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

Weighs in on gun control

February 19, 2013

To the editor: It seems like all the king’s men, referring to the congressional men, nor the president will buck the NRA to solve the gun violence in the USA. That is one half of the problem....

« Back to Article

sort: oldest | newest




Feb-19-13 9:41 AM

Yeah, and if some one steals my car, or just takes it without my permission, and then kills someone with it, put me in prison?

If we just had less welfare and other public largess and made more able bodied men work for a living, they would not have time nor energy to visit mayhem on others.

15 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-19-13 10:05 AM

Mr. Fort: What an UNINFORMED comment! I would be embarrassed if I were that stupid! Criminals will always have guns but, hey, let's make law-abiding citizens responsible for what these bad people do. Really??? Get a grip and talk about something that you know more about. I'm so sick of ignorant people making comments on something they know nothing about!

15 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-19-13 12:55 PM

More money must be provided law enforcement to effectively address the criminal element. Background checks are mandatory for all gun sales including private. All guns must be registered with the state and or federal. Private sales should require a new registration in the name of the new owner relieving the seller of liability. Gun owners must prevent easy access to their guns...if stolen, the courts will determine the degree of liability the owner will face if security was found to be lax. Hanging on a wall or laying on a shelf presents a higher degree of liability than in a vault or steel gun safe. These instruments were designed to efficiently kill...The granted right to possess requires access preventon.

2 Agrees | 16 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-19-13 2:22 PM

Autos kill by far more Americans each year than do guns, so why not ban them, or at least limit their speed to 15 mph, which would cut auto deaths to about 2,000 per year. If we won't do either of those things, we have put a "marginal utility" on life - and we have all learned to live with that reality without the hysteria being ginned up about guns.

12 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-19-13 2:29 PM

PS. I'll put up with the gun deaths, too - even use them, as I already have - in the defense of individual liberty, which is the real source of all that is good in this life, tangible and intangible.

12 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-19-13 2:59 PM

Let's not get silly here, buds. Cars, ball bats, an ax, a hammer or even a bow and arrow weren't designed to kill large numbers of humans is a very short time. Anything can be used as a weapon but few have the killing power of assault weapons with high round clips. I'm not saying you can't have them, you just have to accept liability if you have failed to prevent easy access (determined by the courts) and the weapon is used in a crime or killing. Background checks and registration on the sale and re-sale is required...that would relieve the seller of any future liability. We won't get into fees, that will be left to the state. Fair? The criminal element will be dealt with through better funding of law enforcement and tougher sentences by the courts for violations. Since Sandy Hook, nearly 2,000 new deaths from guns have taken place in the US...should we not be concerned?

4 Agrees | 14 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-19-13 5:29 PM

De Tocqueville saw clearly that democracy is an essentially individualist institution in irreconcilable conflict with socialist collectivism. In 1848 he wrote: "Democracy extends the sphere of individual freedom; socialism restricts it. Democracy attaches all possible value to each man; socialism makes each man a mere agent, a number. Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word: equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in LIBERTY, socialism seeks equality in RESTRAINT AND SERVITUDE." De Tocqueville saw this already in the same year the Communist Manifesto, commissioned by the Communist League, was published. You, Obama and others may follow the Marxist road of restraint into servitude, bubu, but I think de Tocqueville saw more clearly where ever increasing restraints, of which limiting the Second Amendment is but one, ultimately lead, to tyranny, as history has consistently shown us.

9 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-19-13 6:13 PM

First, here is a little education for bububud. According to the US government’s own statistics, in 2005 there were 14,965 murders in the US. Of those “rifles” accounted for 445 or less than 3%. In 2009 there were 348 rifle murders out of 13,636, or 2.5%. As you can see, there are numerous other weapons, including blunt instruments, which have far more “killing power” than a dolled-up semi-automatic rifle.

As for Merlin’s suggestion, again we are back to another law that would prevent law abiding citizens from carrying, but would not do anything to hinder the criminal element. If your car is stolen and then used in the act of committing another crime you are not liable. A person who has murder in their heart is not going to be dissuaded by another paper shield that says that stealing a weapon is illegal. This is an idiotic suggestion that would only victimize gun owners twice in the event that their legally obtained property stolen. Stick to lights, Merlin.

13 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-19-13 7:41 PM

Registration for all guns? I think not. Outside of confiscation what is the point Bu? Read this: Democrats in Missouri introduced startling anti-gun legislation that would require gun owners to hand over their legally purchased so-called “assault weapons” to “the appropriate law enforcement agency for destruction” within 90 days. Under the proposed bill, “Any person who, prior to the effective date of this law, was legally in possession of an assault weapon or large capacity magazine shall have ninety days from such effective date to do any of the following without being subject to prosecution.” Is this what you want Bu?

So that is exactly why I will never register anything. Next up would be semi-auto handguns. The police chief in Chicago said that the 2nd amendment is a threat to society and in California a police chief said guns aren't defensive weapons, only offensive ones. Why then are the police armed? Must be to be offensive.

10 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-19-13 7:53 PM

I say we outlaw DHMO (Dihydrogen Monoxide). It is an inhalation hazard. In 2004, of all children 1-4 years old who died, 26% died from it. In fact in 1912 1500 people died because of it in one tragic accident. From 2005-2009, there were an average of 3,533 fatal unintentional deaths. So what do you all think?

10 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-19-13 8:39 PM

Hbock, I was wondering who was going to spoil my party. Anyway, the whole point is many of these people advocating more gun control are not familiar with them. Bubud is an exception. I just do not agree with him on registration and taking away my AR-15. Anyone that thinks gun control works just needs to look east to Chicago. Did you hear about the Democrat in Colorado that said women afraid of rape should not carry a weapon? He has since apologized for his blatant stupidity. Most of those that want my guns have no idea of their value as a means of defense not only against bad people but against bad govt. as well.

12 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-19-13 9:43 PM

HawkDodger...You didn't complete my "education."...of the nearly 15,000 deaths you cite, outside of the rifle deaths, how many involved all guns in general? MadVette...Again, I'm not advocating taking your guns away, I've been quite willing to compromise. I know the infatuation with these weapons...I felt it myself while serving in the US military. I just feel that owners must prevent easy might help in saving lives. I favor registration and background checks for reasons earlier stated which also might help in addressing the criminal element. I'm not holding out much hope for change, though.....

4 Agrees | 11 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-19-13 10:46 PM

I will not register my guns. I want niether the crooks nor the Government to know what I own. They have no need of that information. Why does the Government need to know what I own? The only reason I can think of is for them to easily come get them. Each little step is just closer to taking them. Each step is only just a little more...No big deal..... Germany did not just wake up one day and kill 6 million Jews. It was a step at a time..each step just a little closer. No thanks.

12 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-20-13 12:23 AM

Bububud, how you would plan on enforcing these background checks on citizens who choose to buy a firearm off the street in an illegal transaction? Who is going to make sure that weapon is registered? None of the ideas that you or the libs have been touting for the last few weeks would do anything to stop gun violence. Even VP Biden admitted that "Nothing we’re going to do is going to fundamentally alter or eliminate the possibility of another mass shooting or guarantee that we will bring gun deaths down to 1,000 a year from what it is now."

Number Two of the banning movement knows that background checks, weapon registration, mag limits, and banning mean looking rifles won't do any difference. So what is the point!? You hold up victims and cry for legislation that your own side admits won't make ANY measurable impact. Is it just that you want to feel like you are doing something to make yourself feel good? Is this just some weird liberal self-gratification?

11 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-20-13 2:41 AM

HawkDodger...Granted, you're not going to get a background check on an intended illegal transaction. That's where more money and staffing to law enforcement agencies in addressing the criminal element comes in. Outside of that, all new gun sales include a background check and registration. If a gun owner sells the gun, it's his responsibility after a background check to make sure it's re-registered to the new owner relieving the seller of any future liability. The risk of the courts is hanging over their heads by not complying. That's why registration is important if it is to work. I agree with Mr. Biden's statement, but with a little effort, maybe we can take gun deaths from 15,000 yearly to 5,000. We'll never know the impact until we try and gun owners comply with new selling procedures as well as preventing access through better security efforts...If nothing is done, nothing will change!

2 Agrees | 11 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-20-13 2:57 AM

Whenever...So America continues to live with 15,000 gun deaths year after year after year because of a paranoid fear that the government is coming to take the guns away...madness! We're well on our way again...2,000 guns deaths since the Connecticut massacre two months ago!

1 Agrees | 11 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-20-13 6:49 AM

It is not paranoid if they are really after you. 15,000 is also an inflated number. The numbers I have been able to see also count justifiable homicide by police and civilians. They also count drug dealers shooting one another. If you remove those two figures the number would be SIGNIFICANTLY smaller. One tradegedy is too many, but will not be lessened by registration of firearms. And if it won't be lessened...why is there a need? They want to know where they are. THAT is not an adequate reason.

10 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-20-13 9:19 AM

Im glad on voting day i stuck to very great words. Ill keep my guns, and my freedom you can keep the change. The country has made it this far from guns protecting our nation and forming it. If you really want to help gun violence tell the police to get criminals not tax paying and voting citizens. But no worry my fellow gun enthusiasts wayne and the repubs wont let the school yard bullied dems pass this bs.

7 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-20-13 6:22 PM

More money for law enforcement? We haven't solved any of the last 6 bank robberies in town. We have already created more feel good laws that have done nothing more then fill our jails with people that would be better off with home arrest and other types of punishment. We've made it a crime to smoke outside in a rest stop along the interstates. This was one of those feel good laws. We the people need to wake up some of these people that come up with these laws. I guess I could carry my pistol into the rest area and shoot these smokers that break the law. We treat them like trash so why not just shoot them and help the state get rid of these dangerous criminals. Stop making stupid laws. Until we take the profit out of these laws nothing will change. Register all guns? Who makes the money on that. If it works like the DOT, they will be above the law.

9 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-20-13 6:46 PM

\hbockoven...Unregistered guns?...Better funded law enforcement and stricter penalties (jail) for the illegal sales (better know who you're selling to) might have a seller thinking twice. All new gun sales will require a background check and registration. When you want to sell your gun, another background check is done and you and the buyer make sure it is re-registered in his name, relieving you of a future liability concerning that gun. All owners must prevent easy access to the gun at home. The courts will determine your liability if the gun is stolen and used in a crime or killing being the result of lax security at home. Hopefully with a few changes, you can still enjoy you guns and lives will be saved!

1 Agrees | 10 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-20-13 7:39 PM

Bub, where will this stop? Agreed, guns can kill, but so can a number of other things. Do you want the gov. to pass more feel good laws? Mabey that NUTJOB in Conn. did'nt read that schools were a gun free zone. Perhaps if he did, nothing would have happened because it would mean breaking the law and God forbid, he would'nt want that, he could get in trouble.

7 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-20-13 7:44 PM

Only honest people follow the law. All restricting laws do is make the honest people pay.

8 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-20-13 9:25 PM

Obama is salivating over all the bureaucrats he can add to govt payrolls to oversee his gun control regime, just like the 16,000 IRS-types he's hiring to oversee those Obamacare fines. As Hayek explains in "The Road to Serfdom," there is simply no end to it once collectivism (as in the infinitely expandable concept of "the general welfare") replaces individualism (as in the concept of "personal liberty and responsibility"). Federal control, via taxation and regulation, almost imperceptibly becomes both a social and economic strait jacket.

10 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-20-13 10:18 PM

Just what we need-more laws. Inforce the ones we already have.Its not the fact that people have guns,it the fact that nutty people have guns.What good is it going to make if the govt knows someone has a gun after they shot a bunch of people and themself.This is all politics and the people are falling for it.

6 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-21-13 11:00 AM

According to a most recent USA Today poll, 56% of Americans favor a ban on assault type guns and 53% favor a ban on high capacity clips. An even higher number, I believe 83%, favors background checks on all gun sales. Most respondants here oppose the will of the majority of Americans. I have agreed to BG checks but have also included registration (I wish they would ask that question). I supported gun proponents keeping their guns and clips (got no thank you) but also asked for access prevention/home security or face liability (opposed). I've proposed better staffing/funding of law enforcement and stricter penalties in dealing with illegal gun sales and criminals (opposed). Compromise (opposed). Another massacre will drive those poll numbers even higher. The American majority favors new gun control laws, so I guess it comes down to the "will of the people!" The Republican answer to that is the filibuster and that means more blood on our streets. Mark it down, buds!

1 Agrees | 8 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 49 comments Show More Comments


I am looking for: