All talk and no action. A sad situation

Ok, I've got a suggestion. There is a constitutional right to "bear arms" in the US, right? So, is it permitted to buy your own tank? What about a nuclear bomb? Maybe just some land mines?

Do you see where I'm going on this? Obviously there is no absolute right to bear any type of armament in the US. So… what is the problem? Simply narrow the range of allowable weapons. Why do hunters need automatic weapons?

Oh and I've heard the mantra: "if you make guns criminal, then only criminals will have guns"

and "ordinary people need guns for the apocalyptic struggle with the government in the end times"

I think these two retreads expose more about the shortcomings of the present policy than they do about the sagacity of gun control. Consider balancing the safety and security of the victims of stolen guns, botched robberies, and violent crime with the amusement a few get out of shooting birds with weapons that were designed specifically to kill people.

With all due respect, the 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with target practice at Boy Scout camps---or hunting, for that matter. I live in a largely rural area of western Georgia, and I own handguns and rifles for self-protection---and I practice with them frequently. Daniel Boone I'm not, but I'm also not Steven Kazmierczak.

Frankly, I'm glad the two Democratic contenders are keeping mum about gun control, because if either of them begins to make unwelcome noises like "new gun-control laws" or "renewal of the assault-weapon ban", they will drive most gun owners into the McCain camp---and that could be the margin which will mean four more years of a Bush-like warmonger in the White House (possibly worse than Bush, at that).

What do you mean by an "automatic weapon", jlocke? Genuine automatic weapons are heavily restricted throughout the USA (the National Firearms Act of 1934), and it's exceedingly difficult to convert a semiautomatic weapon to selective fire or full auto. You need the parts, the tools, the expertise and the willingness to risk ten years of imprisonment, a hefty fine, and loss of RKBA for life, in order to have an unregistered automatic weapon made out of a perfectly legal semiauto.

I agree---there is no absolute RKBA. I wouldn't want hand grenades, Claymore mines or an RPG-7 in my house. But what's wrong with a semi-auto version of an AR-15 or an AK-47?

Paul_GA February 19th, 2008 12:41 pm:

"I own handguns and rifles for self-protection…they will drive most gun owners into the McCain camp"

Paul, I understand what you are saying about rural gun owners and self-protection. I also hear you on the tactics of not driving away voters who are gun owners.

What gives me difficulty is the long-term deleterious effect anti-people weapons have on, well, people. If politicians can't even bring up the subject in an election campaign then how will they get the mandate to make such lethal devices, maybe a little bit more scarce?

Gun free zones are a rich killing field. Concealed carry permits is the answer. Gun control (how to use safely) should be taught in our public schools starting in elementary with BB guns. The problem with guns is not enough people know how to use them and the less people know the more dangerous they become.

The more gun control laws you have in this country the more violence there will be. The American people are not going to let go of their guns. You want to see a black market more dangerous than the one we have now (drugs) just outlaw guns.

With the way people are treating each other in this country, denying their rights left and right, bullying and being downright rude and crude to others it's a wonder we aren't seeing even more violence as a whole. You want to control violence how about doing something to change the ratio of rich to poor and ending the war on drugs. That's where our real problem is.

Paul_GA February 19th, 2008 12:48 pm:

"What do you mean by an "automatic weapon", jlocke?"… But what's wrong with a semi-auto version of an AR-15 or an AK-47?

Paul, I'm no expert on the different weapons but I can see that it is part of the culture. Perhaps there is a way of enjoying one's favourite firearms and at the same time keeping track of them, not letting them get into the hands of bank robbers etc?

If we ban guns, gun violence will end.
If we ban penises, rape will end.

Obviously, guns and penises, or access to them, do not cause gun violence and rape.

Let's address the causes, some of which are racism, oppression, lack of access to education, health care, living wages, etc.
And certainly not least - the winner-take-all, sports, blood lust mentality of our culture.

jlocke: "What gives me difficulty is the long-term deleterious effect anti-people weapons have on, well, people. If politicians can't even bring up the subject in an election campaign then how will they get the mandate to make such lethal devices, maybe a little bit more scarce?" There's nothing to discuss! To an ever greater extent people nationwide are figuring out that the trick isn't to make the "lethal devices" more scarce but rather to make lethal devices omnipresent as in the hands of potential victims such that when the evil doer begins to unload on the innocent we make the "evil doers a little bit more scarce."

The second reality that most understand anymore that the anti-gun crowd is a racist crowd bent on depriving whitey and his family of there last line of defense. Take whitey's guns, then take his money, property, wife and kids. The gov't has been trying to do that since 1965 and has succeeded to some extent through the public school system. But the final act of Reparations for the Black Man can't be had until whitey totally disarmed and utterly dependent upon the Gov't for protection, i.e. the same gov't that does the taking.

jlocke123 February 19th, 2008 1:09 pm

"Paul, I'm no expert on the different weapons but I can see that it is part of the culture."

What culture are you talking about? Are you talking about a free America or the fascist police state we have become? We're near a breaking point and it's a good thing we have as many guns available to the average America citizen as we do. If it wasn't for guns I believe this country would already be in lock down.

You don't think guns are any match against a modern military, well you need to take a look at Iraq.

jlocke123 February 19th, 2008 1:00 pm

"What gives me difficulty is the long-term deleterious effect anti-people weapons have on, well, people."

What gives me difficulty is the long-term deleterious effect on how much more wealth the gross/greedy top one percent of the population can take from us before the average American citizen wakes up and says enough already.

Guns aren't our problem; the grossly wealthy and major corporations are our problem. The war on drugs (black Market) creates an environment that that results in eighty percent of the violent crime we have. Don't be misdirected and blame violence on guns because that's not the problem. Do something to increase the wages and opportunities of the poor, the lower middle class and end the war on drugs and watch violence drastically decrease.

Just a reminder, AND I already know that some of you wont believe this but a fact is a fact................
It is the 7 million (and more)legal, RESPONSIBLE Gun Owners in this country that is keeping these Liars in office from taking over completely at this time.
Dont forget that. Yeah, I know this guy in Il. was "legal" etc...... BUT we dont know everything do we? only what they decide to tell us.
Also would like to make clear that I, personally am sick to death of these manchurian candidates going into these schools, malls wherever and NO ONE does anything to even stop them! everyone goes and runs and hides!!!!!!!
yeah, I know he had a gun, but people need to start defending themselves and stop waiting for some one to come and help. because the help shows up tp late anyway. It is time for the people to start DEFENDING themselves.
Think of how many did'nt have to die if someone among them had the balls enough to get behind him and smack him the head w/ something! STOP BEING SO FRICKIN SCARED!
WE DO NOT COME FROM FEARFUL MEN! Remember who you are, and remember what our forefathers fought and died for.
Certainly Not for us to live in fear. Not like this.

luna February 19th, 2008 1:44 pm

"Also would like to make clear that I, personally am sick to death of these manchurian candidates going into these schools, malls wherever and NO ONE does anything to even stop them! everyone goes and runs and hides!!!!!!!"

Do "Gun-Free" Zones Encourage School Shootings?
by Larry Elder
Posted: 10/18/2007
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=22911#continueA

Edinboro, Pennsylvania. Staring into the owner's shotgun, the teen dropped his gun and surrendered.

Pearl, Mississippi. Ordering the teen to stop, the vice principal put his gun to the shooter's neck and held him until police arrived.

Grundy, Virginia. When the shooter turned and saw Bridges' gun, he laid down his weapon and put his hands in the air.

Israel gets it. Since the 1970s, on school campuses in Israel, policy requires teachers and parent aides to arm themselves with semi-automatic weapons. The result? School shootings have plummeted to zero.

Conceal carry permits and elimination of gun free zones.

glide625 February 19th, 2008 1:16 pm:

"There's nothing to discuss!"… "To an ever greater extent people nationwide are figuring out that the trick isn't to make the "lethal devices" more scarce but rather to make lethal devices omnipresent"…

Well, you sure told me:) Let me know when lethal devices are omnipresent.

rickster469 February 19th, 2008 1:34 pm:

"What culture are you talking about?"… "You don't think guns are any match against a modern military, well you need to take a look at Iraq."

I think that a reasonable person would conclude that I'm talking about American culture. I hope your vision of America isn't modeled on occupied Iraq.

I grew up in a house full of all kinds of guns but as time went by, I was no longer able to understand why anyone (except for a cop or someone carrying a lot of cash) NEEDED a handgun. And it is handguns - not rifles or shotguns - that are typically used in crime.
Articles and ads on handguns also seem to take up the majority of pages in the NRA magazine. But, really, why would an ordinary citizen ever need a psitol or a revolver?
I grant that it is fun to shoot at targets, but is that kind of fun worth the thousands of lives lost when these things get into the wrong hands?
It's time that handgun owners stopped being so defensive and started to feel guilty about how much damage their hobby is causing. Yes, it is a hobby and nothing more. Like tennis, kayaking, chess, motorcycling or whatever.
Only nobody is likely to get killed if my tennis racket falls into the wrong hands.

Wow, they even come out of the woodwork on Common Dreams! A few points:

NRA Freedom: "Curiously, prior to 1968, there was basically NO gun control in this country. And crime was low." Actually, the murder rate was slightly higher in 1967 compared to 2006 - 0.0062% vs 0.0057%. Citation: http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm

Paul_GA: "I own handguns and rifles for self-protection". Paul, I'm not be facetious, but what sort of self-protection do you need? And why more than one firearm? And why does anyone need a semi-automatic? I do understand why rural folks need some sort of firearm, by the way.

rickster469: "The more gun control laws you have in this country the more violence there will be". Not true. Britain has some of the strictest gun control laws in the world (even most of the police are unarmed), and their murder rate is 10 times lower than the US. Britain is a good comparison, because it culturally comparable to the US by European standards: i.e., large wealth divide, sizeable poor minority, multicultural urban areas, exposure to the same popular culture, etc.

zimmie53: "If we ban guns, gun violence will end.
If we ban penises, rape will end." An analogy which you go on to discredit. Dictionary definition: "the unlawful compelling of a woman through physical force or duress to have sexual intercourse." I think not having a penis would pretty much prevent this.

rickster469: "We're near a breaking point and it's a good thing we have as many guns available to the average America citizen as we do. If it wasn't for guns I believe this country would already be in lock down." I've seen this point so many times. Rick, the demographic of people you're talking about are the same people who voted Bush in twice. The same people who believe in wiretapping, torture and ending of habeus corpus. If the government came knocking at their door, the'd invite them in for ice cream and lemonade.

Finally, the idea of everyone being armed. Is this practical? What do you do in clubs and bars, where people get intoxicated? Do you expect 80 year old women to be packing heat to not get mugged? Also, the gunmen shoots first - the Illinois guy could have taken out the same number of people even if everybody were armed. Could an armed woman stop an armed rapist who grabs her from behind? Do you really believe that if everyboody was armed, there wouldn't be an increase in spontaneous gun death (emotional/spur of the moment/unpremeditated crimes)?

Valatius, excellent point.

Of course, gun control is not the answer. Everyone in the US should be able to carry weapons.
How can anybody dare to suggest that, the citizens of the most violent and deadly empire in the world, can't have the freedom to kill each other if that's what they want?

Whenever a shooting incident takes place in the US, the blame is turned not on the lack of gun control, but on the "mental health" of the killer. The question "how could a nine year old or a teen could get a gun" is never asked, but on the lack of security, so that the police will have a free reign in killing innocent Americans. California Attorney General Daniel E. Lungren made a statement back in 1995: "America is, by far, the most violent country in the world when measured against comparable, industrialized nations. Violence is deeply rooted in our society and has become woven into the fabric of the American lifestyle. A culture of violence has emerged that invades our lives at every level, from our most intimate relationships at home to our schools and work environments. For many of us, violence has become an acceptable strategy for solving conflict, exerting power and control, obtaining possessions, and satisfying emotional desires. Moreover, violence has itself become entertainment, glamorized in the behavior of both real and fantasy heroes."

Who is to blame, when the government itself is promoting the culture of violence. One of the subjects that American politicians dare not touch without risking burned fingers, is Gun Control. This subject is guarded by the most powerful lobbies in Washington and a political career can be dashed on the rocks by calling for gun control to protect Americans who are suffering from their own violence.
US Children are ten times more likely to die from gunfire than in 25 industrialized nations combined.In 2004, 81 people were shot dead every day in the US according the US center for decease control. 29,569 were killed by firearms that year. Data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention also reveals that every day nearly eight children or teens are killed by gun violence in America which adds up to about 235 each month. "Where did they get the guns?" That is the question gun control advocates continue to ask. Everyone knows the answer, but no one wants to express it or apply it, particularly the promoter of the culture of violence, the US government and the US politicians.

bidelo February 19th, 2008 3:56 pm

"Not true. Britain has some of the strictest gun control laws in the world (even most of the police are unarmed), and their murder rate is 10 times lower than the US."

Gun Control's Twisted Outcome
Restricting firearms has helped make England more crime-ridden than the U.S.
http://www.reason.com/news/show/28582.html

"On a June evening two years ago, Dan Rather made many stiff British upper lips quiver by reporting that England had a crime problem and that, apart from murder, "theirs is worse than ours."

"The Mirror conceded that the CBS anchorman was correct. Except for murder and rape, it admitted, "Britain has overtaken the US for all major crimes."

"In the two years since Dan Rather was so roundly rebuked, violence in England has gotten markedly worse."

Would you like to see some information on Australia? You do the research. Ever hear of home invasions there rampant in Australia now days.

"Rick, the demographic of people you're talking about are the same people who voted Bush in twice."

No I'm not. You want to know the truth I think more democrats believe in gun owner ship that republicans do. Most of the republican leaders really would like to see the guns removed from us poor democrats. That's why pro-gun control democrats take a beating in elections.

"Finally, the idea of everyone being armed. Is this practical?"

Yes and no but every body needs to be educated about gun use and safe handling. Education would go along why toward reducing the number of gun deaths in this country.

