jump to last post 1-7 of 7 discussions (50 posts)

Oh Yeah. What we need is another law!

  1. tobey100 profile image60
    tobey100posted 6 years ago

    Now that the left is beginning to realize the mantra of 'conservative vitriol' isn't working regarding the tragic events in Arizona 60% plus don't believe the template set forth by the media), they've gone to page two; tougher gun laws.  I've been in law enforcement for 25 years and the very thing we DON'T need is another gun control law.  For those of you who love to browse the web, check it out.

    There are currently 271 federal gun laws not to mention the numerous 'hidden' gun laws and thousands of others making use of the phrase 'Statutes-at-Large' which apply to the purchase and/or possession of firearms.

    Additional legislation is not the answer.  Enforcement is.  In almost every case where a deranged individual goes on a rampage where a firearm is involved we ultimately discover the rampage could have been prevented if the law had been seriously enforced.  As we are discovering now, the Pima County Sheriff, Dupnik (pronounced DIPSTICK) was well aware of Loughner's background and mental state but chose to do nothing.  As a matter of fact Dupnik is on record as saying arresting Loughner would only make the problem worse.  One simple arrest would have prevented him from legally purchasing a firearm.  Could he still have acquired one?  Sure, but not as easily as Pima County law enforcement made it.

    The answer to every problem is not a new law.  It's responsibility and enforcement.

    1. Aficionada profile image93
      Aficionadaposted 6 years ago in reply to this



      I heard some of this recently (not the last sentence, though).  But it certainly does put Dupnik's Saturday comments in a different light, doesn't it?  At least, I think so.  Can you say "red herring"?

      Also, one news report mentioned the huge jump in background checks for gun purchases in Arizona (60-something % increase over last year at this time) - as if perhaps people there are scared and want to have a form of self-protection.  I think, instead, that the increase could be due to the sheriff's department or police departments rushing to clear out a backlog of applications, since they obviously bear some of the blame in Loughner's case.

    2. profile image0
      Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I agree totally.
      We have laws and laws to explain the other laws and laws to partially repeal other laws and it takes a lawyer to even know any of it and the average person can't even go to Court and get a fair hearing unless they have a lawyer, and half the time police and even Judges don't even know the laws.  It's a mess.

    3. Ron Montgomery profile image61
      Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      You need to know the applicable laws of the State of Arizona before making such a comment.  You have posted FoxNews taliking points rather than doing your own research.  You cannot be barred from owning a firearm over a "simple arrest".  I carry a firearm in this state, and as most of you know I am totally nuts.

      Our state laws, thanks to the NRA, are woefully inadequate no matter the level of enforcement to prevent situations like this.

      The NRA is currently pushing legislation that would make it incredibly difficult for the ATF to close down gun shops even after they've knowingly sold handguns to people without running the required FBI check.

      1. Jim Hunter profile image61
        Jim Hunterposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        "Our state laws, thanks to the NRA, are woefully inadequate no matter the level of enforcement to prevent situations like this."

        If your laws are inadequate the only people to blame are the legislators and yourselves.

        1. Ron Montgomery profile image61
          Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Neither I nor my representative is to blame.

          Glenn Beck is on soon isn't he?

          1. Jim Hunter profile image61
            Jim Hunterposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Wouldn't know, I have a job, other than getting payed for how many times I can use the word rhetoric,vitriol, and inflamed.

            How much for Beck?

            1. Ron Montgomery profile image61
              Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              It's pretty good, I believe second only to gerbil.  Is standing on the corner screaming that the appocolypse is coming actually a job?

              1. Jim Hunter profile image61
                Jim Hunterposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Probably not as lucrative as screaming the apocalypse is coming and its Sarah Palins fault, but it pays the bills.

                1. habee profile image90
                  habeeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Wait...I thought it was Bush's fault? Bet W is relieved!

                2. Ron Montgomery profile image61
                  Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Stating the obvious does not pay well...

    4. Misha profile image74
      Mishaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      How exactly are you going to enforce that many laws on the same subject? I bet there are quite a few contradictions between them, and that makes enforcement difficult if at all possible. May be less laws is the answer?

  2. tritrain profile image74
    tritrainposted 6 years ago

    I agree.

    Consistent background checks, training by qualified people, etc should be required.  Especially for carry permits.

    Before more bills are put out there and laws are enacted, I'd like to see careful thought by our legislators.

    1. tobey100 profile image60
      tobey100posted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Exactly.  Here in Tennessee, by strictly adhering to the statutes and enforcing the same, we haven't had a crime involving a firearm that was legally purchased since November of 1998.  I know that to be fact as the unit responsible for guns sales in Tennessee is one of mine.

  3. habee profile image90
    habeeposted 6 years ago

    I agree, too. Better enforcement - not more laws.

  4. DaveL profile image82
    DaveLposted 6 years ago

    Well, here in the UK guns are pretty much illegal to everyone, but we still have the odd madman with a gun rampage, just last year in fact. And then when they don't have access to guns, we've seen examples of people using swords and knifes.

    1. tritrain profile image74
      tritrainposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      You there stop...or...or...I'll yell stop again!

      1. tobey100 profile image60
        tobey100posted 6 years ago in reply to this

        lol lol  As Monty Python would say, "I'll taunt you a second time."

      2. John Holden profile image60
        John Holdenposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Aw, sorry I shot you in the head mate. I thought for a second that your red car was my red car and you were trying to steal it!

        1. tritrain profile image74
          tritrainposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          big_smile

          1. DaveL profile image82
            DaveLposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            LOL - the hooligans are loose!

  5. BobbiRant profile image59
    BobbiRantposted 6 years ago

    If all people only purchased guns legally we would not have as many problems.  While a great many people go to gun stores, too many more buy them on the streets from the trunks of cars, illegally.  In NY state, where I live, a 14 year old boy shot a police officer in the back of the head.  Obviously NY State is not selling legal guns to 14 year old children.  In a perfect world, those gun laws might work.

    1. tritrain profile image74
      tritrainposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I agree, however in a perfect world we wouldn't need guns to defend ourselves.

      1. Rajab Nsubuga profile image61
        Rajab Nsubugaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Prevention is better than cure. In the first instance why would you need a gun? Davel mentioned that in some instances it is the knives and not the gun. The violence in society can not be curbed out by mere laws, solidarity can. And it can take the form of organic or mechnical. Take for instance in the UK where it is not written law but rather the customs of society that govern. If we need protection from our fellow men then we could as well be the cause of violence.

        1. habee profile image90
          habeeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Why would you need a gun? How about for hunting for meat? It's rather difficult to stab a deer, or to kill doves and quail by throwing rocks at them.

          1. John Holden profile image60
            John Holdenposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Get a lot of meat on the hoof in New York do you?

            1. habee profile image90
              habeeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              New York?? Never been there. Our woods here in the South are full of game. It's free, it's organic, and the animals don't have to suffer a life of confinement or the horrors of the slaughterhouse.

              1. kirstenblog profile image77
                kirstenblogposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                If I am ever in your neck of the woods, you know I am going to hit you up for some of that wild meat! lol

              2. Aficionada profile image93
                Aficionadaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Absolutely true.

                Here, we are so overrun with deer (beautiful, but also plentiful) that our Department of Natural Resources encourages the hunting season in order to thin the herd, so that their numbers will not create starvation because of competing for the food supply.

                In my urban neighborhood, we had a herd of deer living for a while.  Some recent construction has apparently encouraged them to move elsewhere, but I always worried about having antlers around rambunctious children.

                I personally know a man who has a special agricultural hunting permit that allows him to bag a larger number of deer (larger than ordinary permits) to keep them off of his farmland.  One year, he shot close to 100.  He processed all of them and donated the meat to homeless shelters in the area.

              3. John Holden profile image60
                John Holdenposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                A light jibe at the many millions of Americans who live in cities and never see any wild life at all. Why do they need guns for game?

                1. Aficionada profile image93
                  Aficionadaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Maybe because they take a hunting vacation in Minnesota or Colorado?

                2. Ron Montgomery profile image61
                  Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  We don't need them for game.  We need them because everyone else has them.

                  It's like playing musical chairs, only deadlier.  You don't want to be the only one without.

          2. Ron Montgomery profile image61
            Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            But a lot more sporting.  I have been busy this year arming elk herds and training them to shoot back ( I've had to modify the rifles to accomidate the hoof)

            1. habee profile image90
              habeeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Do you eat meat, Ron? If so, I assure you that wild hunted animals have a much more sporting chance than the cattle, pigs, and chickens you consume! lol

              1. Ron Montgomery profile image61
                Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                You would think so, but no I give the critters a running start before I lop their heads off.  Like all great predators at the top of the food chain, I prey on the slow and weak.

                1. Jim Hunter profile image61
                  Jim Hunterposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Your RHETORIC and VITRIOL is INFLAMING me.

                  1. Ron Montgomery profile image61
                    Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Not to worry, you are fast and strong.

  6. Rajab Nsubuga profile image61
    Rajab Nsubugaposted 6 years ago

    I think owning a gun is rather a simplistic way of solving real problems. Some people acquire guns to cut the long arm of the law short. They are lawless elements who want to flag the banner of protection to do crime. If they really want wild meat, why not seek the services of a ranger? Habee?

  7. Evan G Rogers profile image82
    Evan G Rogersposted 6 years ago

    This is how freedom dies.

    Some nut shoots someone, then they blame free-speech.

    Then they call it a safety requirement to ban speech.

    Then we become slaves.

    1. fits3x100 profile image59
      fits3x100posted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Indeed, sacrificing freedom on the alter of security.
      I'm not really fond of concealed weapons. I think we should all wear them...visibly. An armed society is a polite society, (Wyatt Earp). If I had to face an armed public when I set out to create mayhem? hmmm...
      The only difficulty I see here is a  lack education and morals. I have a young teen aged son that's has shot competitively for a number of years. He would never jeopardize his right to someday own his own firearms by using them in a dangerous or unsafe or illegal manner...but, if he, or some other student like him had been in that classroom in Virginia? The number of young innocent victims would have been dramatically reduced.
      Common citizens, properly trained, and approved for "duty" by law enforcement could dramatically reduce the desire to "make a statement"...the risk of sudden and certain death has a way of curbing stupidity. Just think, nobody knows who the 4 students are...but they are armed and deadly and embedded in that lecture hall...how many rounds can you get off before the lights go out and your statement remains forever unsaid?

      1. Rajab Nsubuga profile image61
        Rajab Nsubugaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        'Am not bothered if it ain't me.' Is that freedom? Having an armed society does not make any one of us immune to bullets. Rather we are only helped to look at the symptoms and not addressing the real causes. In the first place, how did we get to this? Violence begets violence. If for a moment you think that the solution is the gun then think again on how a gun will restore your life.

        1. Evan G Rogers profile image82
          Evan G Rogersposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          You're right!

          Police Should NOT carry guns - after all, violence begets violence!

          1. Rajab Nsubuga profile image61
            Rajab Nsubugaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Neither am I an anarchist.

            1. fits3x100 profile image59
              fits3x100posted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Pencils do not make spelling errors. Guns don't hurt people. You are correct in that there is a deep and fundamental problem. We are raising children that consider themselves to be without significant value. How can we expect them to value others. The crazy thing is this...we teach kids that they are just the "lucky" monkeys. There is no great mind with a designed purpose for you. No eternity. No consequences. What you see is what you get. He who dies with the most toys wins. Hmmm, does it really surprise  anyone that people are stomping the life out of other people?
              Police should not carry guns? Tell ya what...go ahead and dislike or even hate dangerous men...until you need one.

              1. Rajab Nsubuga profile image61
                Rajab Nsubugaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Rogers feeds on twisted logic. The police are mandated to keep law and order and not to cause violence. I hope Rogers is not advocating for a society of 'a jack of all trades.'

                1. Stump Parrish profile image60
                  Stump Parrishposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Why is it that so many people favor prohibition in this country. It didn't work with alcohol, it sure isn't working with marijuana so it's obviously the correct fix all for guns. Some people have a problem with something and since they cant control themselves they want the government to remove every shred of it's existance from their tempted little brains and presence. Regulation, control and proper enforcement is whats needed, for all three, not to put the whole country in timeout. Grow up and accept responsibility for your own actions and pretty please with sugar on top,  leave me to take responsibility for mine.

                  1. habee profile image90
                    habeeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    You know the old adage - "If guns are outlawed..."

 
working