This is a discussion on Now is ABSOLUTELY the time to talk about gun control! within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Exactly...............!!!!!!!!!!...
And to your other question, only about half of gun deaths are folks seeking to kill anyone but themselves so once you factor all those out, the whole death by gun numbers don't look all that bad given the population.
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the outcome of the vote." ~ Benjamin Franklin
This does seem a more appropriate place to carry the conversation from the other thread containing the news of the horrific shooting. Seems like the topic was shifting to an emotional debate that didn't really belong there.
Vietnam Vets, WELCOME HOME
Crossman 760 BB/Pellet, Daisy Red Ryder, Crossman Wrist Rocket, 14 Steak Knives, 3 Fillet Knives, Rolling Pin-14", Various Hunting Knives, 2 Baseball Bats, 3 Big Dogs and a big American Flag flying in the yard. I have no firearms; Try the next house.
This is one major screaming pet peeve of mine, the constant use of the term “gun violence” and the incessant demand for gun control when the problem is the CRIMINALS. Once we have criminal control there will be no need of so-called gun control. The lame stream media is constantly blaming the gun where the real problem is the criminal behind the gun. We need to constantly remind the media that they are broadcasting falsehoods and when we hear such fallacies brought up in conversation to redirect it to the criminals rather than to the gun.
When you have to shoot, shoot. Don't talk.
"Don't forget, incoming fire has the right of way."
It's about good people and evil people. It is not about inanimate objects.
NRA Life Member
GOA Life Member
Behave Like Someone Who is Determined to be FREE!
As the social engineers come out to tweak laws to move society away from its corruption or closer to an enforced Utopia, maybe it is about inanimate objects. And practical adaptation. They cry for more control of access to guns in spite of the fact that CT's laws worked as well as possible to limit access but did not prevent a murder and theft of firearms. Of concessions on Constitutional rights, on things like magazine capacity for the honest, law-abiding masses, on a broken mental health system to prevent any potentially violent lunatic from going over the edge, and all these laws to engineer society. As if someone has a social answer to an individual terrorist act.
How about we give training and drilling a chance? It works with fire as no child has been killed in a school fire in over half a century. How about we beef up the glass that the psycho shot out to gain entrance to the school? Isn't that a lot more efficacious than another attempt at engineering society?
Security is only as good as its weakest link. And as far as security against a terrorist, laws are about the weakest link. Somehow, I think that the founders had a great sense of this and did not look for security from the top down but expected and protected and encouraged self-sufficiency. And I think that it's a real tragedy if we lose that.
-Blackstone’s Commentaries 145–146, n. 42 (1803) in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)Americans understood the right of self-preservation as permitting a citizen to repel force by force
when the intervention of society... may be too late to prevent an injury.
Think of this.
A carpenter is building say…..a wooden box. If you’ll hang with me here I’m going somewhere with this.
OK….So, he builds a wooden box. It is suppose to be evenly square, but it isn’t, it is obscenely off kilter, out of whack, and very oblong butt-ugly.
Do you blame the tools the carpenter used? Is the pencil he used in his hand to draw a crooked line at fault? And is the saw he held in his hand at fault for cutting a crooked cut? Or is it the carpenter’s fault because he didn’t follow proper procedure?
If there are already restrictive gun laws in place that prohibit someone from using a gun to commit a crime, or that restricts someone from legally obtaining or from owning or even simply possessing a gun and yet they still do, do you blame the gun laws? If you pile on more restrictive gun laws, will more gun laws stop someone whom has no regard for any excising gun laws at all in the first place follow any more new, more restrictive guns laws?
Take for the sake of augment Chicago < sorry windy city>. It was or still is VERY illegal to even have a gun in your house there. Yet there are houses there that do. People within the city limits of Chicago are in fear for their lives to simply walk the streets in some areas of Chicago because of the gun violence in an area where it is totally against the law to simply have a gun in your possession, yet there are people who do.
How much more restrictive can any gun law be?
You can’t, if I am correct, even buy any bullets anywhere, with in the State of Illinois, without a permit!
How much more restrictive can a gun law be?
And yet Chicago is over run with illegal firearms and you want to make more gun laws more restrictive? The one’s in place now do not work.
Please someone tell me how much more restrictive can you make a law then one that states: “YOU CAN NOT LEGALLY OWN OR POSSESS A GUN WITHIN CHICAGO'S CITY LIMITS”?
If someone is DUI and they kill someone while driving drunk do you blame the car and the booze or the driver behind the wheel? We already have laws prohibiting that and yet, there are still people not only doing it, but some get off with just a slap on the wrist! If I’m not mistaking, more people are killed by drunk drivers then by firearms? So let’s outlaw cars and all types of alcoholic beverages too.
So now some will say: “Well that is comparing avocados to walnuts”.
Well the premise is the same. Someone committed an illegal act and they killed someone. Are you going to try to tell me that the sorrow of the parent's of any 5-yr old child is any less hard to cope with because they were run down by a drunk driver, then that of the parent's of those children killed in the school shooting in Connecticut?
Those that are 2A Right avocets are not going to be able to ever reason in any ways shape or form with the anti’s……period! Let’s just hope that our law makers have enough sense to know when to leave well enough, somewhat alone! It is a no win situation for either side.
Just like with that carpenter, any tool in the wrong hands isn’t to blame; it’s the hands that it is in at the use of that time.
And taking any of those tools out of circulation isn’t going to stop crooked lines from being cut!
There is no easy answer or ways of means, to explain that to any of the anti’s either. Because they do not want to hear it! They rant and rave it is our way or the highway. I'm guessing that the 2A Rights side is willing to listen though and I'm sure most if not all agree with reasonable restrictions such as those now in place. But, flat out banishment will not work.
Now then let us all get back on track, and go back to working to save the financial train were all on, which is about to go over the cliff, and let the poor people victimized by the horrid event in Connecticut, morn in peace!!!
PS: PLEASE DON'T FEED THE TROLLS
no, I'm not calling for such a thing, but you get my point. Local gun laws are kinda useless when surrounding states have much looser laws. Only national laws make a difference.