2.1. GUN OWNERSHIP
How about requiring a license to own a firearm? Like a driver's license or pilot's license, it would not indicate that you own a car or plane, but that you are qualified to do so. You have had training in the safety, care, and use of a firearm and have passed a test on those issues. This will not prevent criminals from owning guns, but will ensure more responsible gun ownership for everyone else. Like This Reply to this comment by MikeSettles August 15, 2009 2:19 PM EDT The British began their slide in 1903 with the passing of a licensing law for "high capacity" revolvers ("You can kill six people without reloading!"). This at a time when violent crime there was all but non-existent. It took the do-gooders about 100 years, but legal gun ownership is all but gone now, the Bobbies must be armed, (unlike before), no one even has the right to self defenses, and violent crime rates are still climbing - oh, and the criminals are smuggling guns in from outside the country. [1]
We should keep you around for the entertainment value, if nothing else. Like This Reply to this comment by gunownerdan August 16, 2009 4:06 AM EDT Learn about the racist roots of gun control in America. From 1970-2009, 150 MILLION people have not been murdered Like This Reply to this comment by alliberty August 17, 2009 12:13 PM EDT Cambodia during Pol Pot had gun control, Rwanda during the genocide had gun control. Only countries with gun control in the late 20th century their people were victims of genocide or ruled by dictatorships.No country giving liberal gun rights to its people were never victims of genocide or ruled by a dictator. The Europeans were not murdered because the U.S. military protected them and prevented them from being over run by the USSR who committed mass murder and oppression. Gun control did nothing to save the lives of these people it was our military. The sitting courts did not like the idea that blacks should/did have the same rights as whits nor did they like the idea that all the precedent on the issue of rights was obsolete so they ignored the 14th. 11 years after the 14th was passed in large part to insure blacks had the same rights as whites in gun ownership to protect themselves and families from the KKK, we had the Supreme Court in Cruikshank decide the federal government has no role in protecting black gun rights, assembly rights, speech rights or voting rights. [1]
Citing the Second Amendment and the increasingly maniacal rhetoric of conservative media firebrands, a small handful of violence-threatening protesters aims to make the rest of us -- whether pro- or anti-health-reform -- afraid to speak out. So we face a choice that has nothing to do with healthcare, gun ownership or any other hot-button issue that protesters of both parties are fighting over. It is a choice about democracy itself -- a choice that comes down to the two axioms best articulated by, of all people, Mao Zedong. [2] Groom said it was more than just a change in presidential leadership that led to the current spike in gun ownership. People are concerned about crime and more aware about what's going on, he said. Groom added that while people used to leave their doors unlocked, they can't anymore for fear of a violent break-in. [3]
Semi-automatic handguns require people to pull back on the bolt and pull the trigger, but the bolt sometimes can be too heavy for weaker gun owners, Groom said. "It's a simple thing, and it's not going to jam on you," Groom said of the revolver. "It's going to work." Officials in law enforcement say they are not concerned about the rising number. Maj. David Humphreys of the Panama City Beach Police Department said his agency supports the "constitutional right to bear arms." He described gun ownership as a privilege, not unlike driving a vehicle. [3]
I do belive, however, that gun-ownership by resposnible people poses no threat to anyone and that licensing (ownership) laws do nothing to keep guns out of the hands of the criminal element nor can we predict when a responsible gun owner might crack and use a gun in an irresponsible manner. I'm somewhat bothered by this article as it doesn't refer to what the defendent did to get a misdemeanor domestic violence charge. He may have simply grabbed is partner without her consent. As the article states, there is no evidence he has ever even fired the gun in question. [1]
While the NRA has sided with background check reform, Gun Owners of America has historically opposed federal background checks for gun ownership. The organization says such checks overly burden lawful Americans and have no effect on criminal violence. [4]
President Barack Obama has made no moves and asked for no legislation that could restrict gun ownership, but that hasn't stopped a massive spike in applications for $120 concealed carry permits. Florida's Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services should get 150,000 requests, a 67-percent increase over 2008 this year, the Associated Press recently reported. [3]
RANKED RECOMMENDED SOURCES
(4 source documents numbered in order of appearance in text)
3. Local dealers see spike in gun ownership - The News Herald
1. Gun Rights Don't Apply In Domestic Violence Cases, Appeals Court Rules - Political Hotsheet - CBS News
2. What it means to wear a gun in public | Salon
4. Is there a connection between healthcare reform and gun rights? | csmonitor.com
3. Local dealers see spike in gun ownership - The News Herald
1. Gun Rights Don't Apply In Domestic Violence Cases, Appeals Court Rules - Political Hotsheet - CBS News
2. What it means to wear a gun in public | Salon
4. Is there a connection between healthcare reform and gun rights? | csmonitor.com
2.2. CONTROL LAWS
There is no hint at compromise from anyone, only frakizoid ravings about government conspiracy and nonexistent roundups. When has there ever been any such program? Like This Reply to this comment by MikeSettles August 15, 2009 2:46 PM EDT Andacar: The new pres changed his tune during the runup to election last year. In the U.S. and Illinois senates, he never saw a gun control law he didn't like, and stated that he prefered to ban hand guns and "assault weapons". When he began to campaign for the presidency, he then said "we're not coming for your guns". The people he appointed to key positions in his administration are all avowed proponents of gun control, to include wishing for total bans: Emanuel, Holder, Clinton, etc. [1] Or better yet, lobotomize them. /s Like This Reply to this comment by AOCGUY August 15, 2009 9:26 AM EDT While I'm all for requiring gun safety courses for individuals who wish to use guns, licensing individual firearms has more to do with collecting tax revenue than it does controlling who will own one. [1]
Those of us living in the Rocky Mountains are steeped in America's famous gun culture -- and we therefore know well the binary debates surrounding the Second Amendment. Firearm enthusiasts -- the vast majority of whom use weapons responsibly -- believe the Constitution protects their right to bear arms. [2] I suspect that the Founders may have been smart enough to use the term "Arms" so as to make a broad definition, and not limiting to the weapons of that time. I hold that EVERYONE has the right to self-defense, and when anyone infringes on the right, they defy a guarantee listed in the Bill of Rights as Amendment II. I also hold that the misuse of ANY right must bring consequences, including death or incarceration. [1]
MIke D. you just show your ignorance again (8:24 pm 8/21/2009 post). The news media are lying when they call a semi-automatic firearm, whether it is an AR-15, a Browning Auto Shotgun, an AK-S, or any other commonly-owned semiautomatic, whether a handgun, rifle, or shotgun, an "assault weapon". they have had the difference explained to them many times. they still want to, as the leader of the anti-gun movement in this country says, "Capitalize on the ignorance of most people who go by looks." (may not be an exact quote, but it comes pretty close). they think they know better than anyone else what is good for everyone else. they are inherently racist, because all gun control laws are racist in origin, intent and purpose. criminals will never obey laws, so the gun control laws are intended solely for the law-abiding citizens. Fran, sometimes I wish we were in the Old West, where everyone carried. it was far safer then than now. everyone knew what firearms were capable of. and that there were bad people who would use them at the drop of a hat. and the bad people would drop the hat. in the forty years between 1850 and 1890, when the U.S. Census Bureau declared that the frontier was closed, most reputable historians have found that there were fewer than 4000 recorded altercations between individuals in which firearms were used (gunfights, in other words). [3]
In April, Department of Homeland Security officials warned in a report that right-wing extremists could use the declining U.S. economy and the election of the country's first Black president to increase membership. Recruiters have penetrated social networking sites such as YouTube and Facebook. If such violence were to occur, it likely would be isolated, small-scale, and directed at specific immigration-related targets,? warned Homeland Security officials. This makes rational and sensible debates hard in this country. Mr. Pennington, who heads communications for the Brady Campaign To Prevent Gun Violence headquartered in Washington, D.C., said, ?the rise of these militia groups is evident that law enforcement needs more funding for personnel to enforce gun laws that are already on the books. [4]
Mr. Fogg is a Black retired chief deputy U.S. Marshal for the Department of Justice with over 30 years of experience. ?Racism is a threat to national security and I have seen it within law enforcement. These militias are orchestrated efforts by those who feel they are losing something. This is unheard of and unprecedented,? said Mr. Fogg, who is also the original author of the NO-FEAR Act signed into law by President George W. Bush in 2002 to fight discrimination across federal agencies. Everyone must take a stand and fight injustice and racism,? he said. President Barack Obama has received more death threats that any of his predecessors and extremist plots increased during the presidential race of 2008, according to the SPLC report. [4]
According to the SPLC report, the most law enforcement officers murdered at the hands of a domestic extremist since the Oklahoma bombing occurred on April 4 in Pittsburgh. It was on that day that White supremacist Richard Andrew Poplawski fatally shot three Pittsburgh officers to death. According to the SPLC report, Mr. Poplawski told a friend that America is controlled by a cabal of Jews, that U.S. troops may soon be used against American citizens, and that he feared a ban on guns was coming. [4]
All men are created equal as President Lincoln once said. That is what I believe, that is how I was raised to be. The Southern Poverty Law Center has lost it direction, they use to be a whistler blower organization concerning hate crimes. The sad fact is that the Southern Poverty Law Center has become a hate organization themselves as they demonize conservative Americans who are not racist, but who love their country, served their country and will continue to defend the U.S. Constitution. [4]
Acorn thugs and bullies and others not only blustered and intimidated people who were rightly concerned whether everyone voting in the November 2008 election was legally allowed to vote in that election, in each precinct on election day, they conducted an extensive, nationwide campaign against such actions in the weeks leading up to the election, claiming that it was intimidation against "people of color" to ensure that only those who were legal residents of the precinct in which they were voting were allowed to vote. There is no such thing as a "reasonable" gun control law. All gun control laws are, at their roots, racist, because they are intended to keep firearms from the hands of any group to whom the authors of such laws feel superior, because of their race, "moral superiority", intellectual superiority, or other self-perceived cant. Until they armed themselves and showed up, en masse, to vote and stayed, en masse to ensure that all votes were counted. The sitting sheriff was unseated. and was later prosecuted and convicted for criminal acts he had performed while sheriff. [3] There was an attempt at a gun control law in the 1820s, thrown out by the state court, as being "repugnant to the 2nd Amendment". [1]
What about that do you consider to be hard to understand, jmac? to the authors of that amendment, a well-regulated militia meant a well-trained body of citizens, separate from the Federal, state or any local government, familiar with the use of arms, and supplying the arms and ammunition for same themselves. The second part of the introductory or declarative phrase, "being necessary to the security of a free State", should be fairly self-explanatory, even to intellectually-challenged individuals. [3] Contrast that with NYC, which has averaged more than 2000 gunfights every year since 1900, and, where, BTW, it is effectively illegal for the average citizen to carry a firearm. or Washington DC, which passed an unconstitutional ban on ownership of firearms in about 1973. and led the world in homicides in firearms for the next 30 plus years. (but the states of Virginia and Maryland, which border Washington DC, and have less gun control, have far fewer murders with firearms than DC. [3]
Use all that money from the NRA to clearly state exactly what you want. [3] There is an old saying, "Put a gun on stage in the first act and you have to use it by the third act". [3] "Expanding the use of electronic health records is fundamental to reforming our healthcare system," Ms. Sebelius said in a statement. "Putting into place safeguards for the privacy and security of this information, when it is in electronic form, will be an ongoing priority that influences and guides all of our efforts," writes Dr. David Blumenthal, the White House's national coordinator for Health Information Technology, in an Aug. 20 commentary. [5]
In Kansas, White anti-abortion extremist Scott Roeder, who was involved with the anti-government ?Freemen? movement in the 1990s, allegedly shot to death a late-term abortion providing doctor in a Wichita church April 25. Ms. Blackmon, a Black woman, heads the Justice Keepers of Wichita, which aims to attack racism. ?People need to stop thinking this is a post-racial America. These angry White people are organizing, so we need to organize as well. We are in a fight and they are not playing. [4]
While the police may not act until AFTER a crime has been committed, it seems the Congress thinks it can. While a person is incarcerated, they have had legally removed almost all rights, but once their debt to society is paid, those rights MUST be reinstated. If an individual proves himself to continue to be a threat to society, then remove him from it - incarceration or death. Don't leave him in society with reduced rights - that just creates an underground of people who "go around" their restrictions, in order to live and prosper. [1] NAM reserves the right to edit or delete comments. Once published, comments are visible to search engines and will remain in their archives. If you do not want your identity connected to comments on this site, please refrain from commenting or use a handle or alias instead of your real name. [4] Submit Cancel The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. If you believe this comment is offensive or violates the CBSNews.com Terms of Use, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the comment). [1]
If an ignorant redneck shows himself to have violent tendencies, that should be enough. Maybe he didn't own a handgun at the time. Maybe he hasn't been emboldened by enough Budweiser to use the handgun yet, but will soon if we don't intervene. [1] As George Mason, one of the signers of the Declaration of Independence stated: "The object of the amendment is that no free man shall be de-barred the use of arms." [3]
RANKED RECOMMENDED SOURCES
(5 source documents numbered in order of appearance in text)
3. OPINION Blog | The Dallas Morning News
1. Gun Rights Don't Apply In Domestic Violence Cases, Appeals Court Rules - Political Hotsheet - CBS News
4. Distrustful of Government, Upset About Race, Militias Rise Again in America - NAM
2. What it means to wear a gun in public | Salon
5. Is there a connection between healthcare reform and gun rights? | csmonitor.com
3. OPINION Blog | The Dallas Morning News
1. Gun Rights Don't Apply In Domestic Violence Cases, Appeals Court Rules - Political Hotsheet - CBS News
4. Distrustful of Government, Upset About Race, Militias Rise Again in America - NAM
2. What it means to wear a gun in public | Salon
5. Is there a connection between healthcare reform and gun rights? | csmonitor.com