faster in Australia, one would expect gun violence to have increased if the regulations had not been in place. In addition, the results will improve as the new regulations slowly get the illegal weapons out of circulation. This will take years. All your argument tells us is that we need to get started now to help make our grandchildren much safer.

0

Don 1 year, 3 months ago

Jan so can you explain how you have come about your capacity for clips?

Anyone who shoots a pistol (competition) can drop and reload in less than two seconds, I would advise you to watch some competitions. Same goes for a rifle if you are competent.

Banning guns is going to work as well as prohibition!

0

Sign in to comment