In NM a 15 year old child took the gun out of his families closet and killed
them.A gun safe would have kept that family alive.In
Colorado, a man purchased 6,000 rounds of ammunition and no one stopped him from
killing Americans.I can go to any gun show and purchase any gun if I
use cash.I am not trying to 'ban' guns. I am trying to
offer solutions when 20 children are gunned down in elementary school...last month.
Good letter, but the Obama plan lacks an assault weapon buy back provision. A
buy back will be needed if the weapons at issue are to be removed from the
street. Without that there will eventually be a strong "black market"
for the weapons. In a black market professional criminals will dominate the
market, and these weapons do have a very long shelf life.
The title assigned to this letter is disingenuous at best.With hard
searching, one can probably find some people who want to "ban guns".However, the mainstream is not advocating "banning guns"But it is heard all too often.Outlawing "assault" style
weapons is a far cry from "banning guns"Reasonable arguments
can be made and discussions can be had, but to classify ANY proposed legislation
as a "gun ban" is only meant to feed the flames.How about we
talk about the real issues and leave the imaginary ones out of the discussion.
Gun ban will bring zero people back and stop zero murders as most are used
illegaly anyway. 2nd amendment saves lives.
All you need to know about this issue is to remember than cops carry guns to
protect themselves, not you! Self protection is THE best protection because bad
guys will ALWAYS get guns and a gun in your hand is always better than a cop on
"cops carry guns to protect themselves"The cops I see do
carry guns. They carry pistols. They are highly trained and accountable for
their actions. They are screened for mental stability and proficiency with
their weapon. They control their weapons at all times. They practice
periodically. I support similar requirements for your average
citizen. Do you?
Military type guns are exactly the kind of guns the constitution meant to
protect.A people's militia must have arms sufficient to protect
themselves, their homes and their community or the people's militia will be
vulnerable to threat from roving gangs or other threats in the event of a
natural or other disaster.As recent events have taught us and as the
framers of the Constitution predicted, government militias can't always be
counted on to be there or be there on time. This is why they provided that
people keep the right to protect themselves by forming up into well regulated
militias when required.
@Bartley: "Now is the time to do something about gun violence."Often the best deterrent is to fire back.
@ Joe Blow. You make very good points. If you can guarantee any law will
eliminate mentally unstable and people not proficient with their weapon will
never obtain a gun, I will enthusiastically support it. Since that is
impossible, I will use a gun in a proficient and responsible way to protect
myself and my family from the bad guys who will NEVER obey laws including gun
laws. Any by the way, cops don't just carry pistols, they have all the
firepower they need, including "assault weapons".
How soon we forget our history.On October 27, 1838, Missouri
Governor Boggs issued an extermination order directing the extermination of any
"Mormon" in Missouri.In 1857, US President Buchanan ordered
the US Army to put down the rebellion in the Utah Territory. What rebellion?
The religious worship and doctrine of the "Mormons" were protected by
the 1st Amendment, but that was "rebellion" to Buchanan.Now
Obama wants to overthrow the foundation of the 2nd Amendment. He has found a
political cause that he thinks gives him authority to disregard the rights of
the people and the Constitution of the United States. He thinks that he has the
right, like Governor Boggs before him and President Buchanan to use the power
and authority of the government to destroy the rights of the people.So many agree with Obama. What will they think when they are driven, like the
Native American Nations, at gun point from their homes, their businesses, their
families? Didn't the "government" make promises to them?We, the people, are responsible to keep the government honest. They
won't do it by themselves.
Spoken like a true non-gun-owner.
Another PerspectiveBountiful, UTMilitary type guns are exactly the
kind of guns the constitution meant to protect.A people's
militia...or the people's militia...the people's militia...IS
called a gang.A militia is the National Guard.As as
noted previously -- Those Assualt rifles you say you need, that are used
by the Military and the Police.The same rules should apply then:Extensive background checks, Pass pysical AND mental evaluations, Are required to have extensive annual and semi-annual training, and must
ALWAYS must keep those weapons secured in a Gun Safe or ARMORY.The
same is the SAME.
Other than the background checks,the only result of the proposed gun control
laws, will be stepping stones to more draconion laws. The size of the magazine
or the way a gun looks, will have no effect on criminals.
Mike, yes we have forgotten our history. Unfortunately, though, most of us never
knew the other half of that history. Our forebears had a way of making enemies
out of people who would really have preferred to leave them alone. Look at the
citizens of Quincy for the best example. They harbored the Mormons in their
homes after the exodus from Missouri. But after getting to know the Latter-day
Saints during the next five years, they signed a resolution demanding that the
Mormons leave the state. They were willing to take up arms to make it happen, if
necessary. Ever wonder why?In Missouri, the Mormons came in
proclaiming they were going to take over all the land and set up their own
utopia. Not exactly what the locals had in mind. Look into the affairs in
Caldwell and Daviess Counties, and you'll find that the Mormons
weren't just victims of evil oppression. Truth is always much more
complicated than myth.If we start talking about establishing our own
vigilante "militias" today, I can imagine we might face similar
consequences. Thank goodness Church leaders are more wise and cautious than many
of their followers.
re Open Minded MormonEverett, 00This is probably my last post
due to desnews frequency restrictions.A WELL REGULATED people's
militia is NOT a gang. A well regulated people's militia is people banding
together in event of an emergency to defend themselves against gangs and other
invaders.If the 2nd Ammendment were talking about national guards (a
government militia), it wouldn't have been necessary to give regular people
the right to have guns (so they could form a peoples militia when necessary). A
government militia can always keep its guns in a central location, which is what
army units and national guard units do.
"If you can guarantee any law will eliminate mentally unstable and people
not proficient with their weapon will never obtain a gun, I will
enthusiastically support it"Well Mtnman, we both know that is
not possible. Name one law that eliminates any bad behavior.People
will still drive drunk, but I support laws that reduce the likelihood. When people get a license to carry in public, they should have some
training. Doesn't that make sense? Could you imagine getting a car
license without driving a car?Look. In many ways, I am on your
side. I fully support people owning guns. Any attempt to take away peoples
guns would have me in the streets in protest.I, however do not fear
the govt raising arms against me.Therefore, I do not support those
who want any number of weapons, any kind of weapons and an unlimited amount of
ammo.I do not feel that background checks, waiting periods and types
of weapon restrictions are unreasonable.Can you share what, if any,
restrictions that you could support?
"In NM a 15 year old child took the gun out of his families closet and
killed them.A gun safe would have kept that family alive.In Colorado, a man purchased 6,000 rounds of ammunition and no one stopped him
from killing Americans.I can go to any gun show and purchase any gun
if I use cash.I am not trying to 'ban' guns. I am trying
to offer solutions when 20 children are gunned down in elementary
school..."At mount carmel elementary school, a 5 year old girl
was arrested and treated like a terrorist for bringing a pink toy bubble gun to
school. In another school a child made a paper gun and got the same treatement.
talk about paranoid whackos.
This just puts a bandaid on mental illness. It doesn't help treat those
types of people in any way shape or form. If you defang a rabid dog, the dog is
@Bartly "Assault rifles and similar weapons were designed for war and
killing the enemy by laying down a 'field of fire.'"I
think you may be confusing semi-automatic weapons with fully automatic weapons.
The so-called "assault weapons" banned by Feinstein's proposed
legislation are semi-automatic, which means that you pull the trigger once for
each shot fired. These are not "field of fire" weapons. The automatic
weapons you describe are already illegal.The nation has tried a ban
on "assault weapons", and it didn't stop Columbine from happening.
It seems that murderers don't stop to think whether they might be breaking
a gun law.
