The bodies in Texas weren’t cold when the moronic Senators from my state of CT- Murphy and Blumenthal- were already politicizing the tragedy. Both of these tools called for “common sense” gun control measures as if none existed today. Further, they failed to mention what these simple “common sense” measures are, but then again they never do. So let me offer an outline for more gun control.
Let us assume that democrats will be calling for another ban on assault weapons, or anything that looks like an assault weapon or just looks plain scary, toys included. Such a plan would have to include confiscation. Before we agree to such a surrender, we should demand something first- that weapons be seized from criminals and those who should not own them. It would make no sense for legal gun owners to surrender their guns before weapons were taken from criminals. Law abiding gun owners would be surrendering their weapons in accordance with the new gun control but that would leave only criminals with guns.
That is unacceptable.
Firstly: democrats and liberals need to guarantee that all guns have been taken from all criminal elements and from those who do not legally own them – and prove it- before legal gun owners surrender theirs. I look forward to hearing how anti-gun groups propose to do this.
Second: Guarantee that current laws be enforced. Devin Partick Kelley should not have been able to obtain a gun, yet he did. He was able to do so because the government failed to do its job. Kelley was a felon who fractured the skull of his child and served 12 months in prison. That automatically disqualified him for gun ownership but the Air Force did not add him to the FBI NICS database and Kelley was able to buy weapons. More laws won’t matter if they are not properly administered.
Republicans sought to introduce aggressive legislation targeting felons trying to purchase guns and stop them but for whatever reason democrats resisted it- going so far as to filibuster the effort. The obama administration wasn’t very interested in prosecuting those lying to illegally secure firearms either:
But, two, and this is an even more critical piece, if it had been reported to the background database, when he went into Academy to buy this — these weapons, he lied on the forms. That is a felony to lie on those forms. The Obama administration didn’t prosecute those cases. In 2010, 48,000 felons and fugitives lied and illegally tried to purchase guns. They prosecuted only 44 of them.”
That too is unacceptable. The government must prove that all laws on the books are being enforced properly. In the Texas shooting, it took a good guy with a gun to stop the bad guy with a gun. The government failed.
And oh yeah- you have to amend the Constitution.
DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education.
DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed.
Except for liberals being foolish.
Its easy NO NEW GUN LAWS, enforce the existing laws.
I hate to say but there are maybe millions of men that were not told they had to get rid of there guns after convicted of domestic abuse. This is a very questionable law, a gun need not be involved or even a death threat or injury to the spouse, first misdemeanor offense and your rights go poof.
Oh, but they do. They restrict the rights of law abiding citizens, since the criminals won’t allow themselves to be infringed by such things as laws. The law abiding are also those who most likely object to liberal infringement upon civil liberties and their obsessive march towards socialism, so they, most of all, need to be controlled.
“Common sense” gun control would require being aware of the contributing factors of the gun crimes to actually be able to apply any “common sense”. So, we can rule that out.
The Sutherland Springs shootings have so many missed opportunities to have been prevented that it is nothing short of amazing. Kelley actually escaped from a mental institution and tried to smuggle a weapon on base in addition to the domestic violence charges. I am not a big fan of a wide array of restrictions and regulations to infringe 2nd Amendment rights, but when a person has shown themselves to be violent, irrational and uncontrollable, they would be a dangerous threat with weapons.
Gun owners and the NRA promote and support stiff penalties for using a gun in a crime, illegally possessing weapons and lying to obtain a weapon. We support those things because it helps preserve our rights. Democrats catch and release of violent criminals, pardons for violent drug criminals, lax or non-enforcement of laws that affect gun ownership and THOSE policies result in the kinds of tragedies we see resulting in mass deaths.
But, who gets blamed? Who exploits for political gain?
Looks like vulture’s a re not the only opertunists to thrive off the dead so are the Demac-Rats the donkey is a scavenger when it comes and in CT Murphy and Blumenthall lead the flock in for a feast
@Spurwing Plover: You know what is really humorous, they claim Trump wants to limit their rights and they want to hand over their guns to him. I say I am willing to live in a world a bit less “safe”, than not have the right to shoot back.
You bewilderingly labeled the gun’s magazine “racist”… but that would be where commonsense gun control laws start.. Expanding the ban on high capacity magazines nationwide seems like something this Trump conservative and a majority of Americans would be fine with. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-capacity_magazine_ban
bhlowe, I disagree. The reason for the 2nd is to throw off a tyrannical government. If they have high capacity magazines than we should not be denied them. As far as “high capacity” goes, 30 round mags are standard for an AR (Armalite Rifle) 15.
@bhlowe: We would be fine with the laws that already are on the books getting enforced, no new restriction or laws til the prosecute more felons lying trying to obtain a gun, til they enter all felons into the FBI background database. The number of bullets held in a magazine isnt going to solve anything if dangerous felons can get their hands on guns. Getting gun safety courses back into schools might help, common in the 50s and 60s. https://www.gunandgame.com/threads/gun-safety-taught-at-an-elementary-school-in-1956.166990/
@Bob R: You can’t win an arms race with the US government. If you start shooting at the local police or national guard, you’re going to quickly lose. A nationwide ban of magazines over 10 would be widely popular and probably constitutional. A buyback might alleviate some of the financial pain. Yes, some people will be upset. Most voters would say too friggin’ bad. Just pointing out that this “common sense” gun laws aren’t impossible to define.
@bhlowe:
No, it wouldn’t be widely popular. Many pistols carry a 15 round magazine and those are popular with law enforcement, something Cuomo didn’t take into account when he jumped on the gun control bandwagon after Sandy Hook (again addressing nothing that had anything to do with the actual crime).
Nor is it Constitutional. Nothing in the Constitution limits the weapons or firepower available to the citizen. We ALLOW that voluntarily, out of good faith. Until there is proof that a ban or restriction will actually address a problem, it isn’t going to be accepted. That good faith, by the way, is being disrespected by the left, as they repeatedly get what they ask for, then ask for more and more. This has reached its limit.
So, the rule is that we’re not allowed to talk about possible solutions following any new occasion when the problem has dramatically presented itself?
Maybe we shouldn’t be allowed to talk about stricter fire safety regulations after a high-rise constructed with unsafe materials has just turned into a residential funeral pyre.
I’m not buying the underlying logic. When else should we talk about such things?
@Greg:
How about you wait to offer solutions to the problems until you know the details of the problems?
That’s because logic and the liberal ideology are incompatible.
@Greg:
When you actually get common sense.
Every member of congress should have been on the horn to the pentagon demanding an explanation, not trying to limit lawful gun owners even more.
Well, I guess you’ll just have to live with your disappointment, because many understand that guns do in fact kill people, and that certain unnecessary accessories make it possible for homicidal lunatics to achieve far higher body counts in a far shorter period of time, while serving no other useful purpose. Those who see the obvious will continue to call for stronger regulation every time such an obscene slaughter of innocent people occurs.
You might as well get used to hearing such calls. The nation is currently up to 307 mass shootings for the year—those with a mere handful of bodies having become so common that they’re not even making the national news these days. This is unacceptable.
@Greg:
And these people are referred to as “morons”. Guns can be USED to kill people, but THEY don’t do the premeditated act of killing. That is the crime of the killer. These killers, we seem to see over and over, are usually someone the slipped through the canyons liberals leave for them; incompetent enforcement of laws, catch and release, racially motivated pardons and an agenda that blinds them from recognizing the actual threats.
It is also noteworthy that those who are quick to pull the trigger on reaction to violence are those responsible for motivating it.
Gun control by Dem standards was in place at the Church. Law abiding citizens were unarmed, cray with a gun, the criminals always win. The push back is explained above, when Gov can guarantee my safety against attack, I will disarm, but so should the Gov. If Gov can bring absolute Peace in America, surely they can do it around the world. My ass!
@Greg:
And you can get used to our answer to your useless legislation, NO.
Machine guns don’t kill people. Atomic weapons don’t kill people. Weaponized anthrax doesn’t kill people.
The fact that it takes a human to pull the trigger does not mean the tool is irrelevant to the results, or that the ease or difficulty of procuring the tool is not a factor in how often the results take place. It’s anything but moronic to understand this plain and simple truth.
More firearms in more hands mean more death and injury by firearm. This is because around 10 percent of the population have serious impulse and anger control problems, and they’re not infrequently the ones that feel a compulsion to carry a gun. Firearms accessorized to multiply their volume of fire before the need to reload arises enable higher body counts. These are facts.
@Greg: Then why do you own a firearm dont you trust the government to protect you? Is it a musket you own? Revolver or semi auto?
Was there any indication that the gun used was accessorized? Then some say the NRA is to blame, it was actually a NRA member who shot the bad guy.
Greg, let me say up front, you’re still an idiot. Your momma must be proud.
Now Dr. J, after the government has secured ALL firearms from those that should have them i.e. criminals and one year has passed with ZERO murders by a firearm. I’ll consider considering turning in any firearms I may have. Until then, Greg and his buddies can go pound sand with their empty heads.
@Greg:
Eactly. Someone has to pull the trigger. In each and every case.
True enough, but taking the human factor out as liberals repeatedly do (oh, unless it appears a conservative might be involved) does not help resolve anything. In the case of Sutherland Springs, we should be looking at all the opportunities to prevent this that were missed. That might actually prevent a killing whereas calling a semiautomatic rifle an “assault rifle” and banning it would do nothing at all towards that end.
Since the data clearly disproves that, your statement must be regarded as nothing above stupid. While millions and millions more guns are in the hands of responsible citizens the rates of violent crimes fall, though after 8 years of Obama, they are not falling as much as they were before, but we clearly know the reason for this.
But they are not the legal gun owner. They are not the CHL carrier. They are not the NRA member. They are the thugs, drug dealers and political agitators that are not going to alter their behavior because of ANY law. The embarrassing level of US gun violence is all due to the liberal enclaves of LA, Chicago, DC and NYC where gun restrictions are the most stringent. Take those cities and counties out of the statistics and the US comes out respectably near the bottom of the charts. So, NO liberal should be dictating the means of civil safety to anyone; no one knows less about it that YOU.
What data would that be? Death and injury was the statement.
You should call FOX News and let them know.
@Oblamobinlyen, #19:
And you’re still a sock puppet with a recognizable thumb showing through a hole in the toe.
@Greg:
Not only has the information been freely available, but much of it passes across the very pages of FA where you are a frequent visitor. So, you must ignore it or make yourself willfully ignorant.
More guns, fewer homicides
http://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/cnsnewscom-staff/more-guns-less-gun-violence-between-1993-and-2013?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=marketing&utm_campaign=c-gun-ownership
More guns, crime dropping; 51% less than 1991. Problem: repeat offenders
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/427758/careful-panic-violent-crime-and-gun-crime-are-both-dropping-charles-c-w-cooke
More guns, less crime… again
http://tapwires.com/2015/10/03/violent-crime
More guns, more gun violence? No, not necessarily
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2012/12/14/schoo-shooting-how-do-u-s-gun-homicides-compare-with-the-rest-of-the-world
Data shows gun control mis-aimed, gun violence down with more guns in civilian’s hands
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2013/05/07/Justice-Dept-Report-Destroys-Medias-Gun-Control-Narrative
Exactly what I am saying. Obama encouraged violence. Violence was a popular tool of the left during the Presidential campaign. Violence has been being used even more frequently by the left since the election. Yet, even with this uptick, it is in no way correlated with the increase in gun ownership, is it?
When Obama threatened widespread restrictions on gun ownership, purchases exploded. Millions and millions of guns were purchased. Did killings go up proportionally? No… in fact, they continued to decline. The clear indications are more guns, less crime. I won’t cite that as a scientific fact, but for SURE more guns do not mean MORE crime.
Liberal fright tactics never come to pass. There are no widespread shootouts due to CHL’s being issued. More guns have not resulted in more crimes. Calling a semiautomatic rifle and “assault rifle” and banning them had NO effect on crime or killings. The jig is up about what you are up to with your “sensible gun control” and you have failed. You have gotten all the “sensible gun control” you are going to get.
So, go have yourself a good scream at the sky.
I’m guessing you’re a regular Sean Hannity viewer. Am I correct?
http://www.intellectualconservative.com/progressivesocialists-and-gun-lies/
http://www.intellectualconservative.com/progressivesocialists-and-gun-lies-part-2/
sent by author part 3 on Monday