Comments about ‘Bruce Willis: Don't infringe on Second Amendment’

Return to article »

Published: Wednesday, Feb. 6 2013 12:00 a.m. MST

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Castle Valley, Utah

Bruce Willis says, Don't blame me!

Ok, Bruce. I don't blame you, personally, for all of it. But most people have a good hunch that violence in films probably has a negative effect on us. Can you accept that?

And regarding the untouchable 2nd Amendment.....it has already been touched, and limited ages ago. You cannot buy every weapon you use and see in the movies. Many of them, some of the real ones, are against the law to possess. Can you accept that?

Sorry, Bruce, you are just plain wrong on both accounts.

Cache county, USA

Movies no.
Video games yes.

Colorado Springs, CO

Kirk, I can argue the same point: What's to stop one from carrying multiple 30-round clips? We can argue the semantics all day, but I stand by my post that smaller clips would do less damage (and that's smaller clips used by a person to appease Lost!) I would also argue against the regular Joe changing out clips in a half a second. This is just my opinion.

As far as knee-jerk reactions, there has been plenty of that on both sides, and both sides have strong arguments. But nothing will change until there is a cultural change within the whole country as far as conflict resolution.

Castle Valley, Utah

Snowman, you can't buy a fraction of the number and type of weapons that exist because they are illegal to possess. Are totally unaware that the 2nd Amendment is chock full of limits?

American Fork, UT

Okay, let's see if I have this straight.

We can't regulate assault weapons because it infringes on our 2nd amendment rights.

Hollywood and video games aren't too blame.

We can't provide mental health services to people who need them because that's socialism and Obamacare is evil.

We are quickly running out of options here. Are mass shooting just one of the "freedoms" that we get to experience by living in the Unites States? Last I checked we are grouped right around Uruguay, Costa Rica, Zimbabwe, and Nicaragua in gun related homicides (3.6 gun homicides/100,000 people). Meanwhile countries that have stricter gun laws enjoy rates far below ours. UK 0.04, Japan 0.02, Norway 0.04, Germany 0.06, etc.... If gun regulations don't work than why does every other country with stricter regulations enjoy massively lower gun homicide rates? Work that one out.

Craig Clark
Boulder, CO

Provo, UT,

Craig Clark
"Any gun control is infringment on the 2nd amendment...."

Not according to no less a defender of the Second Amendment than Antonin Scalia who in the 2008 ruling that protects a person’s right to bear arms also wrote, "....the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited...."

Scalia has often reaffirmed the right of the Courts to decide where the line is to drawn.

Sandy, UT

I hesitate to comment because this type of thread eventually becomes name calling and insults, but I will. I'm liberal in many ways and have generally supported Obama. But on gun control I think we achieve no benefit by preventing only law abiding citizens from owning weapons. If we could somehow remove all guns from society, except perhaps those used for hunting, I'd support gun control. But to increase the laws on the books to effectively make it more difficult for only those who abide by the laws to procure weapons is ludicrous. As I've studied it, we have enough gun laws on the books and only need to enforce them. Why add more when we are not able to enforce the ones we already have? Unfortunately we live in a society that has a high crime rate relative to most other OECD countries (like the oft cited Japan). We will always have crime so why tilt the balance of power further to the criminally minded?

USS Enterprise, UT

To "andyjaggy" actually we can't provide the mental health services because current regulations prevent the police from taking people to get mental evaluations. We used to get the mental evaluations done, but recently the government for whatever reason has stopped doing them. People can still get mental health evaluations, they either have their health insurance pay for them or else they pay out of pocket. (Why should the government pay for all mental health evaluations?)

As you show, the US is lumped in with nations that have high crime rates and large amounts of organized crime. Maybe that has something to do with the US problems?

Poplar Grove, UT

Then why does the organization you champion(NRA) actively, with lobbyists and campaign donations, try and suppress the gun laws that are already on the book. The people (I would use something stronger, but the deseret news only allows liberal bashing, don't speak ill of conservative causes) in control at the NRA are incredibly two faced. Publicly the support the laws on the books, but behind the scenes they are doing nothing but undermining them.

Provo, UT


There are no limits in the 2nd amendment. It says we have the right to bear arms. It does not say what ones

Dont Tread
Iron County, UT

I would love to see a tag-team political debate with Bruce Willis and Clint Eastwood in one corner and Stevie Wonder and George Clooney in the other corner. Yippee-Kiyae...Punk.

Pleasant Grove, UT

@snowman: "
Any gun control is infringment on the 2nd amendment."

Taking your statement at face value, banning machine guns, banning fully automatic weapons, prohibiting felons and lunatics from owning guns, all of those are infringing on the Second Amendment. Since I can assume that you approve of those restrictions despite your statement to the contrary, I'm going to take the statement to mean, "Any law keeping me from owning the guns I want to own, in any quantities I want to own them, is an infringement of the Second Amendment." The above-mentioned restrictions make it abundantly clear that gun ownership is not an absolute right and that some limitations are acceptable. The only question is, what other restrictions are also reasonable and necessary for the good of society?

Park City, UT

Our ratios are higher because we have more urban/inner cities than most places cited. The vast majority of our gun violence comes from areas of low income, unemployment, drug use, and gang activity. It's unfortunate that these types of people mess up the ratios because they have a criminal disposition almost from childhood because that's what they have grown up with. Fatherless homes, welfare, drugs. It's probably the reason most resort to joining a gang anyway, but that is where the most crime comes from. I would love to see numbers outside of the inner city. I'll bet they are more in line with those "low crime" countries cited.

So, why use Chicago Mark B? yes, why indeed. Let's use Cedar City, Nephi, Heber, Aspen, Beverly Hills, Wallsburg. Let's run the numbers there and see what they come up to shall we?

Provo, UT

It is unfair and wrong to ban certain guns because someone has done something stupid. They will never be able to change the constitution.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments