At the Nation’s Gun Show in Chantilly, Va., on Saturday, in a cavernous warehouse filled with thousands of customers and tens of thousands of guns, the sharp sound snaps a few heads.
“We’re going to have to have a discussion about those balloon animals,” Annette Elliott, the show’s organizer, said wearily.
Forgive Elliott — and everyone — if nerves are frayed in this era of weekly mass shootings. She, too, has become familiar with the ritual of gun violence in America, but hers comes with a personal twist. Another week. Another massacre. Another round of calls from reporters asking what can be done and who is to blame for the country’s deadly gun culture. After the latest rampage, which ended with 10 dead, including the shooter, at Umpqua Community College on Thursday in Roseburg, Ore., she is hearing the questions again.
“We’re being put out there like it’s our fault,” Elliott says. “But what we’re selling is an inanimate object. And I don’t know what the response is except to arm yourself to protect yourself.” As gun opponents ratchet up the calls for more controls and more regulations, gun owners and sellers have no choice but to push back, she says. The fault, she says, lies with a mental health system that doesn’t have enough resources and with the media which, she says, gives mass killers all the attention they crave.
This response is insane. The problem doesn’t just lie with the mental health system. The problem is imbedded in our culture. We love our guns, we love our violent video games, we love our rights, we love our media, and we love our polarized politics.
The solution to the problem of massacre by gun is not going to be solved by pointing one’s finger at the other guy. The solution has to be found in a subset of all of these components of our culture. You can’t leave anyone out. The gun folks, the mental health folks, the media, and the entertainment industry all have to collude and seek common ground. Each will have to give up a little.
When everyone decides we all own the problem then perhaps we can get to the solution to eradicate some of gun violence. We will never get rid of it all but we have to stop the epidemic of mass shootings.
There are too damn many guns out there. I guess we should just get used to this.
Sadly, I think we are getting used to it.
If this many people were getting killed with garden hoes, you can bet that we’d be doing something about garden hoes. Modern firearms in the hands of homicidal psychotics make it possible to kill a lot of people very quickly. There has to be some way of mitigating this amount of damage. The right to bear arms has to be understood in the context in which the right was defined. It was clearly and expressly understood by the Founders that the mass of people bearing arms would be “well regulated”. The courts have upheld restrictions on types of weapons permitted to be held. If there were a national ban on anything other than single shot muzzle loaders of the type used in the 18th century, or swords, I think it would pass constitutional muster. I use that as an example, although it would not be politically feasible and would perhaps not even be good policy. However, prohibitions on anything other than small capacity pistols or shotguns for home defense, and on anything other than openly carried swords, knives or even limited capability firearms carried outside the home would be consistent with the Framers’ intent. That this sounds cockamamie is only because we have become inured to the surfeit of modern weapons abroad in the land and to the frequent habit of people hiding them on their persons, instead of carrying them openly where others would have the option of avoiding them.
Of course, that brings us back to a very real, practical problem. With nearly a gun for every living human in the country, you can’t ever get the slate cleaned back to the status quo in 1789. Rounding up all the non-compliant guns makes the loony-bin idea of rounding up all the illegal entrant immigrants look almost like a piece of cake.
Someone else here posited this idea before but it bears a review…if weapons are a constitutional right and if a weapon must have ammunition to be defined as a weapon, why shouldn’t we be able to define ammunition? If we had ammunition that would be lethal within 40 feet and had a chemical shelf life of 1 year, our citizens would be certainly able to protect themselves, their loved ones and their property. Additionally, gun manufacturers (I assume they also manufacture ammunition) would be able to increase their god given right to make money by selling new ammo yearly. Plus, if we ensure that some sort of status check is required to purchase ammunition, we could evaluate gun users annually when thy come to get new ammo.
We would reduce the effective range of weapons and, thus, reduce the number of victims of mass killings, and increase the revenue of the gun lobbyists, and be able to review the competency of gun owners annually.
AND, we even could overthrow the bad old oppressive government just as effectively as we could today without any changes to the gun laws.
My understanding of the 2nd Amendment is that every able-bodied male citizen between the age of 16 and 50 is considered as part of the militia, and each had the civic duty to arm himself with the standard weaponry of the day including bayonet, ammunition, and musket or rifle. The term “well-regulated” referred to the regulations of each state governing the appointment of officers, organization of the militia, and procedures for mobilization.
So being armed was not so much a right as it was a civic duty. The Founders would not have been dismayed at all that there are enough guns in the US today to arm every able-bodied citizen. Given that the militia must be able to mobilize quickly, it would have been expected for each citizen to keep and maintain a modern weapon on hand that could be brought to bear in combat.
If every able-bodied citizen was armed as envisioned by the Founders, mass shootings would quickly become a thing of the past.
At the very least, we should eliminate “gun-free zones,” which guarantee that defenseless citizens are sitting ducks for these madmen.
Its obvious that the framers don’t know what we know.
I think each of us reads into the second amendment what we want to see.
White Pine Elementary student shot, killed; 11-year-old charged with murder
WHITE PINE (WATE) — A shooting Sunday morning in White Pine left an 8-year-old girl dead and an 11-year-old boy arrested on first-degree murder charges.
Jefferson County Sheriff G.W “Bud” McCoig said the boy shot the girl in the chest with a 12-gauge shotgun, from inside his home along Robin Road. Sheriff McCoig said the gun belonged to the boy’s father. The boy’s name is not being released at this time.
According to her mother, McKayla Dyer, 8, was found lying on the ground with a gunshot wound to her chest. She was taken to Morristown-Hamblen hospital, where she later died.
“She was a precious little girl, she was a mommy’s girl, no matter how bad of a mood you were in she could always make you smile,” said McKayla Dyer’s mother, Latasha Dyer.
Latasha Dyer said her daughter was outside playing when her next door neighbor, an 11-year-old boy, asked to see her puppy. She said her daughter told the boy “no” and shortly after the 11-year-old boy shot her.
The shooting wasn’t the first time their family had problems with the boy, according to Latasha Dyer. “When we first moved to White Pine, the little boy was bullying McKayla,” Latasha Dyer said. “He was making fun of her, calling her names just being mean to her, I had to go the principal about him and he quit for a while and then all of a sudden yesterday he shot her.”
WATE 6 On Your Side reached out to the boy’s family for comment, but received no answer.
Latasha Dyer says she’s heartbroken and their entire family is devastated. “I want her back in my arms, this is not fair, hold and kiss you’re babies every night because you’re never promised the next day with them,” said Latasha Dyer. “I hope the little boy learned his lesson because he took my baby’s life and I can’t get her back.”
Both children were White Pine Elementary students according to Sheriff McCoig.
http://wate.com/2015/10/04/8-yr-old-girl-dies-in-white-pine-shooting-police-arrest-11-yr-old-suspect/
America loves it’s guns.
White Pine Elementary student shot, killed; 11-year-old charged with murder
WHITE PINE (WATE) — A shooting Sunday morning in White Pine left an 8-year-old girl dead and an 11-year-old boy arrested on first-degree murder charges.
Jefferson County Sheriff G.W “Bud” McCoig said the boy shot the girl in the chest with a 12-gauge shotgun, from inside his home along Robin Road. Sheriff McCoig said the gun belonged to the boy’s father. The boy’s name is not being released at this time.
According to her mother, McKayla Dyer, 8, was found lying on the ground with a gunshot wound to her chest. She was taken to Morristown-Hamblen hospital, where she later died.
“She was a precious little girl, she was a mommy’s girl, no matter how bad of a mood you were in she could always make you smile,” said McKayla Dyer’s mother, Latasha Dyer.
Latasha Dyer said her daughter was outside playing when her next door neighbor, an 11-year-old boy, asked to see her puppy. She said her daughter told the boy “no” and shortly after the 11-year-old boy shot her.
The shooting wasn’t the first time their family had problems with the boy, according to Latasha Dyer. “When we first moved to White Pine, the little boy was bullying McKayla,” Latasha Dyer said. “He was making fun of her, calling her names just being mean to her, I had to go the principal about him and he quit for a while and then all of a sudden yesterday he shot her.”
WATE 6 On Your Side reached out to the boy’s family for comment, but received no answer.
Latasha Dyer says she’s heartbroken and their entire family is devastated. “I want her back in my arms, this is not fair, hold and kiss you’re babies every night because you’re never promised the next day with them,” said Latasha Dyer. “I hope the little boy learned his lesson because he took my baby’s life and I can’t get her back.”
Both children were White Pine Elementary students according to Sheriff McCoig.
http://wate.com/2015/10/04/8-yr-old-girl-dies-in-white-pine-shooting-police-arrest-11-yr-old-suspect/
America loves its guns. Gun huggers would say the nine year old should’ve been armed
Scout,
I think your logic is flawed in that you use a modern definition of “regulated” as opposed to the 17th & 18th century definition, and then use this to reach an unreasonable conclusion as to the framer’s intent.
“Regulated” in the framers context meant “Equipped and Proficient”. This was a result of the framers envisioning a tiny standing army/select militia, and a large “grand militia” consisting of the entirety of those capable of bearing arms, common to the defence of of both the state, and the individual. The framers wrote this at a time in which police forces did not exist, any constabulary was not armed, and a small standing army was an evil to be tolerated, as long as the people remained armed.
Then there is the bothersome notion that the framers didn’t know what they didn’t know. None of them had a crystal ball. That amendment also has to be applied to modern times. Individuals can’t own nukes, for example.
Sheriff: 72-year-old man tied up in home invasion gets free, grabs gun
Read more: http://www.kptv.com/story/30093202/sheriff-72-year-old-man-tied-up-in-home-invasion-gets-free-grabs-gun#ixzz3niYJDpfL
GOLD BEACH, OR (KPTV) –
A 72-year-old man who was tied up in a home invasion robbery by two women managed to get free, grab his gun and send one of the suspects running from his home, according to deputies.
Curry County deputies, along with Oregon State Police troopers and Gold Beach police officers, responded to Crabapple Way about four miles east of Gold Beach at 10 p.m. Friday.
Investigators said two women entered the home of the 72-year-old victim, tied him to a chair and stole his cash, debit card and credit cards.
One of the suspects, identified as 50-year-old Sheila Clark of Coos Bay, then took off in the man’s Chevrolet Blazer, according to deputies, while the second suspect, 27-year-old Michelle Taylor of Crescent City, California, stayed behind to guard him.
Police located the vehicle at McKay’s Market in Gold Beach and then found Clark in the store. She was arrested for an outstanding warrant out of Multnomah County and faces additional charges of robbery, coercion, burglary, unlawful use of a motor vehicle and theft.
In the meantime, investigators said the man who was tied up was able to free himself. He grabbed a handgun and pointed it at Taylor, the sheriff’s office said, and she ran away from the home.
Deputies searched the area that night and the next day, but Taylor was not found.
Deputies said Taylor is also wanted out of California on a felony warrant. Anyone with information about her location is asked to contact the Curry County Sheriff’s Office.
This illustrates the problem with the gun-control crowd, better than I could ever hope to. Those who wish to ban or seriously infringe on private ownership of firearms, constantly demonstrate complete ignorance on the purpose of the 2A and firearms in general. Instead, they continue to push that which has already been proven ineffective reducing or preventing crime, such as “universal background checks”, bans on certain weapons for cosmetic reasons, limits on capacity, waiting periods, and the like. Worse, they then propose solutions based on technologies that do not exist, like “smart guns”, or have also been proven ineffective, like “micro stamping” or these ammo technologies that are something out of a science fiction movie.
So why stop with this super-duper safe frangible non-overpenetrating and will only harm bad-guys ammo? Lets role out phasers, ala Star Trek, with civillian models only able to be “set to stun”, ’cause only the professionals should have the “kill setting”, right?
BS, like me, is a gun owner. So are we the anti-gun gun owners?
@BSinVA
Sounds like an business opportunity.
Go ahead and get that magical 40foot ammo invented.
@Cargosquid
Why don’t we limit private ownership to those “cork & string” popguns. First we need to develop a cork that is actually lethal, and then mandate a 40ft string limitation. Of course a criminal would never exceed the 40ft string limit, or cut the string altogether, because, you know, it’s the law…
And I’d be interested in what BS’s solution would be when faced with the fact that it is possible (quite easy, actually) to manufacture your own ammunition. All one needs is a loading press, and the components: brass, primers, powder and projectiles. Of course criminals wouldn’t be able to make all of these components themselves, as they are too busy making illegal drugs in sophisticated and backyard labs. No way they could manufacture their own ammunition, even if there’s a law against it.
Hillary Clinton is vowing to take executive action if elected president and congress does not act. This is good
A “gun-owner” should know how a gun functions, and more specifically, what is and is not possible with regards to ammunition.
There are a lot of “gun owners” who are not particularly strong supporters of the Second Amendment. They might have a rifle for deer, or a shotgun for duck. They may have an old Colt detective special for something that goes “bump in the night”, but really don’t give much thought to the reasoning behind the 2nd Amendment. Worse, they think to themselves “I don’t own an AR-15, so I could care less if the government wants to ban them. I usually refer to them as “Fudds” as in “Elmer Fudd”. Mario Cuomo claims to be a “gun owner”. Terry McCauliff claims to be one two. Diane Feinstein once claimed to have a carry permit. I wouldn’t be surprised if Michael Bloomberg doesn’t have a couple of sweet custom over & under skeet guns in a cabinet, or better yet, an AR-15 squirreled away somewhere. Owning a firearm doesn’t make one “pro-2A” anymore than the baby grand piano in my living-room makes me a musician.
This is VERY good. Just one of the MANY reasons why she’ll NEVER be president.
Steve: If your understanding of 2A is true and accurate, stop getting your panties in a wad when we discuss reducing gun violence. If the 2nd amendment is sacred, then it is sacred and won’t change. All of our discussions are for naught and you win automatically. I think you doth protest to much (that is IF you are right).
Why hasn’t President Obama taken executive action on “gun violence?”
Answer: He only uses that when it suits him politically. He’s not going to commit political suicide, and neither will Clinton. Lots of pontificating hand-wringing and finger-pointing, but in the end, all talk. If Obama really cared, he would have gone for that risky executive action after Sandy Hook. @Starryflights
The price of liberty is eternal vigilance. People make silly suggestions, based on feel-good notions, and next we have laws that do nothing except trample the rights of citizens. The same silly people offering up tried-and-failed solutions or unicorn-milk fantasy technological solutions, ridicule those of us who advocate for campus-carry, arming qualified teachers and administrators, and eliminating public gun-free-zones. These are starting to be implemented. Spree-killers won’t target these places. They avoid places where they might encounter an armed citizen or security guard now.
Substitute what Steve said about 2A and substitute “reproductive rights.” That’s how *I* feel.
Teachers absolutely should never be armed. If school systems want security, they need to pay for it. That’s just one more job for teachers.
Some of the teachers I have known, you wouldn’t want armed in the classroom.
I am all in favor of armed guards in schools but its going to cost some bucks.
In the old days, teachers were also the janitors. I see little difference. Jack of all trades….
Resource officers should not be used either. That isn’t their function in a school.
My major problem with all this is, most legislators don’t know jack about education. They don’t understand what a dangerous situation they would be creating.
@Steve Thomas
And another bunch of silly people think that the populace feels safer in a dark theatre with trigger happy cop-wannabes or in a classroom with six or seven armed students firing across the crowded classroom. Yeah, that’s the solution….
Why don’t you guys join the National Guard or try out for the local police department if you feel incomplete without a gun – and a hidden gun at that?
No gun owner I know would welcome the idea of armed confrontation with anyone. I think they would just prefer the chance to at least try to defend themselves, rather than to beg for mercy from some lunatic who decided to cause mayhem in a “gun-free zone.”
@Starryflights
Why do you support tyranny?
@BSinVA
We protest because it is only protected by our vigorous defense. Gun restrictions did not drop and the Heller and McDonald decisions did not happen without a lot of work.
@Moon-howler
Henrico has had police in schools for 20 years.
@Censored bybvbl
No one says anything about armed children. As for “students,” I’m hoping you mean adult college students. Tell me….. would the victims in Oregon be better off if Mintz..or any of the other students been armed with a gun?
Btw…. we’ve already been in the military. Thanks.
It sounds like you just admitted to the NRA “buying” a supreme court decision.
PWC has had resource officers for years also. They aren’t armed guards and that isn’t their function within a school.
I have no problem having armed guards in a school building. I oppose using a resource officer as an armed guard and I think most of them would feel the same way.
Our resource officers are a liaison of sorts between home, school and the police. Probably their biggest function is to provide a positive, approachable police interaction with the students.
They are not armed guards.
I get the distinct impression now that there is a full court press to marginalize those of us who are gun owners but feel steps need to be taken to regulate some people’s ability to purchase firearms.
It is some sort of bizarro world anti-gun-shaming.
It’s up to proprietors whether they want guns on their property. Guns in schools need to be controlled by paid security, not teachers. Arming a campus with a bunch of 18-22 year old testosterone laden males doesn’t seem like the best notion to me. It sounds like insanity. I believe Hampden Sydney allows weapons but they also don’t have girls and are well-regulated. (oh there’s that word)
Most 2A-ers I have met have no problem walking all over my reproductive rights. I guess I see the difference as I understand I don’t have totally unlimited rights. Not sure I can say the same for 2A folks. yes, there are exceptions….but not many.
Sadly, we will be able to refight this one again next month when the next massacre is unleashed by some crackpot on a rampage.
@Moon-howler
“I get the distinct impression now that there is a full court press to marginalize those of us who are gun owners but feel steps need to be taken to regulate some people’s ability to purchase firearms.”
Isn’t that like those who attempt to marginalize pro-life women?
If by “some people” you mean felons and the adjudicated mentally ill, I have no issue with keeping them from owning firearms. However, when time and time again we learn these shooters purchased their guns from a licensed dealer after passing a background check, were known to have had mental issues by friends, family, and authorities, but no data was reported to NICS, you will never convince me that expanding something that is broken will solve anything. When it has been proven time and again that criminals obtain their guns through theft and straw purchases, arguing for holding gun manufacturers civilly liable, “Universal Background Checks” and outlawing private sales, none of which would have prevented these multiple-homicide incidents, is folly.
Senator Cornyn’s bill that would clarify mental health reporting requirements, and offers incentives and penalties for compliance or non-compliance is supported by both the NRA and the National Association of the Mentally Ill (NAMI). To date, it is the only piece of legislation that attempts to address the problem. I’ve waited and waited for any of the usual gun-control suspects to say anything in support. Crickets…from the media, and the gun-control crowd. They are too busy working to limit the rights of the many, justifying it based on the actions of a few. “Gun-control” isn’t about “guns” for these types. It’s about “control”.
I am wondering what pro life women have been marginalized. Are we talking about the ones who lie, like Carley or are we talking about the ones who want to strip the teeth out of Roe v Wade? Or….are we just talking about people who have personal beliefs along the lines of thinking abortion is wrong for themselves and their family? I know lots of people who are like that and who have very valid points of view, they just aren’t out trying to restrict access for other women. They aren’t lined up shouting at patients going in to a doctors’ office.
I absolutely am opposed to all felons being denied gun privileges. Felon is forever. Those who want to lead a life of crime will have a gun the afternoon they get out of prison. Those who want to lead a decent life are forever banned from gun ownership, regardless of their crime. The law abiding felons have paid their debt to society and are denied the right to hunt or defend themselves. How can that possibly be right?
As for the adjudicated mentally ill…the key word is adjudicated. How difficult is that? If they check themselves it, no problem. I also wonder how many of those people slip though? Maybe some of these jurisdictions need to start getting fined by the feds for not reporting accurately.
I listened all weekend to the “mental health experts” trying to deny their role in all of this. I even heard some fool trying to convince some other fool on cnn that people who commit these mass shootings aren’t necessarily mentally ill. Yea, right. Normally sane people just gun down dozens of random people in cold blood. NOT!!!
Why isn’t the NRA doing mass advertising on Senator Cornyn’s bill? Talk about crickets. I have never seen it advertised. Pat is right. The NRA should be leading the charge.
The NRA also has the resources to start looking for common denominators for all these killers. I am convinced there is one. Hell, maybe they could blame the entertainment industry who is somewhat guilty in all of our current culture of mass shootings. So far the only glue I have seen stick is the Confederate flag. We have somehow managed to ban another inanimate object as a result of a rampage. Talk about a red herring. I am sure the NRA was more than happy to let that one fly as the bright shiny object du jour.
The NRA should create a pro-active position after all these mass shootings – where is it? Can someone post me a link?
There were armed students on campus that day – the Oregon concealed carry law superseded the college’s policy. They were armed. They were not able to act (location, knowledge, etc).
True for some of the mass shootings – but not true for many every day shootings that occur that are not mass shootings. The Oregon shooter was not under any kind of care – but the Movie Theater shooter in Co. was.
@Pat.Herve
“True for some of the mass shootings – but not true for many every day shootings that occur that are not mass shootings.”
Are you referring to the vast majority of non-suicide shootings that are in conjunction with some other criminal activity, and the shooters are prohibited persons? How would universal back-ground checks, outlawing private sales prevent these shootings, when criminals admit that they obtain their guns through theft and illegal straw-purchases?
The NRA is advocating for bringing back project exile, a justice department initiative that increased penalties where a gun is possessed by a felon, when committing another crime, or when a non-felon commits certain felonies (Rape, Robbery, Burglary, etc.) while possessing a firearm. The NRA is supporting Senator Cornyn’s bill to tighten up mental health reporting to the NICS system. The NRA and NSSF actually operate “gun-safety education” programs like “Eddie Eagle” to teach kids “Stop! Don’t Touch! Leave and tell an adult!” The NRA has been calling for tougher enforcement and increased prosecution for those who knowingly provide false info on a 4473 form, because in the words of VP Biden: “And to your point, Mr. Baker, regarding the lack of prosecutions on lying on Form 4473s, we simply don’t have the time or manpower to prosecute everybody who lies on a form, that checks a wrong box, that answers a question inaccurately.”
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/18/biden-to-nra-we-dont-have-the-time-to-prosecute-people-who-lie-on-background-checks/#ixzz3nnGG2Dmf
Nope…the administration doesn’t have time to go after criminals by enforcing the laws we do have. It takes away from time they need to figure out ways to propose new laws, that will only limit the actions of the law-abiding.
Here it is in a nutshell:
-Existing laws aren’t being enforced.
-The NICS system has repeatedly failed to prevent evil and deranged people bent on murder, from obtaining guns.
-Criminals admit that they don’t walk into gun-stores or gun-shows and purchase firearms. They steal them, or buy stolen guns, or get someone who can purchase a firearm to go and straw-purchase them.
-All the Malum Prohibita in all the history of law, hasn’t eradicated that which is Malum in se. Laws against rape and murder haven’t stopped rape and murder.
This is why the NRA, NSSF, GOA, SAF, and the entire member-driven organizations are doing exactly what their members want.
Let’s go back and talk about felons. That is such a punitive word. I find the gun laws and the voting laws regarding those who have been convicted of a felon to be a sham. It is institutionalized rights denial. Everyone can slap each other on the back and feel all warm and fuzzy.
When you look at the number of people who have gone to prison for small drug sales and use, it is disgusting. when these people finally get out, they cannot vote or defend themselves. Often because they cant get a job, they are forced to live in not so great parts of town. Ridiculous mandatory sentencing started over the death of Len Bias.
I think the NRA is chicken to take this one on. I just don’t think the punishment should be forever. I have no problem with a 3 year adjustment period. I do have a problem with a life sentence of no voting or guns.
Good on Gov. McDonald and gov. McAuliffe for at least lifting the voting ban.
For all the talk all I hear from the left is the need to take guns away or restrict access to guns for law abiding citizens. I have heard nothing about any effort to reduce gun crime among criminals. Is that because if you take out gun crimes committed in our big gun controlled cities the US drops to the 4th lowest gun crime rate in the world or is it because known criminals have not committed a mass murder?
You really can’t have meaningful conversation if you are going to use words like left and right. Those words just aren’t accurate.
Furthermore, “law abiding” is meaningless. This recent shooter was law-abiding until he wasn’t. I would rather have taken his weapons away before he went on a rampage.
As for gun crimes in cities, don’t you think that should come from within those cities? I can’t think of a single law that would break that vicious cycle that wouldn’t put the onus on the gun manufacturers. Maybe you could go in to DC and give them some pointers on what to do with their increase in shootings.
I would probably treat guns and ammo like cigarettes. It works so well there. NOT.
There was 1 student who verified that he was legally armed. “They” is speculation. But the college had adopted the “toughest campus anti-carry law permitted by Oregon law”, and there weren’t any armed students present in the targeted classroom. First rule of armed self-defense: have arms. As far as “proximity” goes, law enforcement lacked the proximity to prevent/stop the multiple homicides. The single, unarmed security guard lacked proximity AND means. So the presence of a single-armed student somewhere on campus was a non-factor. The police were a non-factor. The unarmed security guard was a non-factor. The present NICS system was a non-factor.
Universal back-ground checks, closing the so-called “gun-show loophole”, banning standard-capacity magazines and “scary-looking” rifles, waiting periods, one-gun-a-month, registries, micro-stamping, and all the other propose Malum Prohibita law would have been non-factors in this and so many of these cases. An evil person intent on doing evil, will not be deterred by any of this. By his own admission, he hated the world, especially Christians. Like another shooter, Elliott Rodger (who stabbed his male victims, shot his female victims), he was frustrated by his lack of success with women. Vester Lee Flanagan was an angry man too, also sexually frustrated. 3 men who bought into victimhood, and wanted to make victims of those they despised. Tell me how “Universal Background Checks” under the current NICS would have stopped this?
@Moon-howler
“Resource officers should not be used either. That isn’t their function in a school.”
Really? I thought the first duty of any sworn law-enforcement officer was…well…law enforcement. So what makes a School Resource Officer different from a school counselor? What exactly IS the purpose of having a sworn law enforcement officer in a school?
@Moon-howler
“Those who want to lead a decent life are forever banned from gun ownership, regardless of their crime. The law abiding felons have paid their debt to society and are denied the right to hunt or defend themselves. How can that possibly be right?”
There is a process, much the same as a felon getting their voting rights restored, by which a felon can get his or her 2A rights restored, although the bar is a but higher. I have no issue with this. I appreciate your sense of justice here, in that someone who has been genuinely rehabilitated shouldn’t surrender their natural right to self-defense. I happen to agree with you. Heck, even a recidivist criminal who happens to be walking down the street and is attacked without provocation, has a right to self-defense..he just can’t use that which he is prohibited from possessing to do so.
@Moon-howler
“You really can’t have meaningful conversation if you are going to use words like left and right. Those words just aren’t accurate.”
Is it really inaccurate? The issue is politicized, and it is the Democrat party that has “gun-control” as part of their platform. All the calls for gun-control seem to be coming from democrat elected officials, democrat appointed bureaucrats like the Surgeon General, and democrats currently running for office. When looking at the Heller and McDonald SCOTUS decisions, it appears that the decision split mostly along political ideological lines. Now, there are exceptions to everything, but help me understand how this isn’t a Left vs. Right issue, in the context of gun-control?
“Furthermore, “law abiding” is meaningless. This recent shooter was law-abiding until he wasn’t. I would rather have taken his weapons away before he went on a rampage.”
Most of the shooters were “law abiding” until they weren’t. Every recidivist criminal was at some point in their lives on the right-side of the law. But how do you take away someone’s rights without due process? You can’t, but that is what this administration is proposing, and since it can’t do it through the legislative process, it is resorting to executive action and bureaucratic regulations, most of which are unconstitutional.
“As for gun crimes in cities, don’t you think that should come from within those cities? I can’t think of a single law that would break that vicious cycle that wouldn’t put the onus on the gun manufacturers. ”
I can: Constitutional Carry or Shall Issue. Actually letting people who live in “not so good” places obtain reasonably-priced firearms, and permits costs that are attainable by poor people. Project Exile is also a good law. It worked in Richmond VA.
Please elaborate. re: Constitutional Carry or Shall Issue. I can’t think of a gun control law that would break the cycle of killing among young poor people.
I don’t think we can compare that killing to random spree killing and massacre. There is a different motivation most of the time.
I do think that just saying “law-abiding” is deceptive. I expect the Oregon shooter was law-abiding until he wiped out 18 people including himself.
I just don’t think we should let “law-abiding” be the only criteria.
There are plenty of people who have an opinion who are neither left or right.
@Moon-howler
” think the NRA is chicken to take this one on. I just don’t think the punishment should be forever. I have no problem with a 3 year adjustment period. I do have a problem with a life sentence of no voting or guns.
Good on Gov. McDonald and gov. McAuliffe for at least lifting the voting ban.”
The VCDL (occasionally maligned on this blog) agrees with your position, and has advocated for the automatic restoration of 2A rights for those who have committed non-violent felonies, after a period of 5 years. Why should someone who is convicted of tax evasion be disarmed for life? Not sure. What I do know is for some of us, the very thought of forfeiting our 2A rights adds a good deal of discernment to our daily conduct, which is one of the many reasons why CHP holders have been statistically proven to be even more law-abiding than the general population. Revocation due to criminal activity are less than 2/10ths of 1%. Think about that.
Yes, I am a maligner of VCDL on occasion.
Why should a person convicted of a non-violent felony be denied for 5 years? How about not at all? Even with a violent felony, perhaps that might be where the 5 year period of good behavior could come in to play. You could even have extenuating circumstances. I just think at times we turn a blind eye to common sense, both in keeping guns from people and in not keeping guns from people.
I guess I see the hypocrisy in not challenging the law, at least for non-violent felons. I see no reason at all to deny voting rights after time has been served.
The revocation question has many possibilities. I am the opposite of Scout on CHP holders.
I dislike the term “felon” anyway. The only thing that should involve non-redemption is the death penalty. Once you have served your time and have maintained decent behavior, then after a period of time you should have that word erased. There are some misdemeanors that are far more violent than some felonies.
I don’t think people understand that felony is forever. I have a relative who was going to be charged at 16 for felony breaking and entering a beach snack bar…North Carolina. That is a little stiff.
The reason for the 5year automatic restoration is criminology studies indicate that a convicted felon who does not reoffend within 5 years is unlikely to reoffend at all. Understand that this would be an automatic restoration, not a process of petition. Also, there is both a state and a federal prohibition on convicted felons owning or possessing. Federal action is required, unlike voting which is within the preview of the state.
@Moon-howler
Constitutional Carry is when anyone not otherwise prohibited by State or Federal law from possessing a firearm, can carry openly or concealed without first obtaining permission from the state to do so. 13 states have either unrestricted or limited Constitutional carry. Shall Issue permit states are those who place the burden on the state in justifying denial of an application. May Issue states strictly limit carry to those who can prove a “good and sufficient need”. May issue are in the minority of states ( 9 currently).
Buying a decision? The hard work was opposing laws and getting cases to court.
Our police actually like the job. Its been help up as a good example across the nation. Other districts seek to copy it.
So tell me what your resource officers do that they like so much.
Many of us have already served in the Guard/Reserves and are trained on small arms and automatic weapons. We have been to places in the world where women and minorities have no rights. And we have seen how quickly the constraints of civilization can break down. We have observed that law enforcement worldwide is usually spread thin so that help arrives just a few minutes after violence has ended and the aggressors are nowhere to be found. Those of us who have served in the Guard/Reserves do not live in fear, but do appreciate the security afforded by the right to bear arms. And we marvel at the naïveté of those who think that gun-free zones and gun control will somehow make them safe from those that do not respect the law.
@Kelly_3406
Well said Kelly, well said.
Something to ponder and discuss. I am NOT endorsing this, just presenting.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/get-the-nra-to-license-bullet-sales-and-youll-reduce-gun-violence/2015/10/06/44552ea6-6b8a-11e5-aa5b-f78a98956699_story.html
I am very offended by Ben Carson’s words:
Advance a political agenda? Since when is simply not wanting people to be mowed down in cold blood a political agenda? How dare he!!
It’s people like this who give the 2A-ers a very bad reputation. Here we go with Left/Right again. Does that mean that “the right” wants to be shot? I don’t think so.
There is a political agenda to chip away at gun rights. The fact that the only solution being discussed is gun/ammunition control suggests that the Obama machine is at work.
I don’t think you can say that on this blog. I have tried to discuss at least 3 different areas that might be contributing factors to the violence.
@Kelly_3406
BRAVO-ZULU!
Since the writer works for the Brady Campaign, I am going to assume that he isn’t ignorant with regards to guns, ammo, and the way criminals operate. Therefore I have concluded that he is counting on the ignorance of the reader. First, there’s way more than 4 year’s worth of ammo in private hands. In the aftermath of each publicized shooting, and in reaction to the knee-jerk calls for gun-control, not only do gun-sales spike, but ammo-sales spike as well. Second, serialized casings and bullets, along with “micro stamping” has been tried and failed in California, and has been pretty much abandoned by the gun-control movement. Criminals simply switched to revolvers which do not eject casings, or attach a simple “brass catcher” to their guns. Third, as I mentioned earlier in this thread, home manufacturing of ammunition is really quite easy, and regulating ammunition would only provide organized crime with yet another revenue stream. Lastly, ammunition purchase licensing schemes are operating in several states, such as NY and NJ, and have had no effect on crime reduction. Criminals simply get their ammo the same way they get their guns: they would steal it.
I suspect the writer’s real objective is to artificially raise the cost of ammo to make it more painful for lawful gun owners to obtain, complicate the manufacturing and distribution process to the point where there are artificially induced shortages, and also force manufacturers to spend money to retool, ideally forcing some out of business. Invoking the name of the NRA is a clumsy attempt to place the organization on the defensive, but the writer is hoping the reader doesn’t understand that it is the membership that opposes schemes such as this, and for the reasons I cited above.
Steve – some good points.
As I had said before – all the laws would not have stopped this person. He bought the guns legally and was not under any doctor’s care. I will look at what Cornyn has proposed.
His educational placement is in question. If he was in an ED class, then someone knew this kid had some serious problems.
The fact is, at this point, we don’t know. We also don’t know what HIPAA laws prevent us from knowing. You don’t know what we don’t know.
I too found Carson’s words offensive. That man has no business holding public office.
@Moon-howler
Moon,
Obama himself said he wants to politicize these events, and as Kelly rightly observed, when those proposing gun/ammo control-only, and almost uniformly hail from the political left, democratic candidates actually run on the issue, why is it so hard to fathom that this is indeed a “left vs. right” issue? Look at the President’s home-town. One of the highest murder rates in the country, mostly black-on-black, many involving guns. Yet this city is one of the strictest with regards to private gun ownership, and had to lose in the highest court before allowing citizens the exercise of their constitutional rights. Chicago had crime and murder before the Macdonald and Heller decisions, and has crime and murder today. It also has a long history of democrat control, and is run by one of Obama’s closest allies. Obama will rush to the microphone when a sensational mass-shooting occurs, but says nothing when twice the number die in Chicago on a typical holiday weekend. So why is it hard to understand why supporters of the 2nd Amendment view this as nothing more than a ploy to limit the rights, and the liberty of law-abiding citizens, who choose to exercise their rights, and resist all attempts at infringement?
What is he really supposed to do? What should any president do?
I honestly don’t think a comprehensive background check is that much of a burden on anyone and certainly isn’t going to violate anyone’s rights except those who shouldn’t have a gun.
I think maybe it has become a right /left situation because some of you NRA-ers have positioned yourself in so that everything that doesn’t agree with your stance is “leftist.”
@Moon-howler
The ones that I talked to, told me that they like interacting with the kids and that they feel that they are protecting the community.
@Moon-howler
Licensing bullet sales will be abuse just like licensing guns. No. The writer is a propagandist for the Brady Campaign and merely seeks to make ammo harder to get.
As for Carson’s words, gun control politicians and groups wave the bloody shirt every time there is a high profile shooting. See Obama’s grandstanding on Oregon.
What is the President to do? Keep his mouth shut unless he is supporting liberty. Notice, he said nothing when hundreds were killed in the gun control paradise of Chicago this year. He said nothing about gun control when a Muslim gun downed recruiters. He said nothing when an illegal alien criminal gun down an innocent woman in CA. But mass shootings always bring out the gun control politicians.
Define “comprehensive background check.” How does it work? Does it delay the buying of a gun? Does it invade legally protected privacy rights? How much more invasive is it compared to the SECRET clearance that one shooter, Alexis, had?
Statist is a word that can be substituted for leftist. The problem is that gun control politicians and groups that have lied for so long, using bait and switch tactics, refusing to actually compromise are no longer trusted. The pro 2nd amendment side KNOWS that every new “reasonable” idea is just another attempt to push gun control, restricting rights and banning guns. We know, because we have 30 years of politicians attempting that. We have reached our limit.
Oh yes, they do like interacting with kids. That isn’t guarding the school. Of course if there was a shoot out, the resource officer would help, but that isn’t a swat team. Plus ours are shared. They aren’t always there. School protection should be school guards. Hired guns.
So we do nothing. Makes perfect sense to me. NOT.
I totally disagree with you about the president. He has absolutely every right to be outraged over a massacre.
I thought Carson was crass and I don’t think it is leftist not to want to be killed.
Actually, I used to be somewhat supportive of “your side.” The killings and the no solutions from “your side” are making me less so.
Eventually, the numbers won’t be there and something will be done.
There is something amiss when the two most popular organizations are Planned Parenthood and the NRA.
Cargo,
What do you think when you hear of these killing sprees? What goes through you head?
Steve, same question. I know you are both caring people.
@Moon-howler
Our resource officers stay with the school all day, except at elementary school. Those are shared.
I don’t mind school guards.
As for the president…he can be outraged. Let him. But picking and choosing a crisis to advance gun control is crass.
No solutions? We’ve presented solutions and pointed out that current “solutions” don’t work. You merely disagree.
What i think is that an evil person has committed a crime. I look at it no differently than any of the other crimes we have…such as the epidemic of shootings in Chicago and DC.
I think that we have a problem in our culture. We didn’t have this problem before the 60’s. Guns were more prevalent in society and shootings were rare. Its not the guns….its something else. Something else drives evil thoughts. We have the high murder rates in the black community and the mass shooting and suicide rates in the white community.
We need to look at culture, medicines, mental health care. We need to look at our culture of isolation. Isolation drives most of these shootings….isolation from humanity.
I think there were higher murder rates in the black community before the 60’s. We just didn’t know because we were white and also because we didn’t really care.
I see the murder rate in Chicago or DC as very different than spree killing. Those murders are coming out of poverty, gangs, etc. Spree killing is coming out of mental illness and a culture that seems to be insensitive to violence.
I don’t necessarily think suicide rates are that much higher. It was hidden back in the day. I actually heard of more people offing themselves back then than now. Caveat: I was in a small city where people knew each others business. Some of this sdpree killing might also be suicide by cop.
As for your solutions, forgive me. I honestly don’t know what they are. I don’t hear the NRA making a speech after these horrible killings reminding us of their solutions. I see them as killing us with their silence.
It might not happen in my lifetime, but it won’t go on forever. The American people will start prioritizing.
Cargo, I think you and I might be in agreement on resource officers. Their role isn’t to guard schools and kids and staff.
In fact, if they become guards then their function ceases to exist. I think school guards might be the only way help ensure school safety.
But they should be real guards with no other function. They shouldn’t be down in the cafeteria hi-fiving with the kids. They should be guarding the school.
As for gun free zones—the name is stupid. Parents and kids should not bring guns on to school property or to the bus stop. Period. Cops and guards should have guns in school. I am extremely opposed to arming teachers. one more job.
@Moon-howler
Moon,
I find your comments regarding “no solutions from your side” to be disingenuous and intellectually dishonest. “Our side” is proposing solutions. What makes our solutions different is they have the honor of never having been tried, have never failed, and are in keeping with the second amendment.
Plus, I am waiting with baited breath for you to define the expanded background check, and present a sufficient argument as to why “our side” should roll-over and accept your plan, and any real infringement that may come along with it.
I believe that everyone undergoing a background check pretty much says it all. Would it help? I don’t know but doing nothing hasn’t helped either.
What are the solutions from your side?
That’s the problem. Maybe some would work. Let’s hear them along with an explanation of how they would work.
If not wanting to get shot in a public place by some freaking lunatic is disingenuous and intellectually dishonest, so be it.
I never underwent a background check for the gun I own. I acquired it in the past 20 years. Perhaps I should have. Who knows that I am not some psychotic lunatic.
I never said your side was to roll over. However, in the interest of problem solving, at some point you are going to have to look for common ground. If you draw you line in the sand then anyone who doesn’t totally agree with you becomes your enemy.
We know what that leads to.
For the record, I have no plan other than that somewhere in that big Venn Diagram where mental health laws/gun advocacy/media as it relates to violence meet, there is going to have to some meetings of the minds.
What is Senator Joe Manchin was on this morning addressing the reporting of the mental illness component and incorporating information into the Cornyn bill. (which still isn[‘t on the table yet)
He reminded the audience that only adjudicated mental illnesses were reported.
Stay tuned, more to come.