"So many agree with Obama. What will they think when they are driven, like
the Native American Nations, at gun point from their homes, their businesses,
their families? Didn't the "government" make promises to
them?"It is exactly that kind of paranoia and gloom and doom
that make me feel terribly sorry for people who think that way.It
also makes me seriously wonder about the wisdom of allowing certain people to
carry guns without restriction.We also need to remember that about
2/3 of gang members, and nearly all of those who use weapons against others in
domestic violence incidents are legally able to carry a gun.Why?Because, although they may have a history of violence, none of it has
passed the level of misdemeanor. They have not been convicted of a felony.Yet.Do we need to tighten our laws and include violent
misdemeanors as disqualifiers for gun possession?
People say gun bans don't work. Actually, they do work. None of the
massacres were committed with a machine gun because you can't GET a machine
gun. As bad as the massacres are, think how much worse they could have been.
Someone wrote: "A WELL REGULATED people's militia is NOT a gang. A well
regulated people's militia is people banding together in event of an
emergency to defend themselves against gangs and other invaders."Exactly right.So where, then, is the WELL REGULATED part of the
Irony GuyBountiful, UtahPeople say gun bans don't work.
Actually, they do work. None of the massacres were committed with a machine gun
because you can't GET a machine gun. As bad as the massacres are, think how
much worse they could have been.10:56 a.m. Jan. 24, 2013============ Precisely -- We passed laws
"restricting" weapons from fully automatic to only semi-automatic.And Everyone - including the NRA - agrees this was the smart and right thing
to do.Why all the push back now - same weapon, limited function?I'll bet assault rilfe folks - the all weapons, No questions, no
restrictions, I can have anything I want - people secretly have a hidden agenda
to take away ALL restricitons and all regulations allowing for fully automatic
weapons too!The non-sense (i.e., lacking all sense, common sense) is
It never fails.One left-wing nut takes up the talk about
"militia" and the rest of his cronies join in. They reject the 2008
ruling from the Supreme Court that separated militia from gun ownership. They,
themselves, issued a decree and we're suppose to set aside the Court's
ruling and join in with them in overthrowing the Constitution. Obama uses them.
Obama's handlers use them. They join right in with everyone who wants to
usurp freedom from the citizens. They infer that they have oversized brains and
that they will think for us; otherwise why would they tell us to ignore the
Constitution and the ruling of the Court that clarified the 2nd Amendment?Anyone who demands that Obama have the right to sign anything that
inhibits our right to keep and bear arms is an enemy of the Constitution. There
is no other way to say it. Until an amendment is ratified by 75% of the States,
Obama has no authority to take away our liberty to keep and bear arms.
Another PerspectiveMountanmanMike RichardsSteveDcjbBountiful, UTA WELL REGULATED people's militia is NOT a gang.
A well regulated people's militia is people banding together in event of an
emergency to defend themselves against gangs and other invaders.If
the 2nd Ammendment were talking about national guards (a government militia), it
wouldn't have been necessary to give regular people the right to have guns
(so they could form a peoples militia when necessary). 10:23 a.m. Jan. 24,
2013------- Whatever - When this
“people's militia” starts having; “regular”
training,“regular” meetings, “regular”
drills, “regular” deployments, shows
“regular” organization, and has a proper "regular"
Chain of Command… I might agree you have met the
Constitutional requirement of being “well-regulated”.But, a self-proclaimed bunch of guys, in pickup trucks, with Assault
rifles, with no Authority is a Gang = Mobocracy. Mike
Richards's little history lesson shows exactly what happens to others
Constituional rights [speech, press, religion, peace, prosperity] gets
trampled by "mobs" posing as a "people's milita", when not
meeting the Founder's criteria of being "WELL-regulated".
Again with the same old tired arguments. It is unacceptable to do nothing about
keeping weapons from the unfit. Maybe if any of you NRA people would go back to
it's roots then we can listen and finally get to work. We will never have a
total gun ban and nor should we so get off it and get in tune with reality. The
POTUS directives are a good starting place. I'm telling you we can not keep
Why should we enact meaningless legislation that does nothing to work with the
root of the problem.If you ban the assault rifles and the extended
magazines for them, that won't stop the use of semi-automatic rifles that
can carry lots of ammunition. I can easily find multiple rifles that hold over
10 rounds that don't look like "assault rifles".If you
want to fix the problem, you need to look to mental health. In some cases, you
need to look at the mental condition of the community. The problem is that you
cannot legislate better mental health or better communities.To
"Pagan" did you see the story "Casper College Attack: Man Kills 2,
Self In Murder-Suicide" in the Huffington Post? Does that mean we should
ban bows and arrows too? That murderer killed 2 people with a bow and arrow.
He could have killed more if he had wanted to.
@Kent C. DeForrestWhat I get from your comment is, it is perfectly
okay for people to take up arms and defend themselves, just so long as the
people doing the defending meet a certain criteria. Clearly from
your point of view, any action taken to kill or drive out the early Latter-day
Saints was justified, while both the early and current Latter-day Saints should
not be afforded the same privilege. Is that what the Second
Amendment is to you and to many others? A privilege? Hollywood celebrities can
go on TV and demand regular citizens give up their guns, while many of them have
armed body guards? The President and Vice President of the United
States can attack the NRA as well as many citizens of this country for defending
their right to keep and bare arms, while they themselves receive 24 hour Secret
Service Protection from agents who often use the very firearms they wish to ban?
The Sandy Hook shooter didn't use an "assault rifle." He used
handguns. The rifle was found in his car, but the media didn't mention
that. They made it seem that the rifle was part of his arsenal. In any case,
the rifle was not an automatic weapon. The emotion behind the killing of
innocent children is so strong that it has clouded the minds of many people as
to the foolishness of trying to ban weapons as if it were possible or as if it
would do any good. Until we can cure mental illness, senseless killings will
continue. Nothing will deter a demented mind.
Just remember gun registration equals gun confiscation. Ask the people of
Belgium, Netherlands, and French what happened when the German army arrived in
town. First step get the gun registrations from the city fathers, second
eliminate the guns and a few of the gun owners. Liberals will not acknowledge
Obama's suggested goal to create a citizen army as well armed as the U.S.
military. What could ever be the purpose of a citizen army? When he made the
statement I was shocked that he actually voiced it. Discount it all you want
but he said it. It may not be Obama, but what other objectionable policies are
in the wings by those who wish to secure power over the nation. Liberals are
always harping the GOP is the equivalent of the National Socialist Party, then
liberals why give the GOP this unconstitutional control. The GOP got the
Patriot act passed giving the federal government the power to hold anyone
without due process. Obama pushed it further. You can be declared a terrorist
with out evidence and held indefinitely.
Lest you doubtSenator Barack Obama, July 2, 2008:“We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the
national security directives that we’ve set. We got to have a civilian
national security force that’s just as powerful---just as
strong—just as well funded.”Can you say "Brown
Shirts"? Lenin's Komsomol.?
Everyone is talking about the right to own a gun.Ok.How
about the right to go to elementary school without fear of being gunned down?
JSF writes "Just remember gun registration equals gun confiscation."One cannot be taken seriously after such a ludicrous statement. I did
not bother to read the rest.
"I did not bother to read the rest." You should, but like a true zealot
of the left, ridicule works for you better than dialog. Ignoring what has
happened in the past invites the past to replay itself. Pagan is right every
child has the right to go to elementary school without fear of being gunned
down. So how does this equate to gun control. It is neither a solution nor a
How does a childs right to life equate to gun control?Really?Feigning ignorance that a lack of guns or more regulation to PREVENT gun
deaths is self-evident.A man in china attacked 20 kids with a knife
as the same time as the Sandy hook shootings.They, all lived.The children shot in America, did not.85% of children killed
by gun deaths occur, in America.
@Pagan "How about the right to go to elementary school without fear of being
gunned down?"You are more likely to be struck by lightning.
Feigning ignorance, hardly, identify how elimination of guns, or increased gun
control will protect children in elementary schools. You can't because you
can not regulate a madman with no moral compass. A few castor beans and way
more than twenty could die. See you did not protect the children by any level.
Additionally you exposed hundreds more families to violent crimes.
Shouldn't a child be able to feel protected in their own home by their own
parents. How about the right to go home from elementary school without fear of
being gunned down or violently attacked? You draw a two edge sword that cuts
@cjb@one old man@LDS LiberalThe left continues to
demonstrate their lack understanding of the constitution.'regulated' as defined in the 1700's, means functioning or
working.The intent of the framers was for the people to be able to
adequately function as a militia if ever needed against a tyrannical
government.So any ban would definitely be UNconstitutional.The words of the constitution do have meaning,they are not vague nor
antiquated.Their are many ways to fix our problems, which are far
superior, from education to moral training to to proper care of the mentally
ill,depriving law abiding citizens of rights and liberties is not
one of them.Nor is the indoctrination of children against guns, and
wacko irrational fear of guns the left displays.
Millitary style weapons have No place on our streets. Machine guns and hand
grenades were outlawed in the 1930's. Its high time we did the same with
assault weapons. Limiting clip capacity, and the types of bullets(aka cop
killers) would help also. If you feel the need to fire such weapons ,,, Join the
Mike RichardsSouth Jordan, UtahAnyone who demands that Obama
have the right to sign anything that inhibits our right to keep and bear arms is
an enemy of the Constitution. [Boy - You must really hate Abraham
Lincoln then. He not only ignored the 2nd Ammmendment - He ignored Habius
Corpus, dis-armed every Southerner, and freed the "property" by the
Emancipation Proclamation...all without Congress and their 75%.]========the truthHolladay, UT@cjb@one old man@LDS LiberalThe left continues to demonstrate their lack
understanding of the constitution.'regulated' as defined
in the 1700's, means functioning or working.["regulated' mean regulated....regulations, restrictions, ...
BTW - what back of 'taget shooting', pick trucks and drinking beer has
to do with a fully "functioning" or "working" organized and
"well-regulated militia" -- as you claim?BTW -
"infringed" in the 1700's (and the 21st century) means -
confisgated.The Government confisgating your arms shall not be infringed.
Don't just stand there, do something, anything." It would be more
reassuring if the proposed solutions were validated in some manner. Assault
weapons (still lacking a clear definition) and high capacity magazines are great
for assaulting, but they should not be available to the civilian public, just as
machine gums and other aggressive weapons (artillery, bazookas, land mines,
Rocket Propelled Grenades, mustard gas, etc.) are not. The solution also needs
to include more comprehensive background checks, mental health support (the ACLU
will be an obstacle) and strict enforcement of illegal gun possession/use.
Passing "photo op" laws delays real progress.
Re:jsfStop misrepresenting what Obama said."We will enlist
our veterans to find jobs and support for other vets, and to be there for our
military families. And we’re going to grow our Foreign Service, open
consulates that have been shuttered and double the size of the Peace Corps by
2011 to renew our diplomacy. We cannot continue to rely only on our military in
order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set.We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just
as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded. We need to use technology to
connect people to service. We’ll expand USA Freedom Corps to create online
networks where American can browse opportunities to volunteer."Obama was not talking about a "security force" with guns or police
powers. He was talking specifically about expanding AmeriCorps and the Peace
Corps and the USA Freedom Corps, which is the volunteer initiative launched by
the Bush administration after the attacks of 9/11, and about increasing the
number of trained Foreign Service officers who populate U.S. embassies
All I can say is God Bless the NRA!! This organization has been going strong
since the late 1890's and really represents the heart of what America is
all about.. freedom!!! I am a proud member of the NRA and also a proud gun owner
and hunter as well as concealed carrier. The NRA is pure Americana and is one of
the last strong holds of our constitutional rights. The looney left and their
Communist puppets foam at the mouth and attempt to ban guns and destroy the
second amendment but the NRA stands firm. What those of you on the left
don't seem to understand is that the NRA is not just an organization but it
is a vast membership consisting of American citizens - law obeying and freedom
loving American citizens - that stretch from Main to Washington state and from
Alaska to Texas. Congressmen and women are scared spit-less to ban guns and bash
the NRA because even in blue states folks still hunt as well as cherish the
right to protect themselves and families. Make no mistake this is fight over
freedom vs BIG BROTHER central party rule with King Obama.
