Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | All Access e-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Gun safety

February 18, 2013

Dear editor: The 10 years prior to the September, 2004 expiration of the U.S. ban on assault weapons is worth looking at for a history lesson....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(15)

BrookP

Feb-21-13 2:26 PM

tommyboy, if I may steal some of your words: "It is getting pretty old......all the people who blame everything wrong in today's society on" taking god out of the schools, also. Yep, pretty old, too.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

garypayton

Feb-20-13 11:02 AM

I don't think the problem is too many guns, it might just be too many tools, if you get my meaning...

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

tommyboy

Feb-20-13 2:52 AM

It is getting pretty old......all the people who blame everything wrong in today's society on those terrible guns. Homelessness? All the guns fault. Kids starving in the street? Blame in on a 9mm. Teen pregnancy......all Glocks fault. Guns are a tool and just like any other tool if you don't know how to use it....don't try to operate it. By the way, if someone took the notion to do it they could pack their car/van/truck with enough common chemicals from any farm supply store or grocery store for that matter and drive through Walmarts front door and take out half the building. Shall we ban and regulate those as well? I am not trying to force anyone to go out and get a gun, don't try and take MY CHOICE away from me.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

garypayton

Feb-19-13 6:24 PM

I get it. So does K.D. Just because we don't see it your way, we don't get it? I say YOU don't "get it."

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

andersAK

Feb-18-13 7:39 PM

Gun Control should not be a top priority in our government leaders minds. Education,Jobs, our our Economy needs our concentration right now.

10 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

knights

Feb-18-13 7:21 PM

2 comments from your letter confirm you and your side will never get it - 'freedom lost for law-abiding citizens' and 'my last goal for our national leaders would be funding enhanced mental health counseling'. Freedom lost? Not a concern for your side. More national funding? From what sock drawer will we pull this money? Get with it, we are broke.

6 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

riverrunner

Feb-18-13 1:34 PM

(PART 2) getting fined for not having health care. I could go on forever. The fact that people are even looking at these scary black guns and saying "Ok these kinds of guns are scary looking and can hold more than the magic number of ten rounds....we need to ban these." These semi auto guns are not to blame. Heck I will paint mine camo if it makes you feel more comfortable. If the world starts to spiral out of control and god forbid it does I will be asking to see anyone's voter registration card if I am asked for help. P.S. I think we should take anyone's car off the road if it has more than two bumper stickers on it. Its a distraction for me when I am driving behind you. (Now doesn't that sound ridiculous.)

7 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

riverrunner

Feb-18-13 1:24 PM

So here we go again. Mrs.Davis must have got all of her stats from factcheck**** and copy an pasted them into this little ditty. Why on earth would you bring up the suicide rate by guns? Since you were a teacher and I guess that qualifies you as an expert in everything......you already know that if someone wants to kill themselves they will. Be it gun,razor,pills or jumping from the kinzua dam. Don't bring a gun up in the topic. Its not like the gun said "Hey buddy kill yourself with me." As for your comment about the NRA fostering shotguns under the bed and not Glocks.....anyone familiar with using a gun for self defense would tell you its easier to clear a room with a handgun rather than a shotgun because it is smaller and does not get hung up going around corners going room from room. Living in today's society has become a joke. We give up freedoms and rights on a weekly basis. Told where we can smoke, or how much soda we can buy at one time (NYC), getting fined.

7 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MTOMTO

Feb-18-13 1:21 PM

This is the one stimulus policy that this administration has done correctly. Threaten guns and ammo, people buy more guns and ammo.

8 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

colorado

Feb-18-13 12:40 PM

Here is a copy and paste from Obamas Justice Dept's report issued 1-4-2013 titled " Summary of Select Firearm Violence Prevention Strategies"

START Since assault weapons are not a major contributor to US gun homicide and the existing stock of guns is large, an assault weapon ban is unlikely to have an impact on gun violence. If coupled with a gun buyback and no exemptions then it could be effective.END

Notice the words --BUYBACK WITH NO EXCEPTIONS----- That's the definition of confiscation.

Also notice the words "NOT A MAJOR CONTRIBUTOR TO US GUN HOMICIDE"

IT'S ALL ABOUT POLITICS

8 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

msrngtp2002

Feb-18-13 10:45 AM

I have read the 2nd Amendment multiple times - I don't see the words "hunting" or "hunters" in there anywhere. Neither do I see "shotgun" or any other description of a firearm. The purpose of the 2nd amendment was not so people could hunt. It was so the populace could protect itself from a tyrant. Call me paranoid if one must - but I think that idea is still applicable today.

11 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

colorado

Feb-18-13 10:17 AM

Ignoring the fact that the Brady handgun campaigns goal is the elimination of firearms, especially handguns by whatever means necessary their data is misleading at best.

To start, the number of black guns used in crime is so small as to make the supposed reduction meaningless. Couple that with the fact that since the early 1990's ALL CRIME RATES by all methods have been decreasing. For whatever reason, even with an increasing population, with a huge increase in firearms ownership we have become a more polite society in spite of the media claims to the contrary.

A good example of this is Chicago with their 500 deaths and all the publicity over their crime and violence. In the early 1990's they had over 800 murders a year. It has been on a downward trend ever since as has the rest of the country.

Their mayor just went on TV with a novel idea. He is suggesting they should start enforcing some of the laws already on the books. LOL

Where did I hear that befor

10 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

colorado

Feb-18-13 9:27 AM

In answer to item 1., 2., and 3 on the list--- the fact they didn't happen wasn't because of lack of trying by the liberal Democrats. It was because of the pushback from the law abiding gun owners that scuttled the attempts to enact even more restrictive gun laws than the Clinton gun ban. We only have to look to N.Y. to see what the liberals will do when they have the votes. As a result of the draconian laws just passed there mere possession of a 30 round magazine will get you a greater punishment than either---3rd degree rape, luring a child, or unlawful imprisonment to name just a few.

Even assuming the criminal would not have merely used another weapon, all the firearms together under the current gun ban proposal were responsible for less than an average 45 deaths each year out of a total of approx. 13,000. IT'S ALL ABOUT POLITICS.

9 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

st0newa11

Feb-18-13 7:54 AM

It seems that some people are unable or unwilling to lead their own lives. They would rather give up freedom in exchange for the gov't to handle (read CONTROL) all aspects of their lives. Is it due to a lack of mental capacity, lack of drive, or just plain laziness? This is frustrating to those of us who choose freedom over slavery. I believe that our Constitution was a well thought-out, pretty comprehensive plan for freedom. It does not need "twisting" ( to echo TMMs words) to make our nation better. I'm not a fan of the NRA, but I love our Constitution. Please don't join Mr O in his efforts to shred it.

12 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Themattmobile

Feb-18-13 3:42 AM

In the past few years, the White House and Democrat think tanks have examined ways that political pundits might be regulated. There was an on-going effort to bend free speech laws in order to gag the likes of Rush Limbaugh,Glen Beck,Sean Hannity, and others.(I am not a fan.) Somehow the laws governing political equal time,national security,even obscenity were looked at closely to see if the radical right radio hosts could be silenced. The recent debate over gun rights actually approaches this issue from a different side. If the second ammendment can be twisted or "modernized" so then can free speech. This debate is as much about our most sacred rights as it is about guns. Would you give up your right to free speech to silence a political foe?

12 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 15 of 15 comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web