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.
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.
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.
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.
"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.
Neither I nor my representative is to blame.
Glenn Beck is on soon isn't he?
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?
It's pretty good, I believe second only to gerbil. Is standing on the corner screaming that the appocolypse is coming actually a job?
Probably not as lucrative as screaming the apocalypse is coming and its Sarah Palins fault, but it pays the bills.
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?
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.
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.
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.
You there stop...or...or...I'll yell stop again!
As Monty Python would say, "I'll taunt you a second time."
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!
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.
I agree, however in a perfect world we wouldn't need guns to defend ourselves.
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.
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.
Get a lot of meat on the hoof in New York do you?
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.
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!
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.
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?
Maybe because they take a hunting vacation in Minnesota or Colorado?
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.
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)
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
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.
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?
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.
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?
'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.
Police Should NOT carry guns - after all, violence begets violence!
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.
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.'
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.
You know the old adage - "If guns are outlawed..."
That's the one I was thinking about. They prefer the one...do as I say and not as I do.
Amen Stump! Somehow I know this is just one of those area's of "un-education" that fires your gray matter up! Ya know? You and I usually view problems from slightly if not noticeably different vantage points...can we co-write a hub on this?
Fits, I cant argue with you on this. It sure seems to me that lack of education is the one common denominator in most of the problems this country faces.
Never considered writing anything with another. Could be interesting and it would be entertaining to attempt. Let me know what you have in mind.
by Michele Travis4 years ago
Some people already have a lot of guns. So if gun laws are passed, how will the government actually get guns away from people. Some guns are registered and some are not, how could the government find out,...
by Jack Lee9 days ago
With all the focus on the immigration and foreign travel this past week, another Trump's executive order focused on reducing gang violence in inner cities...Who could be against this?I wonder what the liberal left will...
by FreedomFighter334 years ago
In short the answer is no. Liberals say that less guns out in the people's hands the safer everyone will be, but the truth is the only people that will be safer are the criminals. There is a reason most mass...
by My Esoteric9 months ago
The NRA leadership (not most of NRA members) currently sees Gun Control as a stark Black and White issue. The NRA et al think that ANY step to keep guns out of the hands of those who shouldn't have them is ipso...
by Susie Lehto12 days ago
Infowars has documented the violent rhetoric of BLM, the New Black Panthers, and other groups that share their racist ideology: http://www.infowars.com/milwaukee-sheri … g-america/On Monday, Milwaukee County...
by Michael Collins3 years ago
We hear and read so many people saying what they don't want. It makes me wonder what do people think would help. Please if you are going to list them then use a number system or bullet points. Thank you.
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.