Both Presidents Nixon and George H. W. Bush resigned from their lifetime
memberships in the NRA over their political activity and fundraising in which
they called police "jack booted thugs". No matter how many members they
have, they are still run by a group of loonies seeking power and influence
beyond that which they deserve. President Obama is just following the standard
set by his predecessors.
Another PerspectiveBountiful, UT"Military type guns are exactly
the kind of guns the constitution meant to protect."Then why
aren't the NRA and its ditto heads demanding the right to own M-16A2
rifles, machine guns, rocket launchers, and artillery? These are what is meant
by "military type guns." After all, gun owners have been adamant that
AR-14's and their variants are not assault rifles nor military rifles
despite the uncontrovertable fact that the basic model was designed for military
use with the intent of being able to kill as many enemy soldiers as possible
without jamming. You can't have it both ways. Either they're military
assault weapons or they aren't. And either way, there are far too many
people, based on their online responses, who eagerly look forward to a breakdown
in civilization so they can prove their manhood by shooting as many of their
neighbors as possible to defend our way of life, or to having someone break into
their home so they can shoot them. Most of them have never been in actual combat
and have no idea of what it is like for you afterwards.
Of course the left isn't trying ban guns. At least, not in one fell swoop.
You have to do it a little bit at a time. Why not start with magazines (not
clips) that hold more than 10 cartridges? Or scary-looking guns? (The unintended
consequence, of course, is that I wouldn't be able to store a home-defense
weapon unloaded, so we'll be less safe.)Assault rifles
aren't used in the commission of crimes. Good grief, baseball bats kill
more people that assault rifles. Banning assault rifles is bizarrely unrelated
to the objective of reducing gun deaths.One of the reasons the
anti-gun movement has any traction at all is because there's an apparent
news blackout on the number of lives saved by the use of guns for self defense.
It happens every day, but you rarely read about it in the popular media. That
lack of coverage has always bothered me.But I do believe in gun
control - which is hitting where you were aiming.
PopsNORTH SALT LAKE, UTOne of the reasons the anti-gun
movement has any traction at all is because there's an apparent news
blackout on the number of lives saved by the use of guns for self defense.=========Perhaps youn didn't get the message:Glenn Beck just told you guys 2 nights in a row - to drop the conspiracy
theories.It's making the right=wing look extremeist and whacky.
The second amendment should have reasonable restrictions or be repealed.
Ah yes, the continuing saga of gun bans, misapplication of principle, hysteria
and hyperbole.First, you cannot seriously believe that most gun
owners want to own antiques. Bazookas went out at the end of WWII, so if you
can find one, lots of luck trying to find round for it, which ARE regulated
because they are explosive....just like Hellfire missiles (straight out of a
video game session, I'll guess) Stinger missiles, nuclear weapons and all
the other explosive things that some here and on other sites claim must be
needed by gun owners. Such claims are borne of hyperbole and hysteria, not
reality. Second, we DON'T have a free for all system for gun
ownership. You have to fill out Federal forms, undergo a background check, pay
the fees and THEN you can legally have your purchase. You cannot buy a machine
gun, (a REAL assault weapon) or bazooka at the gun show. You CANNOT buy an Uzi,
MAC-10 or any other fully automatic weapon at the Gun show. You need
licenses/permits at the Federal level to legally own such things.STOP THE MISINFORMATION!!!
Just say 'gun ban' and they come out of the woodwork just like
@one vote"The second amendment should have reasonable
restrictions or be repealed."Well here is how to do that:Two thirds of Senate and two thirds of house must pass a new amendment
repealing the second amendment then three-fourths of the State legislatures must
ratify it. There might be a small problem though. The bill of rights ( the first
ten amendments to the constitution) cannot be repealed