NY Times Editorial: Saner Gun Laws

This is a discussion on NY Times Editorial: Saner Gun Laws within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/23/op...1.html?_r=1&hp It is widely believed in Washington that there is no chance the gun lobby and the new Republican majority in the House would ever ...

Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: NY Times Editorial: Saner Gun Laws

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

    NY Times Editorial: Saner Gun Laws

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/23/op...1.html?_r=1&hp

    It is widely believed in Washington that there is no chance the gun lobby and the new Republican majority in the House would ever permit passage of the modest ideas for tightening America’s absurdly lax gun laws that have surfaced since the massacre in Tucson.

    That may be true, but it is no reason for supporters of reasonable gun regulation not to put up a fight. Nor is it an excuse for the lack of principled presidential leadership on this issue. We are still waiting for President Obama to fulfill his promises on gun safety.

    Mr. Obama ran for the White House calling for the restoration of the ban on assault weapons that Congress irresponsibly let expire in 2004. He has not pursued that goal, and so far, his voice is missing even from the call for less ambitious but necessary changes in gun laws. The country needs Mr. Obama to put his support behind a two-pronged approach that is directly relevant to the dynamics of gun violence we all saw at play in Tucson.

    It begins with a proposed ban on the big volume ammunition magazines that added to the carnage not just in Arizona but also a long line of other mass shootings, including at Columbine High School and Virginia Tech. Even former Vice President Dick Cheney, a staunch gun rights advocate, said last week that it might be time to reinstate the magazine-size rule, which was part of the discarded assault weapons ban. That would save lives without interfering with hunters or violating any constitutional right.

    Mr. Obama ought to tell that to Congress and the public in his State of the Union address this week. The National Rifle Association will counter that Americans need high-capacity clips for self-defense. We’d like to hear how many times in the real world the life of an American, other than a police officer or a combat soldier, was endangered because of an inability to fire 30 shots in rapid succession without reloading. What we do know about is the grim, repetitive reality of mass shootings.

    The pending gun agenda also includes plugging dangerous holes in the background check system to make it harder for people with emotional and drug abuse problems, like the Tucson shooter, to obtain weapons. Despite eroding public support for more strict rules, like a handgun ban, there is broad agreement on the need to keep guns from getting into the wrong hands.

    Although facing a likely primary challenge from the right when he runs for re-election next year, Senator Richard Lugar, Republican of Indiana, voiced his continued support for banning assault weapons in a recent interview with Bloomberg News.

    Another Republican, Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, opposes banning the enlarged magazines. But on “Meet the Press” last Sunday, Mr. Coburn expressed an interest in a bipartisan effort to create a new legal standard to “make sure people who are mentally ill cannot get and use a gun.” His interest in finding common ground is encouraging even though for the moment, at least, the fix is unclear.

    One thing that could be usefully addressed is that many state records on disqualifying involuntary commitments and adjudicated mental instability are not being submitted to the federal background check system. Records of drug abuse or addiction also rarely make it into the system, according to Mayors Against Illegal Guns, Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s gun policy group.

    Asked last week about the administration’s positions on these matters, Mr. Obama’s press secretary, Robert Gibbs, said the White House was focused on “the important healing process.” That is part of the president’s duties. So is protecting public safety.
    "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. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    VIP Member Array tokerblue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    2,328
    Quote Originally Posted by JonInNY View Post
    The National Rifle Association will counter that Americans need high-capacity clips for self-defense. We’d like to hear how many times in the real world the life of an American, other than a police officer or a combat soldier, was endangered because of an inability to fire 30 shots in rapid succession without reloading. What we do know about is the grim, repetitive reality of mass shootings.
    - How many times in the real world life of an American have they been endangered because of a legal inability to actually carry a firearm? What we do know is the grim, repetitive reality of mass shootings tend to happen in those places.

    Not that I'm in the favor of any type of ban or restriction, but I'll be honest with you. I'd swap a 10 round magazine cap for the ability to carry anywhere, anytime in a heartbeat.

  4. #3
    VIP Member Array Guantes's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    5,272
    The problem with most individual proposed guns laws is that they are not a destination, but merely a stop on a journey.
    "I do what I do." Cpl 'coach' Bowden, "Southern Comfort".

  5. #4
    VIP Member
    Array oneshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    +42.893612,-082.710236 , Mi.
    Posts
    7,876
    Quote Originally Posted by JonInNY View Post
    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/23/op...1.html?_r=1&hp

    It is widely believed in Washington that there is no chance the gun lobby and the new Republican majority in the House would ever permit passage of the modest ideas for tightening America’s absurdly lax gun laws that have surfaced since the massacre in Tucson.

    That may be true, but it is no reason for supporters of reasonable gun regulation not to put up a fight. Nor is it an excuse for the lack of principled presidential leadership on this issue. We are still waiting for President Obama to fulfill his promises on gun safety.



