Our gun laws make this kind of killing entirely too easy
Four Marines and a gunman were killed in shootings at multiple military sites in Chattanooga, Tennessee, Mayor Andy Berke announced at a Thursday afternoon press conference. The gunman was believed to have acted alone.
No matter what you think about gun control, it is impossible to dispute the fact that our gun laws make it easy for people, who are so inclined, to inflict a lot of damage.
Do you support a total ban on firearms? If not what laws specifically could prevent gun violence?
Right. Those are our only two options. Great point. /sarcasm.
There were not two options. There was a first question and a second open ended question. What gun laws, specifically, would prevent gun violence?
Dummy, read your comment again. How many options does it allow?
Btw are you disputing the premise of the post? Answer that question if you dare.
The premise of the post is that you stick it through the pierced hole of the ear lobe to keep it from growing back together overnight….
Again, what laws specifically could prevent gun violence? You made the claim so you should be able to answer.
Do you think it is possible to dispute the fact that our gun laws make it easy for people, who are so inclined, to inflict a lot of damage?
But it does beg the question, Jason: That if our gun laws make it easy for people, who are so inclined, to inflict a lot of damage, as you state. What law or laws would you pass to not make it easy for people, who are so inclined, to inflict a lot of damage?
I’m not even there yet. I just at want to see if there is common ground on what is a very straightforwrd question. Can we agree that our current gun control rules make this type of thing easy? Once that question is answered,I’d be willing to dive into other questions.
Living in a free county with certain enumerated constitutional rights is not the same as living in a dream world where evil is nonexistent.
Our freedom of speech makes it much too easy to publish websites and blogs aimed at radicalizing misguided youth. Our freedom of religion makes it much too easy for Islamist Mullahs to teach hatred for our way of life. Freedom of the press allows for the promulgation of lies represented as truth. Our freedom of assembly can be used as a convenient front for starting destructive riots. The Fourth Amendment protects those plotting terror against arbitrary search & seizure by government agents .
Yes, our right to keep and bear arms can make it easier for those bent on harm to fulfill their plans. It also makes it easier for the rest of use to protect ourselves against that evil.
All of our enumerated constitutional rights are essential to the survival of our Republic. They work together and are inseparable.
There will always be those who abuse these rights. Our choices are either to deal with those abusers via the rule of law or to relinquish our freedom.
Personally, I vote for freedom. Should a terrorist decide to make me a target, I may die. However, I will not do so as a helpless victim.
Other western democracies are free. Is Denmark enslaved? Germany? France ? I’m glad to have found some common ground, but your paranoid fantasies have me doubting that anything productive is going to happen next.
Maybe we could start with requiring background checks at all gun shows and for all private sales.
I’m also for making a gun owner responsible for their gun/guns. That means if you buy a gun you are responsible for knowing where it is at all times. If it is stolen, you must report it. If a child gets their hands on it and shoots themselves or another person the gun owner is responsible – we need to start calling these “tragedies” what they really are: completely avoidable, shamelessly irresponsible criminal acts. And yes, some of those parents need to go to jail. Do that and watch how fast gun owners suddenly discover real responsibility.
And yep, register them. You already self-registered if you bought a gun with a credit card or online. So spare me the cry of tyranny. Big Brother already knows who owns guns, right down to the model number.
Current laws do make it easy. A solution won’t be so easy. All or nothing is not politically tenable and compromise may not solve the problem. If the home-grown-terrorists-getting-guns problem is solved it is absolutely too easy to go online to learn how to build a [insert any destructive item here] and we’ll have to chase that problem. The real weapon is the terrorist and those under their control and influence. They need to be taken out at their source in a worldwide concerted effort. Like any fringe, they will never be completely gone but their influence and draw can be greatly diminished.
and, it was reported that military personnel now feel like targets and want to be able to protect themselves here. I hope that they are not allowed to walk around with M-4s and M-16s.
Current law does not prevent gun violence. Making those people who commit violence pay dearly may be a start. We have plenty of laws on the books that are plead out or reduced to prevent overburdening the justice system. I am on the fence in regard to registration, My gut goes with ” if you are law abiding and got nothing to hide, what’s the big deal? “. I also side with Pandora on the owners responsibility idea.
All of my views are balanced by the knowledge that ” big brother ” already knows who I am and have my fingerprints add nauseam for bonding , so I got nothing left to conceal from him, even if I bought a tin foil hat.
The real problem is the dishonesty of certain gun owners. If gun laws/regulations don’t result in no further shootings then they are a failure. With this logic, let’s get rid of seat belts, because, hey, they don’t protect against all auto accidents!
And the idea that gun owners will protect themselves from government tyranny or an intruder is laughable. The government will squash you like a bug (their arms are bigger than your arms!) and an intruder has the element of surprise – unless you walk around your house packing at all times, or have your guns stored (unsecured and loaded) in every room. Which is the definition of an irresponsible gun owner. Sorry, can’t have it both ways.
“Maybe we could start with requiring background checks at all gun shows and for all private sales.”
We already do in Delaware. I hear it’s really working well for Wilmington.
Pandora is right about protection against tyranny. It is not govt musket versus citizen musket any more. The citizens have been seriously outgunned for a long time.
A gun in the hands of a criminal scares me. A pressure cooker in the hands of a terrorist scares me even more.
“We already do in Delaware. I hear it’s really working well for Wilmington.”
The murder rate in Wilmington has faded to background levels in the past six months.
Not to mention that it’s still easy to traffic in guns over state lines, as such contraband is easy to hide.
The gun violence in Wilmington, it should be noted, has nothing in common with the shootings in Chattanooga, other than the use of guns.
“All of our enumerated constitutional rights are essential to the survival of our Republic. They work together and are inseparable.”
This easily refuted bullshit — already refuted above — is the kind of “thought” I have come to expect from the dumbshit conservative coalition.
And if you understood one of the biggest reasons for gun violence/gun accessibility in Wilmington, SussexAnon, then we could have a conversation. And, no, I’m not giving you the answer, because I’m certain someone throwing out a statement like that understands the situation.
Here’s the deal: If someone wants to kill you, if a terrorist wants to kill people they will find a way. We will never stop all of that. What we can stop is a lot of the senseless, incredibly stupid, impulse deaths, but for some reason certain gun owners are okay with the body count… cause ‘Murica!
Hey now! Geezer gave you a BIG hint!
I cannot attest to the accuracy of this data. Just providing a link for reference.
http://data.delawareonline.com/webapps/crime/
Wilmington no longer be known as Murder Capitol, USA in no time!
@J “Can we agree that our current gun control rules make this type of thing easy?”
Sure, but so what? This is just the tip if the iceberg. The real problem is that 90% of all gun deaths are family and friends. It’s a major health crisis that inflicts too many families.
The #1 homicide by a long shot? Spousal. THAT’s the real problem.
@Gan: If you scroll through the many pages of shootings, you will find that there were seven fatal shootings by Feb.1, meaning there have been eight in the 5+ months since, which was when Operation Disrupt has been in effect. At an annualized rate, that would be 18 or 19 per year.
@Sussex anon: If by “no time” you mean “2017,” then you probably will be correct, provided the extra policing continues and the murder rate continues at its current pace. The 2015 figures will be skewed by the bloody January; if the current pace continues through the end of the year, Wilmington should record 23 for the year. That’s still bad, but it will almost certainly drop us in the rankings. A full 2016 at the current pace would give Wilmington an annual murder rate of 18, which would make Wilmington just another city.
That’s not to say anyone should be happy about 18 murders a year, but I think we can all acknowledge that the “murder capital” bullshit is mostly about bad PR. Most of the people who slag the city for its murder rate don’t really give a shit about the people being murdered.
when’s the abortion post coming?
Im for a national gun registry. Every gun needs to be tracked.
I am not for a big brother state, however, and that clashes with my desire for a national registry. Here is how I rationalize that.
The biggest (and valid) argument AGAINST a registry, is that if the government ever decided to confiscate all the guns, they would know exactly where to look. Super point. Then, Americans wouldn’t be able to overthrow the government if that ever became necessary. we’d be totally option less. still with me? super.
If the government ever decided to ACTUALLY come for all the guns, registry or not, I feel we will have already passed them point where it can be reasoned with, or otherwise elected away….. and it will be time to “use those second amendment solutions” anyway. Everything else would be a moot point and “not complying with the gun grab” would be the leas of the laws one could break.
People who willingly give up their guns probably would be in the “revolution” anyway, so Id imagine the “patriots” wouldn’t want “the enemy” having any extra firepower.
If it reaches the point you conjure, they’ve got the drones and the gun nuts don’t.
Knowing who has the guns — or who is supposed to have the guns — is the whole point of a registry. The error here is the notion that your guns will protect you from the highly unlikely future you imagine.
Just to be clear… that isnt a future I imagine…, the drones are actually a great point that helps back up what im trying to say, thanks geezer! But for those who feel the need to have guns to protect the from the government (a dumb idea IMO) Having a registry, or not, would have no effect on that unlikely outcome.
What a register WOULD do, in combination with laws making people bear more responsibility with what happens with guns they purchase, is make it easier to hold someone, anyone, accountable for when a gun is used for crime. A gun is used ot kill people… the registry is referenced, and the person who bought the gun is arrested as an accessory to the crime.
“A gun is used to kill people… the registry is referenced, and the person who bought the gun is arrested as an accessory to the crime.”
How could the “reasonable” and “responsible” gun owners ever object to this common sense? Oh yeah…tyranny.
Southerns didn’t like the end of slavery either.
Track every gun from point of sale to owners. If a crime is committed, the person who sold the gun is legally responsible
I’m more concerned about the risk of texting drivers