So how's that working in Chicagoland where exists the most restrictive gun
laws in the country?
I'm trying to remember when I read about MADD calling for car control.
I remember Obama a few years ago visiting the border with Mexico and mocking
those who advocate better border enforcement. He pointed to the fence and said
that conservatives wanted to built a 100 foot fence, put in a moat, put
aligators in the moat,...., and in general said such measures were pointless and
only far-right extremists favored them.Fast forward to today... now
the left parades gun victims in front of congress and uses the sympathy factor
to push a radical gun control agenda. If the anti-illegal immigrant
movement in this country found one of the thousands of innocent victims whose
loved one was killed by an illegal criminal, drunk driver, or other careless
illegal person to testify in front of congress, the media would be going nuts
about how unfair such tactics are to push better border enforcement measures.The hypocracy is so thick you can choke on it.
What has barack decided he wants to do with his own kids?Allow
people to carry guns to protect them or not?Enough said.
Finding a path forward to decrease the gun violence in this country is a tough
one.While I do not know the best solution, or set of solutions, I
cannot believe that we should just Do nothing.
CrisB writes "What has barack decided he wants to do with his
own kids?Allow people to carry guns to protect them or not?Enough said."Really a bad argument.Kind of like
this one (also a bad argument)What did the Republican National
convention do about guns on premise?Allow people to bring in guns or
I empathize with Ms. Giffords and her undeserved suffering, but her pleas for
"gun control" should be ignored.They are irrational and
favor a "solution" that has repeatedly proven to not fix the problems.
What would have prevented her tragic incident, and the horrendous killings in
Connecticut is "nut control," not gun control.Criminals and
crazy people do not obey laws, and if gun control kept people safe, Chicago with
its gun ban would not be more dangerous than Afghanistan.Many of
those pushing for gun control, and using emotionally powerful props like Ms.
Giffords are motivated by goals far different than preventing criminals from
having guns.The Second Amendment is there for a reason. Yes, there
are risks associated with freedom, but the benefits fare outweigh the costs.
Remember, Deseret News, that if gun rights can be infringed, your
free speech rights can be too! Will you support waiting periods before
releasing stories, "training and test requirements and background
checks" on reporters, limitations on the size or format of your newspaper,
or banning of digital since it was not around in 1791 and therefore beyond the
protection of the First Amendment?No new gun laws!
Maybe Gifford could have mentioned that the deranged kid that shot her and
killed others. Was a registered democrat that was tired of her policies on top
of his mental problems. He didn't use an "assault rifle" to commit
the crime.Maybe she should understand what it's like to be
defensless while a criminal is armed better and doesn't care about his own
life or the lives around him. Too bad no one was armed and could have shot and
killed him sooner.It's a horrible crime that happened. But, the
issue is the mental care system.
Time after time we see that banning guns invariably brings on more not less
homicides. The M-16 the military uses is an assault weapon with a 30 round clip,
which by the way is exhausted after 4 seconds if on automatic. The AR-15 is a
look alike, but only semi automatic. Moreover the round is relatively small
and more designed to wound than to kill. Hunting guns are much more potent. The
concealed carry law I would say has been a great success. I just hope more
"...What has barack decided he wants to do with his own kids?...".IF a republicon was in the White House, YOU would whine about whatever
steps our country took to protect the Presidents' children?The
hypocracy(sic) IS so thick you can choke on it.
@what nowThe point is if Obama wants gun control let him begin at
home. Remove the guns from the people protecting his children. What do you say
Reading some of the comments here makes me realize how deeply entrenched our
national obsession with guns has become.But what is most frustrating
is that most of them simply mindlessly repeat a few nonsensical talking
points.What about actually doing some THINKING and trying to come up
with workable solutions to a horrible national problem?
Using this injured girl, Gabby, to promote a national gun conversation, is
shameless. It's hyperbolic and emotional manipulation. And please spare
us from people who must "do something". Beware the law of unintended
consequences and "act in haste and repent at leisure" All we need do is
look at countries with disarmed populations, now and in the past and see the
consequences. There are already 9000 gun laws, 9001 will not solve what is a
mental and spiritual issue.
Americans cling to their guns as a means to ensure their own liberty. Liberty is
the object. Guns are the tools. Liberty never meant freedom from
consequence...Our liberty was procured by brave men with guns.
Nothing short of that will preserve it...The problem with America is
the degradation of culture and morality. You can not legislate morality. You can
not legislate the reinforcement of strong cultural values. It is a cancer.
Cancer either consumes or is cut out. Renounce war and proclaim
peace. But if the hearts of our corrupt leaders become saturated with power and
greed, prepare for the worst. The tree of liberty must be refreshed
from time to time...
"Using this injured girl, Gabby, to promote a national gun conversation, is
shameless."In an article titled "Why I'm for the Brady
Bill" President Reagan penned the following:Jim Brady, my press
secretary, who was standing next to me, wasn't as lucky. A bullet entered
the left side of his forehead, near his eye, and passed through the right side
of his brain before it exited. The skills of the George Washington University
medical team, plus his amazing determination and the grit and spirit of his
wife, Sarah, pulled Jim through. His recovery has been remarkable, but he still
lives with physical pain every day and must spend much of his time in a
wheelchair.Is this also "shameless"?
So what does Reagan have to do with today's assault on the constitution?
Do you assume that I have human idols? Democrats idolize people. Celebrities,
Kennedys, you name it, that is the mind of the progressive, worship men.Reagan also gave amnesty, what would his mistakes have to do with my
positions on the issue? The resort to authority, (Reagan, Giffords, or anyone)
is a fallacious argument.
Chase asks: "Liberty never meant freedom from consequence..."I have to ask, who pays the consequences? Is it Gabby Giffords,
children in a school, a little boy in Alabama right now?Who?Or is it the shooter who goes berserk and then frequently kills
himself?RESPONSIBLE gun owners should be fully supporting
RESPONSIBLE gun safety regulations.Spouting paranoid rants about
imaginary "government tyranny" is not only irresponsible, it is also
bordering on insane.
@ one old man:How does the Deseret News allow you to call everyone who
disagrees with you "insane" or "mindless".It is far
better to be the above than to be a mind controlled robot.
One old manThere can not be liberty without responsibility. When
you get in a car you accept the fact that you may be killed. That's the
trade off. Some people choose to not use cars and are still killed by them. There is nothing paranoid about insurance. The Fathers, in their wisdom,
provided insurance against tyranny with the second amendment. You
have home insurance, health, auto, and maybe more. People can insure anything
they wish. In this case, liberty. Besides, the war on drugs has not
worked, prohibition did not work, why would you trust a gun-walking
administration to protect you?The moral and cultural decay of our
hedonistic society is killing America. Drunk drivers. Smoking. Sexually
transmitted diseases. Abortions. These things kill Americans... Stop them,
prevent lots of deaths!Guns are a rouse, propaganda. Fear.
The 'SOLUTION' is the loss of the right to bear arms. In order
to have a SOLUTION , you must first have a problem. THINK TANKS
such as "The Institute for the Future' create the problem (mass
shooters galore)and hope to manipulate the population to accept the above
solution.As I said, only a human with a mind controlled by such an
institution as the above "THINK TANK" would be promoting the above
SOLUTION on this comment thread.
In the majority of these cases, the shooter had mental and emotional issues.
Why doesn't Congress do something to help those folks, like doing away with
restrictive privacy laws that allow such folks to go undetected? I have nephew
who has been hospitalized two or three times for emotional problems, yet because
such info is not readily available for background checks, he owns three
Chase and Iron -- thanks for proving my points.
When are our politicians and law makers going to have the courage, commitment,
selflessness, integrity and honesty sufficient to dig deeper into the core
issues that underlie the killings and other violent crime that takes place on a
daily basis in this country.Why do so many children & young
adults in this country have a lack of a properly developed conscious? Why do so many people have such a little regard for human life? Why do people refuse to honor and uphold the rule of law when ever it suits
them? Why are kids drawn to gangs that glamorize and normalize
violence and killing? Why do so many find notoriety and 15 minutes
of fame more desirable and worthwhile than personal integrity, leaving
peacefully, and character? Why are so many becoming mentally ill and
not getting the help that they need. Then when are we as voters
going to have the courage, commitment, integrity and unity enough to demand that
our politicians start solving these problems or be relieved of their offices in