Reminder that Ron Reagan has a close family member who was shot down in an assassination attempt by a sick bastard who should not have owned a gun.
Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
134 Thoughts to “Ron Reagan: We need stricter gun purchasing restrictions”
Comments are closed.
And yet, that law breaking does not abrogate MY rights. No other person’s actions allow for another’s rights to be abridged. That way lies tyranny.
There is no unlimited right.
You can’t yell fire in a crowded theater.
There is no right to buy an assault weapon. You can’t buy a nuclear warhead either.
We need to cut way back on the kinds of weapons the average Joe can buy. You can bear arms without said arms being an AR-15.
I would think in the wake of a horrible massacre like this one beating “my rights” would bring some sort concern out for your fellow man.
We have to start having adult conversations rather than just listening to the bully pulpit. The American people are getting fed up.
I didn’t say that I had an unlimited right, did I?
My right to free speech is not limited because someone else falsely yells “fire”.
I have alot of concern for my fellow man. Claiming, because I disagree with you, that I don’t is low. We have been having adult conversations. Unfortunately for you, it seems, the rest of America seems to want MORE guns. The American people are not getting fed up. I predict gun sales will rise and carry permits will grow in number.
The “assault weapons ban” did nothing. He had a semi-automatic rifle. Again, because someone else abused their rights and broke the law does not mean that my rights should be taken away.
Should our freedom of speech be taken away because hate speech, violence, sedition, etc are promulgated on the web and in books every day. Speech that results in death?
The weapon is not at fault. HE is at fault and he would have found other ways. He had freaking explosives in his car and at home. He decided NOT to bring them in, for whatever reason. I wish that the nut HAD HAD a fully automatic weapon. He would have hit LESS people and run out of ammo faster.
Oh, God, PLEASE!!!! Try it! I TRIPLE-DOG dare Obama to try this during an election season. He could do it like everything else….all by himself, through Executive Order! Please, God, if you’re listening, make the left walk into this trap!
I am going to say it again, there is a lot of wiggle room between Brady and NRA.
Your rights aren’t being taken away. Why would you say that? No one is taking away your rights. (although you would have no problem taking my reproductive rights away, might I add)
Let’s talk about what Ron Reagan said, not what some futuristic Obama may or may not say or what Cargo believes I want to do to him.
What is wrong with attaching a little more competency demonstration to gun ownership for future sales?
I also think private sales should be noted, like a house and a car.
I am not paranoid about who knows I own a gun.
@SlowpokeRodriguez
Why would you lie? Obama has said nothing about gun control. You are just trying to stir up something that doesn’t exist.
You all think that everyone agrees with you. They don’t. You are just listening to yourselves repeating what you want to hear.
Most people don’t object to common sense speed bumps if it makes the country safer.
Don’t use AH politicians who want your vote as a barometer.
Funny thing about criminals–they by definition don’t generally let laws get in their way, no matter how restrictive the laws get. Responding to this tragedy by taking away rights of law-abiding citizens is about as logical as banning alcohol because it causes some 10,000 highway deaths every year. Now that’s carnage.
No one is taking anyone’s rights away or suggesting it. Perhaps you are assuming you have rights that really aren’t your rights?
I am suggesting that the certain weapons be harder to obtain than others. There are NO rights to bear a specific weapon. The Constiution doesn’t specify what arms. Perhaps we should go literal and simply limit the arms to muskets. That would cut down on a lot of assault if you had to load a musket.
There are people who do want to ban alcohol for that very reason.
What has changed in Virginia since the Tech massacre? Anything? our gun laws have gotten laxer.
I was expressing a wish for the future, and you accuse me of intentionally stating a fact incorrectly in order to deceive. I’m not used to the liberal definition of a lie. Is a lie “anything a conservative says?”
Depends on the conservative I would guess. Obama has not mentioned gun control of any sort.
And I didn’t say he did, I was offering suggestions for him if that was his desire. At no time did I say that “Obama says he wants gun control”. Here’s the fun part….do you think he can resist the temptation to try to disarm the nation? The opportunity is right in front of him, bright and shiny like a red-wrapper-clad piece of candy! You know he’d like to do it, it is such a fundamental part of the radical socialist throughout history. Can he resist?
( Is a lie “anything a conservative says?) Not everything, just most things! Of course I’m speaking of our “Political Conservatives” not the true Ideological Conservative.I’m a gun owner and hunter but I quit the NRA when they turned into a Political organization.When you start buying politicians you are no longer a grass-roots organization committed to speaking for sportsmen. I’m with Moon, Nobody outside of law enforcement need assault rifles or high volume clips .
Look, I’m not trying to pick a fight with the management of this blog. What I am more interested in is the chatter on msnbc this morning, for example, which is all “assault weapons ban”, and of course, the Huffington (Daahhhhling!) Post, which is littered with anti-gun opinion pieces, like so many clumps in the cat litter box. The left thinks they have an opportunity, here. Remember, it was the Godfather himself, Rahm Emmanuel, who said to “never let a crisis go to waste”. I’m saying I want Democrats to push for, say, assault weapons ban as hard as they can.
Try Faux News. It is enough to gag a maggot. Same stuff. They are blathering about not saying the shooters name. You would think they were talking about Voldemort.
Gangs off msnbc this morning? Most people simply want the killing to stop. Most people aren’t in to left and right over massacres. Not all left is opposed to guns and not all rights wants to camp out at the NRA.
Its going to be up to Americans, not the politicians, to decide what to do to cut down on gun violence and accessibility to guns by the resident wackos.
I urge you to contact your closest Democratic politician and demand he (Connolly, maybe?) introduce an assault weapons ban with all speed!
Bear owns a lot of weapons. He isn’t local either.
And yes, everything a politician says (of any persuasion) is usually a lie.
Since I see that across the aisles – my liberal left and righteous right friends I implore you to think of the children and buy raffle tickets to support programs for youth shooters.
http://www.virginiagunraffle.com/
As adults, we know the value of the 2nd Amendment, gun rights, etc., but unless we transfer our enthusiasm, knowledge and education to our youth, the future of shooting sports and gun rights in general will fade away.
There are I believe 2 Class 3 weapons that will come with a $400 value NFA Gun Trust so you don’t have to get the ‘Governments signature’.
I hope those that are inclined to help the youth of tomorrow will think about donating.
Why donate to a political movement?
The Boy Scouts do an excellent job with teaching kids about marksmanship and gun safety. Donate there, specifically to that instruction. Who knows other NOT NRA groups?
I admit to an intense dislike of the NRA because I believe they are liars.
The NRA Foundation is A-political, therefore no political activities are allowed at these events. Membership in the National Rifle Association is not solicited or encouraged, You DO NOT have to be a member of the NRA to participate or attend a Friends of NRA event.
For the record I am not a card carrying member of the NRA. I am however a card carrying member of the Virginia Citizens Defense League – a group that actually pushes for my rights in the Virginia General Assembly.
I feel they are fairly contemptible also. Aren’t they the folks who showed up in Blackburg at the first anniversary of the Tech massacre and who acted out?
Ohhh, careful, the BSA is on the outs now because of their reaffirmed stance against gays.
Well, that is old news. They still do a good job with their marksmanship and gun safety badges.
I’m not a member of the NRA, either. They are a political concern, and, as such, are highly vulnerable to corruption and soul sales.
For Obama’s history on guns, a quick google: http://www.justfactsdaily.com/what-is-obamas-gun-control-agenda
@marinm
🙂 Wish I had money.
Funny that this blogger dude has heard them all and the rest of us haven’t. You are borrowing trouble.
Cargo, who is this person and just how do you know they are reliable?
Second Amendment Foundation.
SAF is awesome. If I dipped into the kids college funds they and GOA would get money from me.
Speaking as adults here does anyone think that any new laws will be passed because of what happened in Colorado?
The guy was a text book active shooter. Didn’t want to die and stopped when confronted.
And he left a booby trapped apt. No, but I think there will be more discussion, Marin.
Somehow we have to dispense with the binary thinking on the issue of nut cases getting hold of weapons that can kill scores in less than a minute.
Too many people want to claim their 15 minutes of fame by killing and maiming others.
Our job is to figure out how to keep guns and weapons out of the hands of those who are nuts. How often does it have to happen? Many people are tired of being silenced by the gun lobby.
“Many people are tired of being silenced by the gun lobby.”
What are you talking about? Again? Who is silencing these people or you? The gun control people are the ones that refuse to discuss. We even have a term for it….”Reasoned Discourse.” A refusal to allow comments on blogs or discussion groups. No opposing views allowed or very strictly moderated.
The NRA actually supported many of the laws now decried by current 2nd Amendment support groups.
What is the gun lobby? Me? Marin? The millions of gun owners? Gun lobby is such a vague yet sinister sounding term, when you use it that way.
Binary thinking? What would that be? That I believe that I have a right, as a law abiding citizen, to own and operate lawfully acquired property? There is no gray area. Either I am banned from owning an item or I am not. Following your descriptions…..what would you do? What should be “allowed” by the government in your scenario?
First you have to determine who is a nut. Holmes seemed completely normal. Loughner was an obvious nut case. Cho…same. How draconian do you want to get?
A gallon of gasoline can be weaponized. That LE is taking their time in accessing his apartment shows you how volatile those IEDs are he left behind.
Want to push for BG cheeks for a gallon of gas, too?
He passed his BG checks. He hatched this plan probably over a 4 month time span. And not to be crass but were fortunate he used firearms and not an explosive in that theatre. Couldve been worse….
A box of nails and a bag of fertilizer can be weaponized also. So what. That is not the point.
Obviously the BG check was far too limited which is sort of my point. Maybe more is needed than a once over before you can buy automatic weapons that can kill multimple people in under a minute. Maybe we need a little more assurance that the person is legit and sane. While you can never be 100%, the more you delve, the tighter the controls.
No where have I seen that anyone has a contstitutional right to an automatic weapon. People who really want one shouldn’t mind submitting to closer inspection.
ding ding ding…point proven again…..
Yes, right. Lets start on that gas test immediately. another dumb ass NRA solution.
By the way…what if he ISN’T a nut? What if he’s just evil? Unless one can read minds, there is no test to determine that.
I’m a multi-gun owner. I grew up in rural NC and started hunting before I was a teen. I was a bail bondsman, where I carried a gun, and I spent 25 years in the military, which is a pretty gun-oriented profession. I’m not against guns, but I am against idiocy, and the NRA’s slippery-slope/the government’s coming for your guns crap is idiotic. The NRA is also a partisan political organization that generates about a quarter-billion tax-exempt dollars a year, pays Wayne LaPierre a million dollars a year to try and defeat Obama, and includes “wide-stance in the men’s room” Larry Craig and the unstable Ted Nugent on its board of directors. If you ask me which is a bigger threat to the lives of Americans – AQ or the NRA – it’s hands down the NRA. Here’s a link to the Brady Campaign Against Gun Violence where there’s a petition to address the issue of gun violence that I’ve already signed. http://www.bradynetwork.org
Thanks for your input, Moe. I believe you qualify, in my mind, as someone who can enjoy gun ownership without making a life-time commitment to breathing dragon fire from the NRA. You have pretty much explained why gun owners like me dislike the NRA intensely. The board of directors and LaPierre respresent an ilk that has too long dominated the American political scene.
What do we have to do, start our own club?
I’m interested to know what his mom meant by saying “you’ve got the right person” immediately after hearing about it. What did she know? Just curious!
And what about the bobby-trapped apartment? Are there going to be calls for limits on boobies?
I wonder how stricter gun laws would have stopped Tim McVeigh? Over 150 deaths, without a shot fired.
Obviously not at all.
Back to the adult conversation or is it too much to ask for?
Cargo, stop it. YOU are cutting off conversation because you can’t even start off with the basic premise.You are proving my point by whining about the gun control lobby who to date, haven’t mentioned jack. They have never mentioned jack on this blog.
This should not be an all or nothing conversation and it has become one. I didn’t mean blog discussion necessarily but in one paragraph I now see why it is going to be impossible.
Ok, I give up. I was an absolute idiot to think I would get anything but NRA party line.
I think the NRA is evil because it propagates lies rather than seeking solutions to modern problems. As for Holmes, I agree. He isn’t a nut. He is perfectly normal. You can tell that by the dyed hair and the joker costume and booby trapped apartment.
All American grad students live that way.
Again, I apologise for thinking that we could have an adult conversation here.
I think legitimate questions are being asked on this and the other thread about what the limits should be and where they would stop. Certainly, there are plenty of folks who believe no one should have access to any kind of firearm whatsoever. Take away the “assault weapon” (media-goaded hyperbole) and then what? Before some of those weapons made their appearance on the streets, people were still calling out for stricter gun laws. I’m not seeing “binary” thinking here, just legitimate concern about who gets to decide which guns are best for the law-abiding to own, and whether those “deciders” would ever be satisfied.
How would you prefer weapons like AK-47’s be classified? Shall we store them with the BB guns? How about “You’ll put your eye out” references in kids movies?
If someone else can come up with another name for guns purchased to kill multiple people in under a minute, I am game for renaming.
I don’t classify a revolver with 6 chambers the same as I do a weapon that that fires multiple rounds. “Stricter gun laws” also sounds like media driven hyperbole. Are the gun laws stricter or are we going to require more competence to be demonstrated for certain weapons.
As for who decides competence? Have a competency board for all I care. 1 appointed by the state and 1 appointed by the gun lobbyists and 1 appointed by the other people. See what happens.
Thank you Emma for recognizing that people just want to find common sense solutions. It is a complicated issue with many different opinions. We own guns, but then I know my husband is well trained and we teach our children gun safety from a very young age. I also know that our next door neighbors friends son killed himself with a family owned gun. He was depressed and only a teenager, seeing no future and made a fatal choice. Which brings me to my next critical point.
The over riding factor for many large killing sprees like this seem to connect to mental illness. Look at Jared Loughner, his family was clearly distressed over his behavior. It sounds like the young man who perpetrated the Colorado killings may have also been showing signs of mental illness if his mom “knew” they authorities had the right person. We don’t know yet, but obviously he was not in normal frame of mind, he thought he WAS the joker. I don’t know whether stricter gun laws would have prevented this tragedy, or VA techs tragedy, but it is incumbent upon us a nation to explore the similarities and determine if there are reasonable ways to prevent mentally unstable people from gaining access to guns, or at least make it more difficult!
@Moon-howler
“A box of nails and a bag of fertilizer can be weaponized also. So what. That is not the point.”
So your point is not saving lives; what is it then?
“Obviously the BG check was far too limited which is sort of my point. Maybe more is needed than a once over before you can buy automatic weapons that can kill multimple people in under a minute. Maybe we need a little more assurance that the person is legit and sane. While you can never be 100%, the more you delve, the tighter the controls.”
As has been mentioned before even with medical checks in other countries mass shootings occur. So a BG check is not fool proof. Also please cite your source that an AUTOMATIC weapon was used. As a fellow gun owner you can appreciate the difference between an automatic and semi automatic weapon.
“Yes, right. Lets start on that gas test immediately. another dumb ass NRA solution.”
Ok, I’ll bite. What non dumb ass idea do you have. Show us how you can easily solve this “problem” without impacting my right as an American.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/colo-shootings-show-that-us-gun-laws-make-no-sense/2012/07/20/gJQADjJryW_story.html?hpid=z3
“Yes, the Second Amendment protects a citizen’s right to own a gun, but it does not preclude reasonable regulation for public safety. Yes, mass killings occur in societies with stronger gun laws, but not with such regularity — and not against the backdrop of daily gun violence, both criminal and accidental, that distinguishes the United States.”
@Marinm
Nothing is fool proof.
I am not going to get in to a pissing contest over automatic vs semi automatic. I will leave it to you gun boys to flip flop on definition. You know perfectly well that I mean guns that you can set to fire in succession without a trigger press for each shot. My guns are rather simple devices. My most exotic gun was a .22 pistol.
how about this–Americans who are tired of fooling around with this just put some serious hurt on you cowboys?
Keep pissing off people and you all will be selling some guns to pay off politicians to defend your “rights.” Let’s take it back to basics since real live conversation isn’t possible.
There is serious disagreement over what are “rights” and what are not “rights.” Let’s take it back to rights. Obviously ways to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and wack jobs wasn’t possible. Where is that ass hole Ted Nugent for this discussion? Might as well bring him in here also. Not all Americans think you have a right to carry whatever weapon you want to carry.
Congratulations are in order. I think after this futile conversation, I have been wrong to even attempt to support gun rights. Let’s just try it the other way for a while. I collect turquoise, leather hand bags. I am not particularly interested in guns so why should I care of waste any more of my energy on defending your “rights” which are questionable at best?
Its a lot smarter to try to sell people and listen to their concerns than to big ass.
@Marinm
And one more thing…I keep hearing how all you gun enthusiasts save lives. If that is happening, how come we keep having massacres?
I don’t believe there is a no weapons post at the theater either. I sneak cokes in a theater. I would think nothing of taking a small pistol in if I were in a parking lot late at night. It probably would have gotten me killed in this situation by the way, so lets not speculate.
I keep hearing all this talk and it is that…talk. All I have seen is a bunch of cowboys parading around. Offended? I am very offended at your suggestions for solutions.
Buy more guns. right? We have more gun deaths in this country than any other industrialized nation. The real bottom line is the NRA gang wants its toys without interference. I think that ship has sailed.
I guess we simply can’t have it any way w like it when it comes to the Constitution. We can’t on one hand scream about our “reproductive rights” as a Constitutional given–completely unfettered and unregulated right up until the ninth month–and then on the other hand demand limits on other Constitutional rights that other Americans enjoy but others don’t happen to like. Quite the dilemma, isn’t it?
Reproductive rights aren’t completely unfettored. Not even close. Up until the 9th month? Sorry, that is just a totally stupid, argumentative thing to say. Surely you don’t REALLY think that do you?
Read Roe Vs. Wade. First trimester-unfettored. The second and third trimesters, especially the third trimester, the state very much has a vested interest. As we both know, even the first trimester has now become very regulated with all sorts of restrictions.
Lets speak specifically to abortion. It has always been a balancing act between the rights of the woman vs the rights of the fetus. The closer to term one gets, the fewer rights the woman has and the more rights the fetus has. That is as it should be, in my mind. I am not uncomfortable in the least with this arrangement. Apparently others are, wouldn’t you say?
Nice try at the gotcha. It would help to know what is said in Roe in the first place, however.
Reading this blog reminds me of the “Archie Bunker ” solution to defeating airplane hijackers
His solution was arm everyone who gets on the plane. This kid had no RIGHT to kill anyone and if proven guilty should get the needle(none of that temporary insanity BS)
Maybe they have a Colorado “Old Sparky.” How do they kill out there?
@Moon-howler
I know what auto v semi is but you indicated the shooter used an automatic weapon and I wanted you to cite your source as all media outlets are indicating that he used a semi automatic. A fully automatic weapon is VERY hard to get and stupid crazy expensive because of taxes and rarity on the civilian market. Loose usage of terms like ‘assault rifle’ or ‘automatic’ provide an inappropriate context to an ‘adult’ discussion.
“Congratulations are in order. I think after this futile conversation, I have been wrong to even attempt to support gun rights.”
If by that you mean you will be turning in or selling your guns I’ll take them off your hands. I’ll offer you $100/each.
“Its a lot smarter to try to sell people and listen to their concerns than to big ass.”
If by that you mean a majority of Americans agree with me and the 2A than I thank you for the compliment.
“And one more thing…I keep hearing how all you gun enthusiasts save lives. If that is happening, how come we keep having massacres?”
How come we have massacres in Gun Free Zones? That’s a great question. How the hell did a shooting occur when it was obviously against the law to have a gun any location where they are banned?
“It probably would have gotten me killed in this situation by the way, so lets not speculate.”
But, you just did speculate. Anyways, a gun in the theater may or may not have saved lives. The guy was in some wicked tacticool ballistic armor. The best course of action would’ve been to attack him from the rear and physically take him down. But, thats easier to say than do when you have a human stampede.
“Quite the dilemma, isn’t it?”
That’s why I get a lot of grief from my conservative brethren as well. When I say its a 1A right to lie about combat medals or that service member funerals can be picketed I get a lot of heat from those on the right. But, the sword is double edged and not blunted. This is not Burger King. We don’t get it the way we want. We have to support the Constitution.
Why do you say that guns were banned? Actually he went out the fire exit and came back in.
You are right, I speculated that I would have gotten killed if I had tried a shoot out with the dude. Who better to evaluate that “what if” than me?
The Constitution does not say what kind of arms you get to bear. We could play literalists and limit you to a musket if we were to go back to the time of the consitutuion. Now I realize there were probably all different sorts of muskets so there would be some variety.
How come you accept not being able to obtain a nuclear warhead? How about a howlitzer? Where does one draw the line? How about a LAW?
My argument for all of it would be as long as you could buy some weapons, some could be restricted.
As for Burger King, it sounds to me like a lot of people jumping up and down because they want a specific toy.
My guns aren’t for sale. I can oppose anything I want and keep my guns. Aint America great? I have a taker for my weapons any time. One of them you might get stung on for $100. Its a real POS.
Most people go to the movies not expecting to be shot. I don’t believe that the theater was posted regarding weapons. I would probably never notice. I have been told that if you have a concealed permit, you can carry any where you want in Colorado. I have already said I dont believe that…and it is still up to the merchant. Its easier to as MM than to locate the information for myself.
An interesting take.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2012/07/20/could_an_armed_person_have_stopped_the_aurora_shooting_a_second_opinion_.html
marin, if you can’t buy a real assault weapon, why does anyone care if there is an assault weapons ban?
Why does a private citizen need an assault weapon?
@Moon-howler
Guns are banned in that venue. Here is a VCDL posting about that company. http://www.vcdl.org/static/gue.html#Cinemark
Legally permitted persons would not be authorized to carry in that venue and if they had could face charges. Again that gun ban did nothing to stop the bad guy. He simply ignored the sign and the law.
“Actually he went out the fire exit and came back in.”
This will be an issue at the civil trials – mark my words. People will complain and sue based on the idea that the theater should’ve provided protection/security/safe environment. Company will argue that they can’t search everyone. But I think the fact that he was able to leave and come back in through the emergency door – unchallenged – may be a game changer.
“We could play literalists and limit you to a musket if we were to go back to the time of the consitutuion.”
How would you like to do your blog by quill and paper? It’s silly to say they’d have only covered muskets. What about cannons? Many a ship had a cannon. Or even mobile ground cannons.. They might not be up on the family mantle but I’m sure more than a few civilians had some.
“How come you accept not being able to obtain a nuclear warhead? How about a howlitzer? Where does one draw the line? How about a LAW?
My argument for all of it would be as long as you could buy some weapons, some could be restricted. ”
It is not to me to restrict a persons legal access to firearms in terms of quantity or type. If someone wants a piece of artillery I see no issue in that.
“My guns aren’t for sale. I can oppose anything I want and keep my guns. Aint America great? I have a taker for my weapons any time. One of them you might get stung on for $100. Its a real POS.”
If you change your mind.. $100/per. Even the junk gun. I can sell that to the police during a gun buy and get something good and thank the Brady Bunch for helping me do so.
“Why does a private citizen need an assault weapon?”
Why does a person need more than 1 sexual partner? Its not for me to judge. If someone wants a big scary black gun. Let them have it. Whats the issue?
BTW, its interesting that the ‘assault weapon’ the guy was using jammed and he was forced to switch to a handgun. I’m surprised he couldn’t clear the jam or maybe he didn’t want to lose time.
Do you not find it strange than when this horrific incident was less than 24 hours old, VCDL somehow found a posting for that exact theater about firearms? I simply do not believe it. That company has theaters all over the USA. Somehow VCDL just happened to have that. Foul!
I don’t particularly want to sit in a crowded theater with anyone packing heat, thank you very much. You assume that everyone is sane. I don’t. I don’t know that you, armed person, has the ability to protect me or even should have the respnsibility of doing it. I think you are a thug magnet and I dont want to get caught in the cross fire. Your rights stop when they start stepping on mine.
If people can sue based on coming back in the out, then every school and office in the country is vunerable. You cannot lock a door from inside. so if someone goes out, which they must be able to do, then they can stick a pencil in the door and get back in.
Imagine what a movie would cost if there had to be that kind of security every time a film was shown. So we secure our movies but local jurisdictions are too cheap to secure schools because that, my friends, is a waste of money. Oh slippery slope, do not fail me now.
It would be difficult to “bear” a cannon. They are heavy. But fine. Set one out in the front yard. Just don’t fire it at the neighbors.
I don’t have a right to the internet. I have to purchase and pay for that.
Rather than all the tap dancing and avoidance of the question (what some folks accused Napolitano of doing) what can be done to keep the crazies from getting hold of weapons?
How can we cut down on the number of incidences where some nut case (social deviant or whatever you want to call the person) mows down and kills others?
So far I have seen too many reasons why gun enthusiasts don’t want to do jack. I have also seen lots of nit picking over terminology, etc. Let’s set all the nitpicking aside and just look at the question:
What can we do to keep fire arms from those who would commit heinous acts on unsuspecting americans? What ideas do you have?
I see the problem.
There is no such animal as an “assault weapon.” The media and the gun banners invented that word and the media states that he used “an assault weapon.” He used a SEMI-auto AR-15, not an automatic assault rifle. The previous “assault weapons” ban restricted ownership of previously legal civilian arms. It described them in cosmetic terms. Simple changes made them legal. California has very restrictive laws that are legally superseded by simple changes in the guns.
Holmes was not using an automatic weapon. Use of automatic weapons in this country, in crimes, is EXTREMELY, EXTREMELY rare. For Holmes to have an automatic M-16, he had to a) find a seller, b) done the paperwork and deep background check c) find an ILLEGAL seller, rare in this country….too many sting ops
I think that this is why you keep talking about automatic weapons. The media wants you to think that he was using one and is not telling an accurate story….as usual.
@marinm
I didn’t know that the rifle jammed.
This debate basically comes down to where each of us places our trust and confidence. Do we place our confidence in government to come up with effective weapons restrictions that can prevent these massacres yet avoid undue restrictions on our freedoms? Clearly Moe, Elena, Bear and MH come down on the side of muscular government. Or do we place more confidence in ourselves and our fellow citizens for personal security? Clearly MarinM, Cargo, Slowpoke, and I are on the side of the individual.
The problem is that those on the side of government want to impose their beliefs on the rest of us. I have no problem if you want to remain unarmed and hope for the best. You can choose to wait for the police who will always be at least 90 seconds too late. But you also want to restrict my ability to defend myself and my family by limiting the types of guns we can carry and own. MH claims that we could not have successfully defended ourselves against this killer. Maybe, maybe not, but I would rather try and fail, than cower in fear while hoping for mercy from a psychopath.
Remember, this is the government that gave us Fast and Furious, Iraq WMD, ObamaCare, and the Solyndra debacle. Do you really think the feds can pass and enforce appropriate gun laws that would prevent these incidents? If so, you’re living in a fantasy world. I trust myself for personal security over these clowns any day of the week.
@Kelly
Your government gave you a whole lot more than that. I notice those are mostly partisan things.
You want to violate my rights by not having any stop gaps on who can and cannot purchase a weapon. Right now, you are more than willing to have someone like Charlie Manson buy up an arsonel just so you can practice your rights. That is sort of like me suggesting that I follow you around and start yelling “fire” every place you go, just because I think I can. Or I might choose to yell “gun carrier” so you become a magnet for every testosteroned crazy who seems challenged by that label.
I think our local, state and federal governments have ever right and obligation to make laws that protect all of us. It is up to us to elect the right people to see that this gets done.
You cannot be everywhere at once. Who will protect your family then? These are serious questions. The above yeller was hyperbole of course.
Who will protect your kids at school or your wife while she is at work? Who will protect your kids on the bus, at Tak won do, your wife at the mall?
At some point, unless you live in a cave, you will have to rely on Law enforcement hired by your local government. I am not ready to get rid of it because it doesn’t suit your vision of utopia.
And in other good news, the inmates who are sharing the prison with Holmes have made it very clear that if at all possible, they will dispatch the “kid killer” with all speed. It’s rare to hear of this so openly.
Yeah, they can ban true automatic weapons all they want. I can’t afford one anyhow, and most likely couldn’t shoot one worth a damn.
I love an honest assessment. I couldn’t shoot one either. The NRA howls over it though…they don’t want us to ban assault rifles.
Let me repeat, I hate the NRA. I hate the lies and distortions. I needed to say that. Moving on….I want weapons that can kill multiple critters, people etc, to be harder to buy unless you have some pretty good street cred. I want people to have to demonstrate competency and I want the background checks to delve a little deeper. There can be appeals boards. but I think we need to start somewhere.
They’re already “banned” by being 20K a pop.
@kelly_3406
I like your summation! Nicely done! As far as my security and security of my family goes, there is an old saying: When seconds count, the police are only minutes away! And for the record, no trained and responsible gun owner believes that in a situation like the Batman shooting, that it would be as easy as “fire one shot back and it’s over”. Hopefully folks know that it’s a hell of a lot more complicated than that!
I agree it is a hell of a lot more complicated. Whny aren’t we discussing the complications of that dude buying so much ammo, etc.
Because there are no complications to that dude buying so much ammo. The ammo sitting in his car or his room is useless. Too bad that he did not try to carry all that ammo. 6300 rounds may sound like a lot…but people will shoot 1-2000 in a weekend. People that load their own may have ten thousand rounds at home. They buy in bulk and it doesn’t go bad. But I sure as heck don’t want to carry it. Heck, until recently, I probably had 2000 rounds of various ammo in my house.
You keep moving the goal posts and putting words in our mouths. “You want to violate my rights by not having any stop gaps on who can and cannot purchase a weapon. Right now, you are more than willing to have someone like Charlie Manson buy up an arsonel just so you can practice your rights.”
Everyone has said that crazy people need to be prevented from owning weapons. What “stop gaps” do you want? What more? Please, we’ve asked repeatedly, but you keep telling you that we don’t want to discuss this. What would satisfy you that bad people can’t get guns? You haven’t said. You’ve just kept saying that we don’t want any limitations on anyone, in contradiction to our actual words.
No one wants to get rid of law enforcement. Where did that come from? We want to be the stop gap between the crime and the arrival of the LEO.
You don’t want to sit in a theater with someone “packing heat?” The odds are…you have. At a theater, in restaurants, at the store, walking down the street. You say that your rights are being abridged by the action of someone else carrying a firearm. How so? Wouldn’t the mandatory disarmament of the other person be an abridgement of their rights so that you don’t have to sit in a theater with them….and by mandatory disarmament…I mean by force of law, not enforcement of property rights.
That cinema’s private corporate policy is to ban guns. Totally cool with that. That’s why the VCDL knew where to look. They checked to see if they had corporate policy about firearms. Nothing sinister about that. That’s their job. I checked too. As did other bloggers. And we were right. It was a “gun free” zone. If you were caught with a gun, you were denied entry or asked to leave. No trespassing.