"What do you do in clubs and bars, where people get intoxicated?"

What were doing now, you would be surprised how many people carry everywhere. Most gun violence in bars is caused by gangs or drug dealers whose only power source is the black market of illegal drugs.

"Do you expect 80 year old women to be packing heat to not get mugged?"

It has happened and she didn't get mugged.

"Do you really believe that if everyboody was armed, there wouldn't be an increase in spontaneous gun death (emotional/spur of the moment/unpremeditated crimes)?"

Nope I don't believe there would be much of an increase. Anyway I'm not advocating every body be armed just every body be educated in the safe use and handling of guns. Big difference.

Do the research you will find many studies like the following.

Guns and Violence
Miguel A. Faria, Jr., MD
http://www.haciendapub.com/edcor12.html

"Recent scholarship in the criminologic, sociologic, and legal literature shows that the defensive uses of firearms by citizens amount to 2.5 million uses per year and dwarf the offensive gun uses by criminals. Between 25-75 lives are saved by a gun for every life lost to a gun. Medical costs saved by guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens are 15 times greater than costs incurred by criminal uses of firearms. Guns also prevent injuries to good people and protect billions of dollars of property every year."

deepa February 19th, 2008 5:09 pm

"US Children are ten times more likely to die from gunfire than in 25 industrialized nations combined."

Do you think economical well being of the common citizens of those nations has anything to do with it? I do.

Lets take a look at some other facts here for comparison.

Guns and Violence
Miguel A. Faria, Jr., MD
http://www.haciendapub.com/edcor12.html

"In Prof. Lott's survey, children 14 to 15 years of age were found to be 14.5 times more likely to die from automobile injuries, 5 times more likely to die from drowning or fire and burns, and 3 times more likely to die from bicycle accidents than they are to die from gun accidents."

Should we outlaw children riding in automobiles and on bicycles?

And then there's this

"Data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention also reveals that every day nearly eight children or teens are killed by gun violence in America which adds up to about 235 each month."

A lot of that violence is due to the black market of drugs. I've seen numbers that support the fact that the black market of illegal drugs kills more people than the use of those illegal drugs.

You want to see a drastic decrease in gun violence in this country? End prohibition.

It's too easy to blame an element then it is to look at the overall problem.

Try to take my gun means you will have to come on to my property. Come on to my property and attempt to take what I have a right to own, and I'll shoot you in the face.

I'm not what I would consider a violent person. I've never carried a gun in public and I've never even gone hunting. But I continually find it fascinating how no one is willing to touch upon the primary reason why we have the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution. I don't keep a gone in my home for fear of robbers, so much as a fear of my own government -which is first and foremost the reason behind this Amendment. And if anyone thinks for a second that this current administration has not given me reason to fear my government, well, I'd say you've been living under a rock for the past eight years.

Don't tread on me!

I hope the author, Derreck Jackson is reading all this.

Clinton and Obama are wise to steer clear of this issue. "leadership" is of no use in such a drastically divided debate.

If reducing gun violence is a cause you believe in, then get active in a grass-roots effort. Elected leaders will join only when we demonstrate that is is safe to do so.

I think we should talk to our law-abiding gun-owning neighbors about their "frontier" mentality. They seem to be fixated on the "last line of defense", and largely unconcerned with the first, second and third lines of defense.

Of course, the balance between personal responsibility and social responsibility remains at the heart of most political issues.

rickster469, thank you for your clear and point-by-point rebuttal. I read the Reason article, and I haven't looked up statistics, but I am quite willing to believe crime rates for everything "except murder and rape" are higher in England than America. I'm not arguing that, the theme of the discussion here is murder and it's staggeringly lower in England. In fact, the fact that other crimes are greater or comparable to the US, and murder stands out as being much lower - a clear anomaly - only serves to bolster my argument.

In terms of clubs and bars, you advocate "what we are doing now". Well that would be a gun-free environment wouldn't it? Most clubs, at least, search people before entry. Even in states like Arizona, you must check your gun in before entering a bar.

"I think more democrats believe in gun owner ship that republicans do". You've got to know that's not true. This survey says democrats favor stricter gun control by 72 to 41 percent. http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=498.

"Do you expect 80 year old women to be packing heat to not get mugged?" "It has happened and she didn't get mugged." Look, I'm sure it has, anybody can dredge up such anecdotes. But I'm talking about in general. Any reasonable person would know that an 80 year old is no match for a young, male mugger under most circumstances.

And I know what your going to say, that she would at least have a chance, the mugger's going to be armed anyway. But that's not the pretext behind gun control. The idea is that you have a society where there are so few guns in circulation, that it's likely the criminal also isn't armed. It's de-escalation. (And I know that might be unrealistic for the US at this point).

And then the argument that other causes of death are high in comparison. Those other causes of death tend to result from life-enhancing activities. People swim for pleasure, people drive to go to work or visit friends. The use of gun can only result in life-degrading outcomes, unless the person misses!

Ouroboros: "I don't keep a gone (sic) in my home for fear of robbers, so much as a fear of my own government -which is first and foremost the reason behind this Amendment". If you think all those other gun owners are going to be on your side, think again. As long as Bush is in power, they'll be shooting you on behalf of the government.

Gun control...definately a hot issue, especially here on CD. I guess if one must take sides I have to take the pro-gun side. I too live in a rural area and possess guns for both recreation and self defense. I grew up around firearms and fortunately, have never known anyone who has injured anyone or been injured themself.

I do understand the reason so many who post here are for extreme controls on firearms, especially after such tragedies such as Colombine, Virginia Tech, Univ of Northern Illinois, etc. Unfortunately, I don't think placing tight restrictions on guns will have much of an effect on gun violence. First of all, the majority of people who purchase guns legally are very responsible in their use. Second, this country has had the option of gun ownership since it was founded, it would be EXTREMELY difficult to attempt to enforce strict regulations on any kind of firearm simply because of the numbers that are already under private ownership. Third, the only result strict ownership regulations will have is the same as atrict drug regulations have had...a resulting black market with no regulation whatsoever.

There are plenty of existing laws on the books regarding crime and guns. What needs to be done is to enforce the existing laws and keep the guns out of the hands of those who pose a threat. I have no personal problem with background checks being required prior to the purchase of any gun, and I have no problem with those who have had past problems with mental illness being denied gun ownership. There is a common ground where the general population can feel secure without interfereing with a law abiding and mentally sound person'e right to own a firearm.

Unfortunately, there is no solution to the "gun" problem. This is a violent society, a racist society, a criminal war society. Nothing will change the heart of humankind, nothing will make the desparate peaceful, or the greedly honest.

Bidelo, I happen to like firearms. They're not just tools for self-defense, they are things to be enjoyed, like some collect cars, or model planes, or antiques. I collect firearms, and I don't see anything wrong with it. As I stated above, I'm not Daniel Boone, but I'm also not Steven Kazmierczak (the Northern Illinois killer).

In my case, I like semi-autos because I fire rifles left-handed, and though most of my rifles are bolt-actions, all of them are made for right-handed shooters (they are, in fact, former military firearms like Lee-Enfields, Moisin-Nagants, and MAS-36's). My two semi-autos are just the ticket for me, as they eject their spent cartridges up and away from my face, and are easy to use, lefty or righty.

I happen to be partially disabled, and using a telephone is difficult for me. So I have to protect myself. And even if I could use a telephone easily, what's the guarantee that the sheriff's department will arrive in time? So the choice is clear---depend on yourself, not others, for your safety.

Understandable?

I used to be big on gun control, but no more, not with these criminals in charge of government. If government finally starts to go big for gun control, it's time to head for the exits.

Next time you see or hear about a mall shooting or school shooting, which always seems to be a prelude to a vote on some legislation like the "veterans disarmament act" or the Homegrown Terrorism Act, do a little reading on MK ULTRA, and given the fact that all these shooters were on anti-depressants, see if you can associate the two. Then ask yourself, given the number of people about to lose their homes and who are unhappy with the war, and some of them would be on anti-depressants, isn't it strange that the shootings happen in malls and schools and not anywhere else?

Of course, the small number of these events makes this fact statistically insignificant, and if they are all isolated cases and just some nut jobs acting on their own, then nothing to worry about. However, I just have a hunch there is some company out there wanting to install metal detectors in every mall and school, and someone might be helping them.

The right wingers now say, well, McCain isn't great, but he's a hell of a lot better than Hillary or Obama. They know where there interests are and they know, for instance on gun control, that their guy will do what he's supposed to. Why can't we get our act together? Do we really want four more years of war, guns, and all the rest? Do we want more young republican "strict constructionists" on the Supreme Court?

If your interest in gun control, your interest is better represented by Hillary or Obama, not McCain. Less people will die. But don't expect Hillary or Obama to throw red meat to the right wing. The idea is not to stir up the hornets. Also, studies by unions have shown that their members will vote for gun rights over their heath care and jobs. Pretty stupid, but that's how it is.

If we win, we can decide these things. We'll have the power. Let's win it.

bidelo February 19th, 2008 7:17 pm

"Most clubs, at least, search people before entry"

Are they still in business? I bet there not. I have been to clubs and bars in more than a few states including Arizona and I've never been searched before entry to the bar. Don't get me wrong I've never carried a gun just to be carrying a gun but I know some people who do. I have personally witnessed a gun being pulled in self-defense several times but I've yet to witness a gun being actually used in self defense or by a criminal. Most people don't take pulling a gun lightly. Criminals well their crooks what can I say.

Me "I think more democrats believe in gun owner ship that republicans do".

bidelo "You've got to know that's not true. This survey says democrats favor stricter gun control by 72 to 41 percent."

You know, surveys can be rigged. I would be willing to bet that survey was rigged. Most of the democrat's I know own guns, most of the republicans I know don't. Another reason I believe that survey was rigged is because democrat leaders who support gun control usually don't get elected. Gun control had an impact on reagan and both bushes getting elected. They called them reagan democrats but I called them gun owners. Hey ever since the democrats got off of the gun control band wagon they started getting elected again. I'm serious.

"And I know what your going to say, that she would at least have a chance, the mugger's going to be armed anyway."

Actually most muggers aren't armed. There's quite a bit of serving time difference between armed and strong-arm robbery. She would have a better chance if she didn't do something stupid by putting herself in a place that increases your chance of getting mugged. Greedy unscrupulous illegal drug dealers commit most of the violent gun crimes in this country.

Lets get off of blaming guns and lets get on and solve the real reasons for violence in this country. The war on drugs needs to end now. Economic opportunity (a living wage), proper education (free technical training to any who ask for it), smaller neighborhood public schools, these are the type of solutions to stopping violent crime.

"People swim for pleasure ……..The use of gun can only result in life-degrading outcomes, unless the person misses!"

Hey I like to shoot guns for pleasure. If you take that away from me then lets outlaw swimming. What do you like to do? Lets outlaw that. You can outlaw guns and nothing will change except the crooks will start using baseball bats. Opps, that's already taking place.

Once again guns aren't the cause of violent crimes.

There's an authoritarian "left" and an authoritarian "right". Both want to strip back their own share of the Bill of Rights. They agree that people should have little or no power (surrender to the State or to the Corporation). Or to the modern corporo-state hybrid.

Who needs guns so badly and why? Some Men. For whom Something Is Missing. Maybe if they are afraid of the dark they should buy a nightlight.

Unless it is more about hate and being insecure sexually, for that, they need other help.

Think Frued coulda got some mileage outa this? Oh man.

Show us a tyranny which occurred historically where there existed a well-armed populace.

Demonstrate lots of evidence that the present government is incredibly honest.

Case closed.

"Frankly, I'm glad the two Democratic contenders are keeping mum about gun control, because if either of them begins to make unwelcome noises like "new gun-control laws" or "renewal of the assault-weapon ban", they will drive most gun owners into the McCain camp"

that's exactly what will happen and probably what i'd do if the dem's put more gun control bullshit out

I have a few guns myself (not revolvers,which have little use except to kill people or target shoot). However in our county we have had quite a number of accidental shooting deaths and also a number of suicides, so it is serious business.

Personally, if there is so great a need to defend ourselves, I would prefer guns to be carried in plain sight, as in the old west days. It bothers me to not have any idea who has the ability to end my life over a possible mistake in identity or carelessness. With the mentality many people now have thanks to GWB, it may become shoot first and ask questions later (the pre-emtive policy).

Are we really regressing to the idea that no one can be trusted so we have a gun on one side and a taser on the other to take care of them? That is going to be a lovely society for our kids and grandkids to grow up in. We can throw out Mother Goose and replace it with Rambo stories, which may already be the case, with violent video games that kids must have.

Then the problem is the untamed brute, the educational system, the f'd up society which will not pay teachers a decent salary, loss of a sense of civic responsibility, unwillingness to teach conflict resolution, emphasize teamwork, the overall decay of our culture.

It has little to do with weapons. They're merely a response to a problem, not the cause. Anyone arguing otherwise is trying to disarm an already-dying democracy or drive a wedge between populists and Middle America (seen a lot of that lately). The authoritarian "left" seems to be stuck on a few notes:

* disarm the populace.
* instill a sense of self-loathing blanket/racist guilt for the (VERY REAL) genocide committed against Native Americans and slaves. We're supposed to associate ourselves with the tyrant perpetrators, rather than our own peasant great-grandparents who were oppressed by the same Empire and came here to flee it. God forbid that poor hispanics, whites, Native Americans, blacks, etc. began to think along class, rather than racial/creed, lines.
* drop us off at the door of vague WTF's, head-banging, fear-mongering, protesting. Instead of genuine expressions of grassroots power: citizen's councils, Article V, secession, etc.
* ensure that race and other issues wedge apart populists of various demographics.
* Hanoi Jane's, etc. to discredit the peace movement.
etc...

In a sense, the old-guard "left" (whoever they are -- Stalinists, CIA, who really gives a shit at this point?) haven't really changed their tune.

Now is the time to maximize liberty. To look at the entire Bill of Rights, reaffirm them. To empower and embolden people, to move beyond Cold War framing, arrogant and authoritarian de-powerment, etc. It just doesn't "work" any more.

Guns Guns Guns!
In this land where few even invite their neighbors down the street for a picnic.
Guns are suppost to be our solution.
and when you look at what the haves have to the have nots in this country.Having guns available just might be a good reason for both tribes.
I mean the rich want to protect their pocessions and the poor certainly do not want too starve to death.
You know this is far from the same country that which I grew up in the 1950'and 60's
People .Families lived in one place . Neighbors on Your street even knew your dog's name.
Back then most hunters used shot guns to hunt . And hunters did not have to carry a pistol because of snakes .
The only pistols remember back then were the ones in the westerns on TV and of course the police.
I saw it written in some book oh maybe in the 1970;s about our gun toting cowboys of the wild west. They said that many of those gunfights were really assinations of some poor soul that was drunk . And that many of the killing were actually back shootings.
And do not forget what we Whites did to the Natiive Americans that made the mistake of coming into town unarmed. Or the blacks for that matter.
These rose coloured glasses people lol. I wonder if there are any stats about those Cowboys coming off a long cattle drive going into town shooting their guns in the air,
How many of those bullets came down and injured or killed humans or animals?
You still see it today here in the USA people shooting into the air.
No my friends guns have actually made this country worse.
It was far better when to kids use to duke it out in the school yard.
Me I fought some fights and some of those kids I fought are still life long friends.

Pulling the trigger is final, That bullet will go somewhere.
I believe it was back in The Clinton Administration that Scientist developed a hand gun that could only be fired by it;s owner. What Happen? Asked The NRA. By the way Those Guns which their owner could only fire? Also protected him or her to the right to Bear Arms

The stated purpose of the Second Amendment is to maintain a "well regulated militia". Hamilton and Jefferson were deathly afraid of a military coup d'etat, which they thought could be prevented by de jure civilian control of a weak and virtually nonexistent standing army (which is why America relied upon the State Militia system right up through WWI), and if that failed, by a well-armed citizenry willing to defend their Constitution, armed with weapons which were analogous to, and often superior, to military ones.

Today America spends more on their military than the rest of the planet combined, and our democracy is dead, buried, and supplanted by a circle jerk of the military, the oligarchs, and their groveling whores in Washington; the military-Congressional-industrial complex.
Private corporations like Blackwater are raising their own corporate mercenary armies, complete with mechanized armor and attack aircraft, and KBR is busily building corporate concentration camps with your tax dollars.
It's abundantly clear that the Second Amendment can't possibly serve it's originally intended purpose, but as our beloved President has said, the Constitution of the United States is "just a goddamned piece of paper" anyway.

The current situation argues more for keeping high capacity assault weapons than banning them, no matter how Quixotic such a gesture might be.

"Recent scholarship in the criminologic, sociologic, and legal literature shows that the defensive uses of firearms by citizens amount to 2.5 million uses per year and dwarf the offensive gun uses by criminals. Between 25-75 lives are saved by a gun for every life lost to a gun. Medical costs saved by guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens are 15 times greater than costs incurred by criminal uses of firearms." - -rickster469

This is the kind of patent bullshit that American gun-huggers constantly spout. Patent bullshit, incidentally, which only Americans--unquestionably the most ignorant, suggestible and backward people in the developed world--believe.

As a Dutch European, I can only give my opinion as an outsider, but in Holland it's very hard to legally own a gun and I think it's great. If I worried about my safety and thought I needed a gun to feel safe again, I would have to carry it around all the time!! I, off course, am a responsible person, just like everybody else. Getting into an argument with someone who has just had a bad day, while that person is carrying a gun, might lead to all kinds of misunderstandings, causing one of us to shoot and kill the other, just by "accident". If cigarettes are considered bad for your health, why not guns?

"This is the kind of patent bullshit that American gun-huggers constantly spout. Patent bullshit, incidentally, which only Americans–unquestionably the most ignorant, suggestible and backward people in the developed world–believe."

and never discussing the cases where a firearm has saved someone's life is what the gun hating disarmament nutbags also do. if you don't want to own a gun, fine, but stop spouting your own brand of bullshit to try to convince others. i've known cases where it did save a life and so I know all these comments from these armchair pundits are nothing but their own opinion and nothing else.

great post, Paul Bramscher. the authoritarian left is as much a tyranny as the right wing that they hate. i don't see any more freedom under their ideals.

Al Gore talked about gun control until he lost in 2000.
The last thing we need is a repeat of that. Win first.

godlessrant,

The authoritarian effect is a ping-pong ball match. Authoritarians control the "right", and set up extraordinarily foolish actions on the "left" -- to push people back to the "right". It's a frying-pan vs. fire choice for most people. They see the world in metaphorical binary terms, with bad choices on both sides.

We need to dispel the left/right myth. Let's talk deliverables of liberty, nuts-and-bolts policy, power to the people.

I am puzzled how gun control became a left position. Listen people the right are uparming, the FBI has deputized "Infraguard" private industry to shoot to kill with no consequences and we are sitting around talking gun control?

WTF? Do you think they were talking gun control in Franco's Spain in 1936? Do you think the Iraqi resistance to American imperialism is talking gun control? Wake up people the right wing is playing for keeps, are we on the left playing for keeps as well or will we just die like sheep?

hootowl,

You just stated why left/right are nebulous, but then you dropped back into that mode for your final analysis.

There is power and wealth. And there is powerlessness and poverty. These things are demonstrable, quantifiable, objective. We don't need any more wedges among the bottom 90% (worldwide).

WmC February 20th, 2008 9:26 am

WmC left out the link to the quote he commented about so here it is. I don't think WmC wants any body to actually read the article he's calling bullshit.

Guns and Violence
Miguel A. Faria, Jr., MD
http://www.haciendapub.com/edcor12.html

"Recent scholarship in the criminologic, sociologic, and legal literature shows that the defensive uses of firearms by citizens amount to 2.5 million uses per year and dwarf the offensive gun uses by criminals. Between 25-75 lives are saved by a gun for every life lost to a gun. Medical costs saved by guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens are 15 times greater than costs incurred by criminal uses of firearms. Guns also prevent injuries to good people and protect billions of dollars of property every year."

WmC's comment about the above quote from the article "Guns and Violence" by Miguel A. Faria, Jr., MD.

"This is the kind of patent bullshit that American gun-huggers constantly spout. Patent bullshit, incidentally, which only Americans–unquestionably the most ignorant, suggestible and backward people in the developed world–believe."

I doubt that WmC can provide any article with a source of references that supports the pro gun control group. They always bring up one sometimes two pieces of information /facts without linking to the source of the information. When they do link to an article there never are any references to the source of information that the author used to base his opinion for the article.

People like WmC will use all sorts of incomplete information to push their agenda. People like WmC wear blinders so that they can hide from the truth.
People like WmC don't want people to hear the truth.

WmC the quote above is not bullshit unless you consider fact bullshit.

Considering all the facts there is no evidence to support for gun control and there is plenty of evidence against gun control.

Gun control is in essence and act of violence against the rights of others.

I'm in favor of some reasonable licensing & testing for gun ownership; but not the typical bans that we've seen fail time and time again. Washington D.C. anybody? Total failure and a prime example of why NOT to pursue this tactic.

What I fear is a "Rosie O'Donnell" approach, where guns should be banned, for everybody but "ME!"

Such hypocracy.

pdf February 21st, 2008 5:42 am

"I'm in favor of some reasonable licensing & testing for gun ownership"

If our city, county, and federal weren't so damn corrupt; nope I still couldn't go for it. Teach gun safety to every one and in the public schools that I would agree too.

Continuing to look outside oneself may provide a fleeting remedy, but never a cure. Many thousands of years of evidence confirm this. Guns are not the cause of violence any more than are knives, rocks or sticks.

It took me 50 years to learn this-

Heat is energy. Cold is not. Cold is simply the relative absence of heat. One cannot manufacture a machine that produces cold. To make something cold, remove the heat.

Light is energy. Darkness is not. Darkness is simply the relative absence of light. One cannot manufacture a machine that produces darkness. To make something dark, remove the light.

Compassion (love) is energy. Evil is not. Evil is the relative absence of compassion. To make something evil, remove compassion.

The degree to which one lacks compassion is the degree to which one serves evil. This is true regardless of religious beliefs, political alignment or anything else.

Imagine yourself in a giant auditorium with all of the lights turned off. Total darkness. In your hand is a flashlight. A flick of the thumb sends a beam through the darkness. While the flashlights beam is not infinitely powerful, all of the darkness in the universe, if you could bring it into the auditorium, would have no effect on it whatsoever. There is no battle between darkness and light. Darkness is powerless. The battle takes place in the thumb.

The same thing can be said for the trigger finger. The battle between good and evil does not take place "out there" where the bullet is. It takes place in the finger.

The battle is between that which is separate from all else (ego) and that which is connected to all else (spirit).

To borrow from Joseph Campbell-

"…every failure to cope with a life situation must be laid, in the end, to a restriction of consciousness, Wars and temper tantrums are the makeshifts of ignorance; regrets are illuminations come too late."

Truth Faerie
The_truth_faerie@yahoo.com