I’m astounded at the fear and paranoia from right wingers. We need brave
patriots to stand up for rational ideas that protect people, not gun
“rights.” Most gun lovers have no understanding of constitutional
law. Thank goodness for leaders who have common sense and seek what’s best
for the people. I’m glad we have a rational police chief in SLC who sees
the downsides to loose gun laws. We clearly need a background checks on every
wanna-be gun buyer. Obviously, we also need to downsize magazine clips to a
reasonable size, as well. We should also keep weapons out of churches, schools,
and businesses. Let’s call out the NRA for what it really is, a
self-interested lobby that only seeks money and political power to prop up its
weakening hand. As for gun shows, manufacturers, and dealers, they are driven by
greed at whatever the cost. While they demonstrate their fake expressions of
sorrow after every mass killing, their acting skills on TV screens show the
reality beneath the facade. They later gloat on their way to the bank as gun
sales go higher. Let’s be rational. We must counter this great evil!
I think he makes a very good point assuming his statistics are correct.
Legislating more laws and then not enforcing them does nothing. Maybe he has a
financial stake in his opinion but by no means is his opinion unreasonable.
Truthfully I do not think we have a gun violence problem in this country. Sadly
tragedies happen. No law will ever stop that. Go to the FBI's website and
find the number of violent crimes in the US. Then look at the number of violent
crimes that involved a fire arm. Then take that number and divide it by what
the 2010 Census tells you is the population of the United states. You will
certainly get something less that half a percent and maybe something less than a
half of a quarter of a percent. This is the likelihood of you getting shot in
the next year and if you don't live in New York, Chicago, or Las Angeles
(cities run largely by democrats mind you)your likelihood of getting shot gets a
lot smaller. Guns aren't the problem.
Biden's comments coincide with Pelosi's. Lets pass a bill now and
read and worry about the details later. Really? I find it
dispicable that liberals and Dems claim that if a new law saved but 1 child we
should do it. Do they feel the same about abortion and pornography?
Didn't think so.
Outstanding bricha, real numbers. Sweet. And from wiki answers no less. But what
I asked about was the number of children that are accidentally beat to death by
bats. Were you able to find that number? I'll wait some more. But so 500 to 1000 people are killed each year in accidental deaths, eh?
That's some pretty low percentage you cite there. Not a bad collateral
damage is it? 500-1000 statistics. But you know what's funny? I've had
two reletives killed in accidental gun shootings. (In neither of the accidents
were the guns in their hands, by the way). What are the odds? Funny stuff. You
think I'd hit the lottery with those odds by now. You want to know what
else is funny? I've had guns pulled on me. My son has been robbed at gun
point. On a safe street. I know numerous people that have commited suicide with
a gun. And no I don't live in a bad area. What are the odds? Do
you count those as real numbers?
Mark lets talk about real numbers here, on average between 500 - 1000 people die
in accidental gun deaths per year. It is estimated (according to Wiki Answers)
that there are about 200 million privately owned guns in the US. That means of
all guns there is a .0005% chance per year that any gun will accidentally kill
someone(that is using the 1000 accidental gun deaths per year).
"Bricha, you forgot all the knives, bats, hammers, etc. that also kill
people. Just jump off the shelf and attack people"James, each
year a number of children, and adults, are accidentally shot and injured or
killed with guns. Can you please tell us how many children accidentally club
themselves to death with a bat each year? Whether or not it just jumped off the
shelf. I'll wait.
Guns cost money. Ammo costs money. In combination they cost lives. This is
because they are designed for one thing: to kill.
Easier to sell to mentally ill people if no checks. Paranoid people buy more
guns and ammo.
Bricha, you forgot all the knives, bats, hammers, etc. that also kill people.
Just jump off the shelf and attack people.What if all guns were
confiscated - would the death rate be any less? Or, would people find other
means to kill people?What if all guns were confiscated - how would
women or older children protect themselves from abusive husbands or fathers?
Artillery, bombs, rocket launchers/LAWs, and automatic weapons are
already banned. Assault rifles were already banned, then they voted to un-ban
them. They seem to have found a stopping place of restricting people's
rights. There WERE (and still are) reasons that they stopped there.What's special about "assault rifles"? Why target them? Because
they are usually painted a different color, lighter weight, targeted more at
sales to the military? As far as American assault rifles, they generally are
more expensive than foreign assault rifles.Why do I have one assault
rifle? Because it was semi-automatic, which is convenient/nice to have when
hunting, and because it was FAR CHEAPER than american made semi-automatic guns.
In other words, I bought my SKS "assault rifle" for $79 (used) from a
dealer vs. $400 for American semi-auto.
So many people are fixated on the "shall not be infringed" part of the
Second Amendment, but forget the "well regulated" part. How can a
Militia be well-regulated without regulations?Even Justice Scalia,
in his written opinion in the District of Columbia vs. Heller, states that
regulations as to the type of weapon that is permitted, the places where it is
permitted, and who is entitled to carry the weapon are legal.
It never ceases to amaze me that people actually believe that guns are to blame
for crime. The root problem is the education of our children. If everyone in the
country was taught from an early age to have respect for human life the crime
rate would not be where it is now.
"I am at the gun show now. There are a few scary people. Then I realized
that the odds of anyone here interfering with my right to life, liberty or the
pursuit of happiness is much lower than with the folks in DC."That's cool RBB, but did you notice the two really big signs at the
entrance that say, in big letters, no loaded firearms. At least there used to
be. I haven't been there in awhile. Anyway, from the crossroads
of the west website:Q: Can I carry a loaded gun in the gun show? I
have a Concealed Carry Permit. A: We respectfully request that you do not
bring any loaded firearm into the gun show. Safety is our Number One Priority,
and a safe environment in the show can only be maintained if there are no loaded
guns in the show. And: No loaded firearms and no loaded
magazines are permitted in any Crossroads gun show. Your personal safety is our
number one priority while you are at the show. Haha. Haha. Your own
people don't trust you guys with your guns. Your own people. Hahaha.
More people died in Chicago last year than people in the Middle East,killed with
hand guns not assault rifles. every security person till carry a hand gun not
assault riffles. the easiest way to discredit some is to be called crazy or
senile. Even if their not. Madam Albeit, who was Sec. of State under Pres.
Clinton, once said that she can see that the mentality of the people will be
that of a 5 year old. That's crazy, or maybe it just may be.
Salt Lake City...Wake up! You have a police chief who is wanting to put a crack
in the 2nd Amendment. It is time for him to go. We live in a world full of men
who wish to exercise power over us and take away our freedoms. This is a very
real threat that must not be allowed to take hold. Once the Amendment becomes
cracked and limits are placed upon us, this opens the door to us eventually
losing our rights to defend ourselves. That is the ultimate goal here despite
what your chief is telling you. It would be nice to live in the world that many
of my fellow democrats believe in, but we don't...period...end of story.
If this gun ban succeeds, the criminally insane will then use other kinds of
guns exclusively. Then they will want to ban these guns. What then? If we
don't stand firm, banning all guns is then just a few steps away.And if this happens we still will not have solved the problem. The criminally
insane can easily find other tools to murder. Knives, swords, fertilizer bombs,
gasoline bombs. Some of these tools are more effective than any gun in mass
killing. Any of these weapons are not as good to help a person defend
themselves. A woman with a knife doesn't have much of a chance against a
strong man who attacks her with a knife. She does have a good chance if both
have a gun.
Guns make people and families safer ... IF ... gun safety is practiced.1. Always treat a gun as if it is loaded,2. Unless a gun is
supposed to be loaded, each time it is handled, verify it is unloaded.3.
Teach each member of the household the rules of gun safety as soon as they are
old enough.4. If any members of the household are too young or otherwise
mentally unfit to handle a gun, keep guns out of their reach.It is
often repeated that more people die in gun accidents than are saved by guns.
Though I suspect this is untrue, (I would like to see actual statistics), this
is definitely not true for people and families who treat guns with the respect
Law abiding people are not the problem, and should not have their rights
curtailed. Guns have a legitimate use . They provide home and personal
protection. In the event of a natural disaster they enable people to help
protect their community.
Clinton 2:52 pm - Who would you say should interpret the Constitution if not the
Supreme Court? Isn't that how our government was designed - Executive,
Legislative, Judicial; Checks and Balances - do any of those terms ring a bell
to you. I am not saying, in any way, that law abiding citizens should not be
allowed to own firearms for their protection, for sport or for any other reason
that is not harmful to other humans. But I am suggesting that there should be
or could be limitations to that right for our own protection and
"freedom." And the most conservative court in the last 50 years has
backed me up on that opinion with their decision of DC vs. Heller.There are a number of things we need to do in response to the latest, or to
any of the past tragedies that have befallen the nation. But to suggest, as the
Mr. Templeton has, that requiring background checks at gun shows does not make
sense doesn't make sense to me. The District of Columbia previously had a
gun ban but it was useless because guns were so easily accessible in neighboring
Virgina. Just common sense, that's all we need.
I believe the purpose of the background checks is to stop those with violent
criminal history and those who are mentally ill from buying guns. It seems to
me that is right and appropriate.
Here are the current gun laws in place *It is a federal felony to be
engaged in the business of buying and selling firearms without having a federal
dealer's license* It is a crime for a federally licensed dealer to
sell a gun without doing a background check--that's all dealers,
everywhere, whether at retail stores or gun shows. *it is a federal felony
to sell, trade, give, lend, rent or transfer a gun to a person you know or
should know is not legally allowed to own, purchase or possess a firearm *It is a federal felony to submit false information on a background check form
for the purpose of purchasing a firearmThis is all that is needed
for new Gun Law Legislation - Records of those who are prohibited
by law from purchasing firearms (including those whose mental health history
puts them in this category) should be included in the federal instant background
check system. So will Gang Members , Drug Dealers , Hoodlums &
Criminals go thru a gun check ? No Way and Washington should be concentrating on
Our Wide Open Southern Border. What was Fast and Furious ? Google it
So all these new proposed gun laws are now going to make law abiding citizens
criminals, and that is wrong. Gun control is not the answer to all the shootings
going on at our schools. How about letting our kids go to school safely by
allowing - teachers , bus drivers and school administrators to carry after
taking gun safety classes & lots of range time. All of these
politician's kids , grandkids have that benefit. These gun laws have
nothing to do with safety as it has been proven many many times that guns in an
open carry setting bring down all crime. So who's afraid of Armed Citizens
? Criminals and Our out of Control Politicians in WashingtonSome of you
need to research the Patriot Act , NDAA Bill and why our Civil Liberties are
disappearing. Law abiding Citizens do not deserve to be going to jail. Those in
Washington no longer responds to the citizen's demands - ie No Obama Care -
Stop the Foreign Occupations - No Wall Street Bail-outs - No Amnesty - Repeal
the Patriot Act and now Leave our 2nd amendment god given rights alone
I am at the gun show now. There are a few scary people. Then I realized that
the odds of anyone here interfering with my right to life, liberty or the
pursuit of happiness is much lower than with the folks in DC.
@micawber: Wouldn't "appropriate limitations" include things that
actually matter, rather than cosmetic features of a gun that have no bearing
whatsoever on its functionality?@one vote: Because non-sequitur
arguments are so helpful.@ECR: What part of "shall not be
infringed" don't you understand? The problem is that people have been
conditioned to think that it is OK for the government to limit our rights, or
limit when and where we can exercise them. That was NEVER the intent, and I
defy you to show me otherwise. Just because our government has become corrupt,
and gotten out of hand to a certain extent, doesn't mean we should support
them in inching further away from the intents and laws of the Constitution.
Freedom requires vigilance, and quite frankly, many Americans, and many of you
on this forum, are not fulfilling your civic duties to preserve freedom and
liberty, in my opinion.
@liberal larry: That's not what he said. He said that we're not
enforcing existing laws. Of the 72,000 people who failed a background check in
2010, only 44 were prosecuted for providing false information. What was done
with the other 72,000? So, his point to Biden was, if you can't enforce
the law against the 72,000 people who failed background checks, then how is
adding to that burden against law-abiding citizens going to help the matter.
Biden's response was, "We'll deal with that when we get
there." So the question that begs to be asked is, "Why can't we
deal with the issue of the 72,000 failed applicants now then without adding any
burden to law-abiding citizens?' The reason is because that isn't the
point. Disarming America is. Don't buy into political sophistry.
Here's a background check idea without it registering guns.Gun
owners could pass a background check and be issued a numbered ID card with their
info, photo and thumbprint on it. The government would only keep a copy of the
card which would only have the card number and thumbprint.All gun
sales, even private party sales, would require the participants to go to a gun
store or police dept. Their card numbers would be checked to make sure that
they're valid and the sale would be made. The gun's info would be
registered to the card. The feds/police wouldn't know the name of the
guns' owner. This would allay gun owners' fears of registration and
prevent confiscation.If gun owners become felons or mentally ill,
cops could run their prints to see if they are card owners. If so, the guns
will have to be transferred to another. If they can't produce the guns, he
could be charged with gunrunning.Recovered stolen guns could be
listed on the Net under the owner's card number listing the gun's
location.This system would work and satisfy everyone's
Many people argue are attempting to interpret the 2nd amendment without having
read the 2nd amendment. Here is the text: "A well regulated Militia, being
necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and
bear Arms, shall not be infringed." The purpose of the 2nd amendment is for
the security of a free state, and it says the right to keep and bear arms
"shall not be infringed". It doesn't say, "shall not be
infringed except by action of Congress or the President of the United
States". It doesn't list any type of weapon as being excluded.
Congress does not have the authority to place ANY restrictions on firearms
without amending the Constitution. I agree that restrictions make sense in
present circumstances, but will there come a time when the people have to take
up arms and form a militia in order to secure a free state? I'm not willing
to take the chance. There are no guarantees when it comes to human behavior.
Beverly: The point I was making was that any tool/machine/whatever used
incorrectly can have devastating and deadly consequences. Of course I am
appalled by the number of people who die from guns, I hope and pray it goes
down, but we are fooling ourselves to think that by taking away guns it will
solve any kind of problem. There are any number of ways that one can hurt or
kill another if one is intent enough. If we take away deadly tool, those who
wish harm on others will find another. What we have is a human
problem. We should be talking about how we can help our neighbors, how we can
have a better sense of community, reaching out to all who might be struggling.
Instead we are left demonizing anyone who responsibly owns a gun, and
responsibly uses the gun for sport, and yes even for protection.
Dear bricha: Using your car accident analogy is on shaky ground. You need a
license to drive a car, the car has to be safety inspected each year, you can
have your license revoked if you don't drive properly, you need insurance
to drive a car. etc. etc, etc. Because of the 2nd Amendment, all of these
restrictions are missing for those that own a gun. Would you support these
measures, which are required to drive a car in the State of Utah, if only some
of them were required to own a gun? People have to register their car with the
DMV (Division of Motor Vehicles. How about registering your gun with a newly
created agency- DGS Division of Gun Safety? Use you head. The car analogy is
I firmly support Chief Burbank's position on gun issues He is an
intelligent, thoughtful, law enforcement officer. He is stating what he thinks
is best for the citizens he is sworn to protect. Nothing in his statements
violates the U.S. Constitution; and what he states fulfills his sworn duties to
protect the public he is sworn to protect. All I can say is, "Chief
Burbank: Keep up the courageous and professional job you are doing for the
people of Salt Lake." You have my full support.
"Obama has no intention of ever leaving he White House, he is an absolute
dictator and evil man doing what no other man in world history has been able to
do, destroy the United States. He has made sure we have no nation to call to
help us defend against his Despotic ambitions of absolute power. Guns and armed
citizens are his only road block and the proposed legislation is one that will
have absolute power to disarm to enslave all americans.""Registration is ONLY used for one thing, and that is eventual
confiscation"Do you both realize that what you have posted is a
complete disconnect from current or reasonably imagined reality?
@4:29 AMA DN reader wrote:"...Guns are our current
defense against government oppression..."."...the most
blatant and outrageous attempt we have ever faced..."."...Many fear... the demise of this country..."."...Obama has no intention of ever leaving he White House, he is an
absolute dictator and evil man doing what no other man in world history has been
able to do, destroy the United States. He has made sure we have no nation to
call to help us defend against his Despotic ambitions of absolute power. Guns
and armed citizens are his only road block and the proposed legislation is one
that will have absolute power to disarm to enslave all americans..."."...suicide attacks by education disabled children...thousands will
die daily...".The comments above are not a sarcastic rant nor
are they an example of one who spends all of their mental energy filling their
minds with reasons to validate their paranoia but must represent the honest
belief of one who has a firm grip on reality.Thank you DN for
providing readers a forum to express their 1st Amendment Rights.
Re: My2Cents"Obama has no intention of ever leaving he White
House, he is an absolute dictator and evil man doing what no other man in world
history has been able to do, destroy the United States. He has made sure we have
no nation to call to help us defend against his Despotic ambitions of absolute
power. Guns and armed citizens are his only road block and the proposed
legislation is one that will have absolute power to disarm to enslave all
americans."Back away from the kool-aid my friend! The thought
of people with your kind of thinking, running amok with an automatic weapon
scares the be-jeebers out of me! If you are finding the Govt. as oppressive and
restrictive as you note implies, you might want to consider another country, oh
say Syria or maybe even Egypt, they say it is nice there this time of year!
"Registration is ONLY used for one thing, and that is eventual confiscation-
the ultimate infringement."That's a bold statement. I
suppose you have evidence that registration's sole aim is confiscation, and
that representatives of the people are conspiring to overthrow our republic and
its constitution by wanting background checks and sales to be registered. Oh, a
liberal in the White House is not evidence. Since 1994, background
checks have stopped more than 2 million illegal gun sales. You are right,
though. Gun registration does not "solve" crime. It helps prevent
crime. And since 1994, crime has gone down.If the government comes
for your guns in the way you are implying with your paranoid mini-rant, they
will be coming in Abrams Tanks and Apache helicopters. I'm pretty sure
they won't call ahead or knock at your door.
What is most interesting is that the push for gun control marches on even though
there is Biden et al. admit that it will have little impact on gun murders. The
"assault weapons" they want to ban are used in less than 2 percent of
murders. "Oh gee, they took away my AR-15, I cannot shoot anyone with my
30-06 or revolver." How many deaths would have been prevented by banning a
30 round magazine. Almost none. In Colorado his semi-automatic jammed and he
used a shot gun. If a nut case has 2 hand guns, he or she could get off 20
rounds before stopping to reload. By that time, the 3-4 seconds it takes to
reload is a non-issue. If you really want to cut down on the murder rate 1)
enforce the laws we already have and 2) change the culture that glories graphic
violence. No. 2 is out because it would cut into Hollywood's profits if
all these people in favor of gun control could not make movies where they shoot
everybody and blood and guts are flying everywhere.
Beverly, with that thinking should we ban all cars? Unfortunately I
couldn't find the statistics for 2012, but in 2010 32,885 people died in
car accidents. I mean we can do better, in 2010 the us sold over 12 million
cars!! What a travesty! 12 million killing machines incredible!
Templeton's hangup with prosecuting background-check liars misses the point
completely. I'm much less concerned about whether we prosecute the liars
than whether we perform the check in the first place and prevent the sale of
guns to people who shouldn't have them.
Are they going to give out free handguns as samples to anyone?
dwayne, The Supreme Court has held repeatedly that government can impose time,
place and manner restraints on speech, if you believe the first amendment is a
proper analog to the second.I don't believe the Constitution
"guarantees unlimited rights to any firearm we want and ability to carry it
anywhere where property rights take priority." Even Justice Scalia believes
some limitations are appropriate. The question is what the appropriate
dwayne - I would challenge you to show me where the Second Amendment guarantees
"unlimited right to any firearm we want and ability to carry it anywhere
where property rights dont take priority."The Supreme Court -
who, I would argue, is the final arbiter of the Constitution - said in their
decision to strike down the District of Columbia's ban on gun ownership in
the case of District of Columbia vs. Heller, "Like most rights, the Second
Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon
whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose...The Court’s
opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the
possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the
carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government
buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale
of arms."This was not a liberal court, this is the court of
Roberts, Scalia, Thomas and Olita. What they said, in a nutshell, was the right
to bear arms is Constitution, but limitations on that right are Constitutional
Burbank quit being a cop when he became Chief, that makes him a politician. Most
of the Cops out on the street have no problem with armed citizens.
The nation's largest gun show promoter has their own agenda, and it is not
the welfare of the citizens of the nation.
Mr. Templeton is absolutely right!In Utah over 2,000 people
prohibited from buying guns were turned down, and their name and address and
details of the felony were turned over to the BATFE. How many of those were
prosecuted? Well, how many? Come one, must be hundreds at least.....Less than a handful. The Deseret News needs to ask the local BATFE and the
U.S. Attorney exactly how many. And, maybe why the other 2,000 were NOT
prosecuted?"Background checks" are not about keeping bad
guys from getting guns, which they will get regardless of any laws ever passed,
but are the number one priority for those who seek to create de facto
registration lists of all guns and gun owners. Registration never
solves any crimes. Ask the Canadians how that $2 Billion long gun registration
scheme worked out, before they decided it was worthless and eliminated it.Registration is ONLY used for one thing, and that is eventual
confiscation- the ultimate infringement. New York and California already have
used registration lists to confiscate guns that had required to be registered,
so this is not hypothetical.It's not the guns, it's the
@dwayne:Interesting. I do like where you are going with the
discussion. Unfortunately there is a limited space here. The limitations you
are speaking of in the 1st Amendment are part of the "Clear and Present
Danger" clause rooted in the Supreme Court decision which jailed people
speaking out against the Draft in WWI. They ruled against those speaking out
against the Draft. There are also limitations on the 2nd Amendment, too. The
average Citizen is prohibited from owning certain weapons as it is. The
discussion, no matter what side a person falls upon, is the extent to which
those limitations should be made.
My question is, when did Chris Burbank become a justice of the Supreme Court?
His quote in this article, “There are limitations to constitutional
rights,” he said. “We need to … realize that the Second
Amendment doesn't guarantee you access to any firearm you want and the
ability to carry it anywhere you want. Reasonableness says we're going to
limit access.” is just plain scary. Of course there are some restrictions
regarding the Second Amendment. One just can't go out and buy a fully
automatic weapon without being properly licensed. Same thing with a cannon, or
high explosives.Since Burbank swore an oath to defend the
Constitution of the United States as well as the Constitution of Utah and uphold
the laws of Salt Lake City, he doesn't have the luxury of picking and
choosing what laws he has to enforce and defend. Even though he chooses, at
times, not to enforce lawfully enacted laws mainly because he doesn't like
them.Burbank needs to be summarily fired, and get someone that is
interested in upholding and defending the law, even ones that he doesn't
I'm sorry, but I don't care one bit what Templeton thinks. He is
acting solely in his self-interest. Why would the writer this paper think he
would say anything else. This is like talking to oil companies about
environmental issues. They will never, in a million years, do what's
right, but only do what puts more money in their pockets.
The gun lobby can't have it both ways. It's inconsistent to state
that gun violence is a mental health issue, and then in the same breath claim
that we shouldn't have background checks to weed out felons and people with
mental health problems.Most people have trouble separating their
politics and their pocketbooks.
Why should we care what this person thinks? Just another example of how the war
against common sense with guns is driven on the far right by GREED. Pure and
simple. Then there is the loud minority that somehow have bought into their
thinking: that we are on a slippery slope to taking away everyone's
weapons.If you are so paranoid that you believe this nonsense, you
are probably one of the crazy people that should not be trusted to own a home
armory of assault weapons. There is absolutely NO reason why
everyone who buys a gun - anywhere - cannot undergo background checks and have
to fully register the purchase. Instead of saying "no" to everything,
let's start finding common ground and do something.
Think just possibly this guy has a financial stake in the game? Hard to be
objective when money is at stake.Universal background checks was
once supported, even promoted by the NRA."the NRA also took out
an ad supporting background checks at gun shows: The message of
the NRA’s 1999 campaign was “Be Reasonable,” and the
organization bought ads in top newspapers, including USA Today, The Washington
Post, and The Wall Street Journal, to make its case. “We
believe it’s reasonable to provide for instant background checks at gun
shows, just like gun stores and pawn shops,” the USA Today ad reads."
How can he say he;s against TOUGHER background checks at gun shows when they
don't do background checks at gun shows? Bottom line is we
somehow have to keep guns out of the hands of criminal and dangerous mental
health persons. A little inconvenience of a background check shouldn't be a
problem for a law abiding citizen should it?
The economic engine in our life doesn't always make our decisions good. Do
we really expect a "Gun Show Promoter" to support actions that would
slow gun sales? Pointing at mental illness, pointing at the lack of enforcement
of current laws, pointing at the need for armed guards in schools, as Henry
David Thoreau said, "Hacking at the branches of evil, when we know the root
cause." Readily available guns is the root cause and, as the President
stated, "We can do better." Over the past five years around 30,000
people, each year, die from gun violence. In this coming year, if another 30,000
Americans die from gun violence, we should be ashamed of ourselves. We can and
should do better.
Biden is such a flake. Let's start enforcing the drug laws in this country.
If that were to happen he would be conducting this program from jail. I thought
using marijuana was illegal. I guess that doesn't apply to the vice
Well we'll address it sometime later. Next question?The right hand
doesn't know what the left hand is doing.
US citizens have every right to oppose unconstitutional alterations of our
rights and freedoms. Opposing government and legislators is our duty and
obligation to preserve our way of life and government of the people. Guns are our current defense against government oppression and this is the
most blatant and outrageous attempt we have ever faced in the last 250 years of
existence. Many fear duty are ready for Absolute government control and the
demise of this country. Rights to worship, talk, representation, and live as we
please is ours to keep or surrender.Obama has no intention of ever
leaving he White House, he is an absolute dictator and evil man doing what no
other man in world history has been able to do, destroy the United States. He
has made sure we have no nation to call to help us defend against his Despotic
ambitions of absolute power. Guns and armed citizens are his only road block and
the proposed legislation is one that will have absolute power to disarm to
enslave all americans.If advocates think past events of suicide
attacks by education disabled children, wait until the mentally able refuse to
comply, thousands will die daily.