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

Wants gun law changes

February 1, 2013

To the editor: Well I heard on the radio today that there was shootings yesterday at three gun shows....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(41)

fdintelligence

Feb-01-13 1:09 AM

As a matter of fact I researched these shootings......and they were all accidental!! Quit taking a lesson from our uber-liberal media and skewing stories to your benefit. Do not try to take our weapons because someday you will thank us for keeping them.

15 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

gssmms

Feb-01-13 3:14 AM

Nita, as far as I know, in most situations, it's ALREADY against the law to shoot someone.

On the same day you are referring to:

How many people were injured or killed involving automobiles? Motorcycles? Bicycles?

How many were hurt or killed when they slipped & fell in the bathroom or shower?

How many got sick or died as a result of smoking or drinking?

How many suffered injury or died in a restaurant from choking on food that wasn't served, pre-cut, into small, bite-sized pieces? (or perhaps even pre-chewed or just blended?)

Perhaps we should push for laws to limit the problems in these areas as well?

I don't like people getting shot either. We've got laws against shooting people, acquiring firearms illegally, driving wrecklessly or drunk, etc.. What else would you like to see legislated?

13 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

conservative

Feb-01-13 7:09 AM

First of all I object to your language- "his" American people- I do not think that was accidental language. Secondly, and it has already been expressed- no law will stop a criminal- that is why they are called criminals. And shame on you for trying to imply that that the gun show shootings were actual crimes when they were accidents. You know the dems have no ground to stand on when they have to resort to this- kind of like saying the parent got "heckled" the other day when he testified- anybody who watched the clip knows he did not get heckled by pro 2nd amendment people- but dems are dishonest because they know the facts are not on their side- so it is time to ramp up the emotion on this issue- sickening.

11 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

forprogress

Feb-01-13 8:20 AM

A-freaking-men. I am tired of people trying to vconvince me that guns are bad or that tighter gun control is needed. According to the CDC data in 2010, gunshots did not even land on the radar for causes of death. In fact, it accounts for less than 1% of deaths in the U.S. In addition, the leading cause of homicide deaths are due to blunt force trauma from items like a baseball bat. If the goal is to "protect the American people" it would make more sense to have baseball bat control laws.

10 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

forprogress

Feb-01-13 8:20 AM

A-freaking-men. I am tired of people trying to vconvince me that guns are bad or that tighter gun control is needed. According to the CDC data in 2010, gunshots did not even land on the radar for causes of death. In fact, it accounts for less than 1% of deaths in the U.S. In addition, the leading cause of homicide deaths are due to blunt force trauma from items like a baseball bat. If the goal is to "protect the American people" it would make more sense to have baseball bat control laws.

7 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

forprogress

Feb-01-13 8:21 AM

Obama is a "flavor of the month" president who doesn't give two ***** about us. He is simply using an emotionally charged situation to socialize our democracy.

11 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Skipper

Feb-01-13 9:40 AM

This morning's newscast reported Kansas City had either 14 or 17 homicides in January, and scores of shootings in which death did not result. And virtually all of these took place in the part of the city where there are gang wars, prostitution, drug dealers and worse. The guns used are without exception obtained by theft, not by legitimate purchase; bad guys know they will not pass the federal background check that is already required to legally buy a firearm. Instead of ranting about increasing gun laws, the effort should be made to clean up crime and remove the stolen guns - and those who use them.

11 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

bububud

Feb-01-13 11:50 AM

Guns aren't going anywhere, but a "tweeking" of current gun laws may help to prevent future massacres which by the way weren't conducted by criminals, but the law abiding guy next door. I would suggest thorough background checks. An end to easy sales at gunshows or from the internet. Registration with the state and federal. A private sale would require the seller and buyer together have the gun registered again possibly with local police. That would be forwarded to the state. Liability is then with the new owner. Easy access and lack security makes the registered owner liable if it is stolen and used in a crime or killing. The courts will decide the degree of liability. More money to law enforcement to prevent criminal activity involving guns. A few ideas that might help...

3 Agrees | 10 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

bububud

Feb-01-13 4:55 PM

hbockoven...If the "people" have given you the right to buy and hold in your home these killing machines, the least they can expect in return is adequate security on your part to prevent easy access. These type of weapons belong in locked safes or vaults, not hanging on a wall, in a gun cabinet or in the corner of a closet. You will be held liable if the gun is used in a crime or killing being the result of lax security on the part of the registered owner. The "people" demand no less! The courts will determine your degree of liability whether the gun is stolen or not! I don't think that is asking too much, do you?

4 Agrees | 8 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TAXEDENOUGH

Feb-01-13 5:13 PM

A gun is no good if your home is being broken into and you feel threatened if you have to get to a safe, unlock it, and load your gun. You won't have enough time. These crooks won't wait for you to arm yourself. I wouldn't live in some of these big cities without a loaded weapon close an available. To many wackos on drugs out there.

8 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

wingback

Feb-01-13 5:20 PM

we need those three people (I can't remember what they called them) in the Minority Report with Tom Cruise...then we can arrest previously law abiding people right before they go to kill someone with a gun. Or, better yet, on the background paperwork, ask them if they intend to use the gun in an illegal manner. Yeah, that will work!

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

bububud

Feb-01-13 5:30 PM

Taxedenough...OMG...While you are present in your home, you can have it in the middle of the dinner table or hanging around your neck for all I care! When you are not at home, unless it is with you, these military type assault weapons must receive a high type of security. You don't leave it on the dinner table or in an easily accessible gun cabinet and go shopping. UNDERSTAND?

4 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

tiredofbs

Feb-01-13 7:27 PM

The media is the only ones that need some legislation on this subject. They should be fact checked and held accountable if/for attempting to deceive the American people out of their rights. So much false reporting going on since Aurora, can't watch these liars repeat lies anymore. Then the drama Obama-zombies repeat lies verbatum. News decides/runs public opinion.

6 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Whenever

Feb-02-13 9:53 AM

Bububud, if the guns are in my house...and I am not home..they are already locked up...Just like my fridge and coffee cups. My front door is locked. EVERYTHING in my house is locked up. Locks are only to keep honest people out. If a crook wants ANYTHING in my house they will take it..Locked up or not.

8 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Whenever

Feb-02-13 10:50 AM

How can anyone disagree with my previous comment? It is fact. Unless the "Disagree" folks are just being stubborn perhaps?

5 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

bububud

Feb-02-13 10:54 AM

Whenever...My point is, once again, these assault type killing machines, and all guns for that matter, when not in the possession of the REGISTERED owner, must be provided enough security to prevent a thief or anyone easy access. That may be a vault or a steel safe secured to the floor. Hanging on a wall, in the corner of a closet, laying on a shelf or in a locked gun cabinet with a glass front is not adequate security. If "the people" have given you the right to possess this weaponry, you must at the least be responsible for common sense security not only to prevent theft but also for the safety of your own family. Does any gun owner think this is too much to ask? Ignore the responsibility this right gives you and risk facing the courts!

3 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Whenever

Feb-02-13 11:09 AM

My guns are locked up in a safe, however my point was, that if a crook wants them, they will have them. Safes are not crookproof. Nothing is safe if someone wants them.

7 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Whenever

Feb-02-13 11:18 AM

"these assault type killing machines", by the way, if I remember the statistics from 2011 correctly, were responsible for only about 5% of firearms deaths. They have just been "Demonized". It is a tool. Not good or bad...Just a tool.

7 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Whatever

Feb-02-13 11:20 AM

In how many of the shootings we have been hearing about did the shooter get a hold of their guns legally. I am betting a very very small percentage. So you can support the new gun laws coming to light and cheer if they succeed. However, in the end, the only people these gun laws will affect are the responsible gun owners. I will also bet my life savings that shootings such as the ones in the recent past will continue to happen. Also if by chance you are present at one of these horrible events - I hope the police are able to get there in less than 3 minutes because that is when most of the injuries and fatalities will happen; supporters of the new gun restrictions believe that only the police and military should carry.

8 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

bububud

Feb-02-13 1:25 PM

hbockoven...Cars weren't designed to kill humans, these killing machines were! Do you have a better name for them? Rules concerning them need to change if you are allowed to continue to purchase and hold! No attempt at change just means more innocent blood. Gun supporters here seem to have no concern. To some, even the responsibility of security of the weapons or the concern most Americans may have is of no interest to them, just leave them alone to do anything they want to do. We are a country of laws, not anarchy!

1 Agrees | 8 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Whatever

Feb-02-13 1:44 PM

Bububud - NO CONCERN? Our guns are locked up in a gun safe for the safety of our children and others children. Now as I have said before the gun laws only restrict those who follow the law not criminals. So tell me how these new laws are going to keep a criminal from obtaining a semi-auto gun to commit a crime? I want a full and clear explanation with stats from places in the U.S. that already have very strict gun laws. If you cannot provide that your uneducated spouting needs to stop!

6 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

bububud

Feb-02-13 2:40 PM

Whatever...FINE...You're doing exactly what I am asking be done to prevent EASY access to these type of weapons. Thank You...others don't with deadly results! I believe in registration when bought and re-registration to new owner when privately sold to protect the seller from future liability. Forty percent of guns sold in the US are done with no background check. Madness! Is that OK with you? Maybe more funding to law enforcement is needed to provide the necessary tools and personnel needed to fight the criminal elements in this country! Republicans won't like that! Is doing nothing besides armed guards everywhere, as proposed by the NRA, the best we can come up with? Get educated and propose solutions other than "do nothing!"

0 Agrees | 10 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Whatever

Feb-02-13 3:15 PM

Okay Bub - That 40% comes from a study conducted in 1997(yes I do my research)which is a 15 year study and completely inaccurate. The number is closer to 15%. However that 15% does not clearly divide the number of guns sold without background checks and how many are actually stolen. Try again Bub...so far your argument does not hold water.

7 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

bububud

Feb-02-13 4:26 PM

Whatever...So, I'll accept your 15%! If 10 million guns were sold in the US in 2012 (probably higher), 1.5 million were done without any background check or stolen, right? That is the figure for one year! That's telling me there's alot of innocent blood to be spilled in the future. Is that acceptable to you or is it just something we as Americans have to tolerate and simply hope our children or family members or friends are lucky enough to survive? When the AR-15's aren't doing the job, is an m-60 in every home next?

0 Agrees | 9 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Whatever

Feb-02-13 6:46 PM

So tell me Bub - did the first AW ban work the first time? I have researched and know the facts but I don't think you do. Also is it working in Chicago where it has been established as a "gun-free" city. You still have not provided me with any facts (well one outdated one)and have yet to back up what the new gun laws will do to help keep things like Newtown from happening. Do some real research and then talk to me about how it will help. And I am not talking about back ground checks.

6 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 41 comments Show More Comments
 
 
 

 

I am looking for: