OpEd in Today's NY Times: "A Right to Bear Glocks?"

OpEd in Today's NY Times: "A Right to Bear Glocks?"

This is a discussion on OpEd in Today's NY Times: "A Right to Bear Glocks?" within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; The author appears to be convinced that in light of the Arizona tragedy last Saturday, that it was a high-capacity "clip" (her word, not mine), ...

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 28

Thread: OpEd in Today's NY Times: "A Right to Bear Glocks?"

  1. #1
    VIP Member Array JonInNY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Mid-Hudson Valley New York State
    Posts
    4,207

    OpEd in Today's NY Times: "A Right to Bear Glocks?"

    The author appears to be convinced that in light of the Arizona tragedy last Saturday, that it was a high-capacity "clip" (her word, not mine), that is the cause of this unfortunate incident.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/10/op...s.html?_r=1&hp

    By GAIL COLLINS

    In 2009, Gabrielle Giffords was holding a “Congress on Your Corner” meeting at a Safeway supermarket in her district when a protester, who was waving a sign that said “Don’t Tread on Me,” waved a little too strenuously. The pistol he was carrying under his armpit fell out of his holster.

    “It bounced. That concerned me,” Rudy Ruiz, the father of one of Giffords’s college interns at the time, told me then. He had been at the event and had gotten a larger vision than he had anticipated of what a career in politics entailed. “I just thought, ‘What would happen if it had gone off? Could my daughter have gotten hurt?’ ”

    Giffords brushed off the incident. “When you represent a district — the home of the O.K. Corral and Tombstone, the town too tough to die — nothing’s a surprise,” she said. At the time, it struck me as an interesting attempt to meld crisis control with a promotion of local tourist attractions.

    Now, of course, the district has lost more people in a shooting in a shopping center parking lot than died at the gunfight of the O.K. Corral, and the story of the dropped pistol has a tragically different cast.

    In soft-pedaling that 2009 encounter, Giffords was doing a balancing act that she’d perfected during her political career as a rather progressive Democrat in a increasingly conservative state. She was the spunky Western girl with a populist agenda mixed with down-home values, one of which was opposition to gun control. But those protesters had been following her around for a while. Her staff members were clearly scared for her, and they put me in touch with Ruiz, who told me the story.

    Back then, the amazing thing about the incident in the supermarket parking lot was that the guy with a handgun in his armpit was not arrested. Since then, Arizona has completely eliminated the whole concept of requiring a concealed weapon permit. Last year, it got 2 points out of a possible 100 in the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence state score card, avoiding a zero only because its Legislature has not — so far — voted to force colleges to let people bring their guns on campuses.

    Today, the amazing thing about the reaction to the Giffords shooting is that virtually all the discussion about how to prevent a recurrence has been focusing on improving the tone of our political discourse. That would certainly be great. But you do not hear much about the fact that Jared Loughner came to Giffords’s sweet gathering with a semiautomatic weapon that he was able to buy legally because the law restricting their sale expired in 2004 and Congress did not have the guts to face up to the National Rifle Association and extend it.
    If Loughner had gone to the Safeway carrying a regular pistol, the kind most Americans think of when they think of the right to bear arms, Giffords would probably still have been shot and we would still be having that conversation about whether it was a sane idea to put her Congressional district in the cross hairs of a rifle on the Internet.

    But we might not have lost a federal judge, a 76-year-old church volunteer, two elderly women, Giffords’s 30-year-old constituent services director and a 9-year-old girl who had recently been elected to the student council at her school and went to the event because she wanted to see how democracy worked.

    Loughner’s gun, a 9-millimeter Glock, is extremely easy to fire over and over, and it can carry a 30-bullet clip. It is “not suited for hunting or personal protection,” said Paul Helmke, the president of the Brady Campaign. “What it’s good for is killing and injuring a lot of people quickly.”

    America has a long, terrible history of political assassinations and attempts at political assassination. What we did not have until now is a history of attempted political assassination that took the lives of a large number of innocent bystanders. The difference is not about the Second Amendment. It’s about a technology the founding fathers could never have imagined.

    “If this was the modern equivalent of what Sirhan Sirhan used to shoot Robert Kennedy or Arthur Bremer used to shoot George Wallace, you’d be talking about one or two victims,” said Helmke.

    Giffords represents a pragmatic, interest-balancing form of politics that’s out of fashion. But, in that spirit, we should be able to find a way to accommodate the strong desire in many parts of the country for easy access to firearms with sane regulation of the kinds of weapons that make it easiest for crazy people to create mass slaughter. Most politicians won’t talk about it because they’re afraid of the N.R.A., whose agenda is driven by the people who sell guns and want the right to sell as many as possible.

    Doesn’t it seem like the least we can do?
    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch; Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote."
    -- Benjamin Franklin


  2. #2
    Moderator
    Array Bark'n's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    West Central Missouri
    Posts
    9,917
    Every one of these anti-gunners who write articles should be required to post a bold type disclaimer which states:

    The author of this article is a complete idiot and does not have even a rudimentary understanding of weapons, how they function or what makes them go bang! And that the following text is pure drivel, based solely on emotion, half truths and innuendo!


    I am completely amazed that everyone of them knows how to spell the word Gun correctly.
    -Bark'n
    Semper Fi


    "The gun is the great equalizer... For it is the gun, that allows the meek to repel the monsters; Whom are bigger, stronger and without conscience, prey on those who without one, would surely perish."

  3. #3
    Ex Member Array azchevy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Oceanfront Property
    Posts
    3,850
    Let's see. it is against the law in Arizona to assault or murder someone..... that law didn't stop him.

    Drugs like marijuana and cocaine and things like illegal immigration is against the law in Arizona... yet it is everywhere.

    Yes, NYTIMES, more laws will fix the problem. if you outlaw hicap magazines, criminals will turn them in, refuse to buy them, and they wont be available.

  4. #4
    Distinguished Member Array alachner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Costa Rica
    Posts
    1,232
    Instead of focusing on the mental problems of the attacker and his issues, they focus on the gun only. If someone goes crazy with a kitchen knife in a mall and kills 10 people. Would they ban kitchen knives as well? Why don't they ban cigarettes instead? Cigarettes kill 440,000 people per year!!!! The deaths caused by firearms in the U.S. don't reach 100,000 and most of them are suicides and accidental deaths. How about banning high calorie foods or junk food? Yes, that kills 300,000 Americans per year!!! I just don't understand what is the obsession of the U.S. Government with regards to gun restriction.
    "If you carry a gun, people will call you paranoid. That's ridiculous... If I have a gun, what in the hell do I have to be paranoid for?" [Clint Smith - Thunder Ranch]

  5. #5
    VIP Member Array tokerblue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    2,349
    Quote Originally Posted by JonInNY View Post
    America has a long, terrible history of political assassinations and attempts at political assassination. What we did not have until now is a history of attempted political assassination that took the lives of a large number of innocent bystanders. The difference is not about the Second Amendment. It’s about a technology the founding fathers could never have imagined.
    - I'm sure the founding fathers could never have imagined the internet, but that doesn't mean that they would have limited us to 10 posts a day.

  6. #6
    aag
    aag is offline
    Member Array aag's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    52
    “If this was the modern equivalent of what Sirhan Sirhan used to shoot Robert Kennedy or Arthur Bremer used to shoot George Wallace, you’d be talking about one or two victims,” said Helmke

    And if there were more Glocks in this crowd, we'd probably be talking about much fewer victims as well. Plus, the perp would likely be dispatched, saving the cost of the trial.

  7. #7
    Member Array PSLOwner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    349
    Regardless of your views on their politics, the NY Times usually has articles with less factual errors than this mess has.....

    It's like it's a first draft

  8. #8
    Moderator
    Array Bark'n's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    West Central Missouri
    Posts
    9,917
    Quote Originally Posted by PSLOwner View Post
    Regardless of your views on their politics, the NY Times usually has articles with less factual errors than this mess has.....

    It's like it's a first draft
    Really? Ever read a Paul Krugman article in The Times?
    -Bark'n
    Semper Fi


    "The gun is the great equalizer... For it is the gun, that allows the meek to repel the monsters; Whom are bigger, stronger and without conscience, prey on those who without one, would surely perish."

  9. #9
    Member Array Cornelius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    140
    Loughner’s gun, a 9-millimeter Glock, is extremely easy to fire over and over, and it can carry a 30-bullet clip. It is “not suited for hunting or personal protection,” said Paul Helmke, the president of the Brady Campaign.
    What?! I've seen lots of Glock vs. 1911 debates (or alternatively, Glock vs. XD, Glock vs. M&P, etc), but this is the first time EVER I've heard that Glocks aren't suitable for personal protection. If anything, a Glock is one of the most utilitarian defensive weapons ever developed.

    Helmke is making up gibberish that's about as nonsensical as the killer himself- someone should notify the authorities before he starts attacking people...
    Ek = 1/2 (m*v^2)

  10. #10
    VIP Member
    Array OPFOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Nomad
    Posts
    4,713
    Exactly, Cornelius. Calling the single most popular (and one of the most efficient, hands down) self-defense handguns "not suited for personal protection" is one of the dumbest things to come out of that oh-so-dumb organization...
    A man fires a rifle for many years, and he goes to war. And afterward he turns the rifle in at the armory, and he believes he's finished with the rifle. But no matter what else he might do with his hands - love a woman, build a house, change his son's diaper - his hands remember the rifle.

  11. #11
    VIP Member Array Guantes's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    5,272
    It is apparent that Ms Collins believes that in excess of 60% of U.S. LE agencies are in error in their choice of a personal defense weapon for their officers.
    "I do what I do." Cpl 'coach' Bowden, "Southern Comfort".

  12. #12
    Distinguished Member Array tangoseal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Near Hotlanta!!
    Posts
    1,340
    I didnt even read all that jibberish. The very fact that they are calling it a Clip means they dont know enough about firearms to even hold a conversation on the proper control and legislation of them.

    One of you guys and I mean just one of you guys or girls here show me how to load a Glock's clip and I will buy you a dinner and hotel at anywhere on earth that I can afford tomorow!!!

    And one more thing ... "It’s about a technology the founding fathers could never have imagined." - From the article above.

    I thought the Constitution was a living breathing document as so many anti-gunners proclaim. If that were so then why all the sudden is the constitution sealed and dead. Oh that's right it;s only alive when its convenient for dispatching our liberties, not preserving them with the changing times.
    "I believe that the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms must not be infringed if liberty in America is to survive." - Ronald Reagan

  13. #13
    VIP Member Array chiefjason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Hickory, NC
    Posts
    2,789
    I must be doing something terribly wrong. My "regular pistol" is a Glock 19. Undoubtedly Gail is a snubby girl.
    I prefer to live dangerously free than safely caged!

    "Our houses are protected by the good Lord and a gun. And you might meet 'em both if you show up here not welcome son." Josh Thompson "Way Out Here"

  14. #14
    Ex Member Array hamlet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    new york
    Posts
    1,290
    I think she has some good points, while others I don't agree with or they seem off the mark.


    (Hopefully that mixed reaction won't provoke a rabid attack. I'd rather consider various points of view and throw some out after that if need be; not throw the them out first.)

  15. #15
    VIP Member Array jwhite75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    West Virginia
    Posts
    5,319
    It amazes me how truly uneducated these "NYC" types really are about the world around them. She said "semiautomatic weapons were banned until 2004". Really???? How about doing some actual research so you can spit veom correctly? Wow.
    Friends don't let friends be MALL NINJAS.


    I am just as nice as anyone lets me be and can be just as mean as anyone makes me. - Quoted from Terryger, New member to our forum.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. CA-approved Glocks vs "regular" Glocks...
    By dang.45 in forum Defensive Carry Guns
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: May 12th, 2013, 06:09 AM
  2. Replies: 19
    Last Post: July 23rd, 2010, 03:11 AM
  3. Question on "Fixed Sights" Glocks
    By Rollo in forum Defensive Carry Guns
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: May 12th, 2010, 10:09 PM
  4. Today's New York Times: "On Concerns Over Gun Control, Gun Sales Are Up"
    By JonInNY in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: November 7th, 2008, 12:54 PM

Search tags for this page

are glocks legal in ny
,
attempted political assassinations that took life of innocent bystanders
,

collins points out what a right to bear glocks?

,
glock ny times
,
glocks ny times
,
op-ed rights to bear arms
,
quote origin the gun is the great equalizer...for it is the gun...
,
school of glock forum gail
,
shooting in the midhudson valley mall parking lot
,
what the author is talking school of glock
,
will all glocks be illegal in nys
Click on a term to search for related topics.