    The pending gun agenda also includes plugging dangerous holes in the background check system to make it harder for people with emotional and drug abuse problems, like the Tucson shooter, to obtain weapons. Despite eroding public support for more strict rules, like a handgun ban, there is broad agreement on the need to keep guns from getting into the wrong hands.


    Another Republican, Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, opposes banning the enlarged magazines. But on “Meet the Press” last Sunday, Mr. Coburn expressed an interest in a bipartisan effort to create a new legal standard to “make sure people who are mentally ill cannot get and use a gun.” His interest in finding common ground is encouraging even though for the moment, at least, the fix is unclear.

    One thing that could be usefully addressed is that many state records on disqualifying involuntary commitments and adjudicated mental instability are not being submitted to the federal background check system. Records of drug abuse or addiction also rarely make it into the system, according to Mayors Against Illegal Guns, Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s gun policy group.




    This is IDIOTIC^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^



    Its like saying there is a way to screen people for their Drivers License, and if they Drink, they should be disqualified because they may get drunk and drive into a crowd.

    Are they kidding me????




    Get the facts first. You can distort them later. Mark Twain
    If you want to make God laugh, tell him your plans.

    Washington didn't use his freedom of speech to defeat the British, He shot them!

    Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy." -- Ernest Benn

  6. #5
    Senior Member Array ks kid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    US
    Posts
    520
    "Another Republican, Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, opposes banning the enlarged magazines. But on “Meet the Press” last Sunday, Mr. Coburn expressed an interest in a bipartisan effort to create a new legal standard to “make sure people who are mentally ill cannot get and use a gun.” His interest in finding common ground is encouraging even though for the moment, at least, the fix is unclear. "

    The last time we (USA) tried to ensure mass murder didnt take place, a new agency was put in place. The answer that we have is to get naked to fly and cant use the word terrorist. Its against the law for a mental defeciant to have a gun, how do we ensure that does not happen. The defination of mentally ill is very wide and would more than likely catch a lot of gun owners.

    I think Tokerblue is right, let me carry everywhere so I can protect my family.

  7. #6
    Distinguished Member Array mr.stuart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    usa-southeast texas
    Posts
    1,678
    As usual,people that do not understand,CRIMINALS DO NOT OBEY LAWS! This is why we call them criminals.If they cannot purchase a gun legally,they will obtain weapons through other methods.I often consider what type of people write these articles.Probably have no real life experience.They most likely have lived a comfy little life without a vision of the real world.
    Pain is the best teacher,but nobody wants to go to his class.


    When the past smothers the present, there is only desperation. When the future absorbs the present, life stands still. In either case a decision must be made because you only live now and you are only what you are now.

  8. #7
    VIP Member Array automatic slim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    The western edge of The Confederacy
    Posts
    2,198
    It's already illegal for the mentally ill and drug abusers to own guns, so what is this guy talking about. If the current FBI background check isn't enough, what is??? Why are the police always exempt from these laws? I was an LEO for 21 years and I don't recall a single incident where I or anyone else would of had to fire 30 shots! I never had to fire a single shot as 99% never do.
    "First gallant South Carolina nobly made the stand."
    Edge of Darkness

  9. #8
    Distinguished Member Array Anubis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Arapahoe County CO
    Posts
    1,795
    I too would like to see "saner" gun laws, but my ideas of saner laws are probably not in line with those of the columnist.

  10. #9
    VIP Member Array chiefjason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Hickory, NC
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by JonInNY View Post
    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/23/op...1.html?_r=1&hp Even former Vice President Dick Cheney, a staunch gun rights advocate, said last week that it might be time to reinstate the magazine-size rule, which was part of the discarded assault weapons ban. That would save lives without interfering with hunters or violating any constitutional right.
    Boy, that did not take long did it. What's the %, still under 1% of this type stuff used in crimes? Trample everyones rights to "stop" less than 1%. Doesn't seem to me that the cost justifies the action. Not that it has ever mattered to them.
    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"

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. Roanoke Times Editorial
    By DaveH in forum General Firearm Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: May 13th, 2010, 09:45 AM
  2. Roanoke Times Editorial -- agreeing with the NRA
    By DaveH in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: May 4th, 2010, 03:22 PM
  3. Bad Roanoke Times Editorial
    By DaveH in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: February 20th, 2010, 11:30 PM
  4. Good editorial in the Washington Times of all places...
    By MinistrMalic in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: January 23rd, 2010, 06:09 PM
  5. Roanoke Times Editorial
    By DaveH in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: June 3rd, 2008, 08:42 PM

Search tags for this page

editorials nys laws
,
future gun laws new york
,
future of gun laws in new york
,

future of ny gun laws

,
future of ny state gun laws
,
gun laws editorial: new york times
,
it is widely believed in washington that there is no chance the gun lobby
,
nyc gun rights in the future
,
powered by mybb roanoke times & world news
,
powered by mybb tucson museum of art
,
saner gun
,

saner gun laws

Click on a term to search for related topics.