Published: Saturday, Jan. 5 2013 7:20 p.m. MST
@ Sneaky Jimmy I'd bet you are an anomoly in the Bay Area. It is nice to
have someone from CA that has a lick of sense. Hang in there.
Right. More armed people are what our society needs. Consider
this: According to a 2008 analysis of NYPD firearms discharge data
done by the New York Times, between 1996-2006 officers hit their intended target
about 34 percent of the time. Another analysis, published in 2006 by
the RAND Center on Quality Policing at the request of Police Commissioner
Raymond Kelly, found that in the years 1998-2006, the average hit ratio for
officers involved in a shooting where the subject does not fire back was 30
percent. During a gunfight, where the target is shooting at officers, the study
reported that the hit rate falls to just 18 percent.The Times
reported that in 2006-2007, Los Angeles police officers hit their targets
between 27 and 29 percent of the time, respectively. There is no reliable
national data on hit ratio.
I have to wonder how many felons bought a weapon at this gun show. Have
to wonder if a potential mass shooter bought one of the AR15's. How
many bullets bought were purchased by a criminal?Why are there not
background checks at guns shows?Thinking back to the recient mass
shootingsHow may of the weapons were bought at a gun show? How many of
the weapons were obtained because the owner did not have the secured.Citizens certainly have the right to own guns.What need need is more
responsibilty, and liabilty for gun owners.
Gun control, gun control, the words of the leftists whose knee jerk reaction to
something upsetting....they always blame their fellow countrymen for something
that became out of control where, in the case of Sandy Hook, people were mainly
blameless.But if you want to live in a country where gun ownership
is not allowed, try living in Mexico. Without guns, 50,000+ people are killed
every year. In the United States, 30,000+ people are killed every year.
Mexico's gun violence still happens even with totalitarian gun
restrictions. I dare you to go to Mexico and live there for a day, especially
along the border.Personally, I would prefer to live in a country
without such gun restrictions, even if I do not own a gun.
Jemezblue: "Gun control, gun control, the words of the leftists whose knee
jerk reaction to something upsetting"More guns, more guns, the
words of the righties whose knee jerk reaction to something upsetting...
I was talking last night with a friend who is an expert on gangs in Utah. He
works with the Utah Attorney General's office. Although he is pro-gun, he
has some serious concerns with the lack of adequate background checks, the gun
show loophole, and the fact that before being prohibited from possessing a gun,
a person must have been convicted of a felony.According to him, at
least two thirds of gang members cannot be restricted from packing. Most have
fairly extensive records of misdemeanors, but no felonies -- yet. It is not
unusual for police agencies to have to return weapons to gang bangers because
their possession of the weapon is permitted under current law and the Second
Amendment. Because there is no registration of gun serial numbers, there is no
way of learning if the gun has been stolen.He also points out that
in almost every case of a gun being used in domestic violence, the gun was
lawfully possessed by the shooter. Even though the shooter may have had a long
history of previous violence, nothing can be done until he crosses the line from
misdemeanor to felony.Something to think about?
Gun safety should be taught in schools by responsible NRA teachers. People in
the USA live around guns so teach them accordingly. If your son is Boy Scout he
can learn about gun safety at scout camp from a qualified, certified teacher but
how about the girls?. Hunters safety classes beed to beef up the safety issue
also. Lets leave it that way. Education must never be taken out of the equasion.
I am a life long hunter and gun enthusiast but see no use for a large clip
military rifle in a household exscept to fill a landfill with .223 bullets. We
have had bans before on large clip capacity guns and it was removed. Criminals
will have whet they want to use and always will in the USA. We also live in a
much different society that we did 50 years ago and adjustment need to be made
to match the threats.
gun control is nothing short of a declaration of war on the american people by
The idea that we can solve our gun violence epidemic by making more guns
available is as absurd as the idea that we can solve our DUI epidemic by opening
Despite all the rhetoric about wanting to do something, guns are more popular
than ever in Utah. Heck, within the next couple months we'll
have TWO gun ranges within a mile of my house that are opening. Weirdness. After Sandy Hook, my neighbors all went out and bought guns--and are
applying for Conceal Carry licenses. Guns are no longer seen as an extreme form
of self-protection, but as the primary form of self protection, which imo, will
only lead to more tragic tangential cases of gun violence. I'm
not a huge fan of the systematic arming of my neighborhood--I think it breeds
mistrust and contempt for neighbors, and our media teaches that the only way to
solve one's problems is through decisive steps like gun violence. How often
have we not cheered for the good guy, when he blows away the bad guy--leaving
all question as to whether he'll torment the innocent in a movie again? That sort of indoctrination plus more guns in our hands will only lead
to further disrespect and harm to our society.
My wife has never shot a gun in her life but she wants to change that. She works
as a secretary at a grade school and she wants a concealed permit and her own
9mm. It is highly doubtful that the school district will ever allow guns to be
carried but I think her attitude is common across the country as more and more
people realize the need for self protection. It is too late when the police
arrive - the damage and death have already taken place. Bad guys will always
have guns - legal or illegal - and no law will ever prohibit that. I always
carry my .40 semi auto Smith and Wesson when I back pack and hike - not just for
protection against wild animals but more so 'wild' and bad humans.
Shooting someone is a last resort but people at least want an option as to
whether they live or die.
juni4lingSomewhere in Colorado, CO"Shall not be
infringed."To liberals that somehow gets translated into: Taken
away.But the original founding fathers meant "Shall not be
infringed."============ That's because Liberals
are more educated and use a dictionary to define such "big" words.Infringed means "tresspass", i.e., the Government can not tresspass on
your property to take away your guns.As in, can not Confisgate, as in can
not take away.Liberals use a dictionary to define words, Conservatives trust college drop-outs on the radio to define it for them.
To "LDS Liberal" actually, your "information" is wrong.
Liberals live in areas where there are more educated people. However, that does
not mean they themselves are more educated.If you look at the
statistics, they only show the areas where a majority are liberals are more
educated. For example, if there is an are with a lot of conservatives with high
levels of education, but the area is predominately undeduated liberals, the
studies you are looking at would conclude that liberals are highly educated.However, you should look at studies like "Conservatives Better
Informed, Most Consistent, More Open-Minded, Says Pew" at National Review.
There are other studies out there that show that conservatives are more
educated, more intelligent, happier, more generous, and donate more time than
Have we really stooped to who is more educated or not? Wow!
It is ironic that the biggest boost to the gun industry is when the politicians
begin to threaten the 2nd amendment. I'll bet Rememington, Glock,
Sig-Sauer, ect. would love for that to happen monthly. As for those
of you who claim to care about human life being taken by guns, what do you say
about cars? We as a nation accept about 30 thousand deaths on American roads
every year for the privilidge of driving 60 to 70 miles an hour. Want to save a
lot more lives than guns take yearly? Just have the nations speed limit reduced
to 25 miles an hour. Few if any people would die in car accidents unless they
died of old age trying to get somewhere. Would any of you accept that life
saving change? Doubt it. As for me, I love it that a person, particularly a
woman, can defend herself from rape and possible murder with a gun in her purse.
And, these kinds of things do occur more often than any of the mainstream media
would have you believe.
To keep the citizen militia up to date they age going to have to start selling
drones at 20 million each.
Truthseeker you are full of bunk! Cite your source for that alleged statistic.
Far more people have died from Auto Accidents in this state than from
Homicides.By the DNews count out of 47 homicides last year, I
counted 26 were with guns. Maybe I was off by one or two. Even with accidental
gun deaths, we are still well below how many die on the roads. We have had
around 200 traffic fatalities in 2012, but no final statistics yet.You can't control suicides, nor the method people use to take their own
lives. Some use guns, some don't.
Midwest Mom...The "well regulated" applies to Militias, not firearms.
If you read the actual Second Amendment, "well regulated Militia" is
first, the last statement, "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms,
shall not be infringed". What of the, "shall not be infringed" do
you not understand?
My 2 Cents. We choose not to be subject to government. Really . We believe in
being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, magistrates in obeying, honoring and
sustaining the law. I am not anti-gun. However if your rational for gun
ownership is to defy the laws of the land as opposed to self defense that
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments