Skip to comments.TUCSON SHOOTINGS: Gun control and the Wild West (Feline nickname alert)
Posted on 01/18/2011 1:18:39 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
The massacre in Arizona should make every forward-thinking person in America angry. And this anger should give thoughtful people the backbone to tell the NRA that the Wild West show that they sponsor is over.
The NRA and its disciples believe that they deserve to own guns at all costs. The costs are very high; people are literally killing us, their fellow Americans, because of their gun obsession.
The massacres that happen on a fairly regular basis in our schools, work places, and now at a public gathering of an elected official are almost all committed by a person who is a legal gun owner or by someone who steals or borrows a gun from a relative who is a legal gun owner. That is the problem with guns: no one knows when a legal gun owner is going to go nuts.
Why does anybody in America need a gun that can shoot and blow away dozens of people in only 30 seconds?
We live in a country where entertainer-public figure Sarah Palin shoots animals for fun to show what a tough woman she is and to prove she is one of the guys. Palin had a map on her web site that had crosshairs on the districts of Representative Gifford and 19 other members of Congress. Palin now says the crosshairs were meant to be taken as crosshairs from a surveying instrument.
The people who promote guns at all costs (right-wing radio and television talk-show hosts) seem to be scared that our government will turn on us. If the government turns on us, it's all over anyhow, for crying out loud. The government has tanks, jets, and flame throwers.
I would like to live in a country that isn't the Wild West anymore - where nobody carried a gun. I would rather be in a crowd where if somebody had a baseball bat or a knife and went nuts they could only get one or two people before they are tackled.
It is time to pass intelligent, sane gun-control laws.
Good grief, how old is the person that wrote this drivel?
There’s no use to even try to educate these imbeciles——at least until they are confronted face to face by a bad guy with with a gun.
Like free speech hasn't killed anyone? MLK, Malcolm X to name just a few.
AFAIK, few if any of these perps have had CC license, but does anybody know whether this claim is accurate? Certainly Loughner purchased his 9mm legally.
“I would rather be in a crowd where if somebody had a baseball bat or a knife and went nuts they could only get one or two people before they are tackled.”
Rwanda comes to mind. Or Mexico. Take your pick...
It's The Bill of Rights, not the bill of needs.
The NRA and its disciples believe that they deserve to own guns at all costs
Actually we American Citizens believe in the U.S. Constitution which is what tells us we have the right to bear arms..
As to sane gun , we have what about 6000 plus guns laws between the Feds and the States? So you think what? We need how mnay more . ANOTHER 20, 40 500?
“And this anger should give thoughtful people the backbone to tell the NRA that the Wild West show that they sponsor is over. “
Uhh, actually, we didn’t sponsor the show.
It was some fellers named Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Franklin, I believe. The script they wrote is called the Bill of Rights - its somewhere in something called the
U. S. Constitution.
I would rather be in a crowd where if somebody had a baseball bat or a knife and went nuts they could only get one or two people before they are tackled.
Hard to believe that someone this stupid can be published in a newspaper. What a fool........
written by an 11-year old who got all their information from the unbiased people at MSNBC and DailyKos.
Loughner was able to get his gun legally because the local Sheriff never took his mental illness seriously enough to write up a report.
Yes, he did. And thereby hangs the tale. He had an arrest record, and was mentally very shaky. I don't know of anyone who feels he should have been able to get hold of a weapon, not even the staunches pro-gun, lifetime NRA member.
The writer should come on back when he or she figures out a way to keep weapons out of the hands of Jared Loughner without infringing on the right of millions of other citizens who keep and bear arms.
Walk-in rampages are one kind of crime. Yeah, maybe these crimes would go down if people couldn’t buy guns. However, these are not the only time murders with guns happen. There are plenty of other times people find themselves with a badguy or several badguys and going gun to gun would be a lot more advantagouse then trying to knife fight with them.
Would a mere arrest record be enough to stop a purchase, or is a felony conviction required?
Right. My nephew and I were talking about this just last night. He insists — and I agree, that a determined attacker with a blade in a crowd could probably kill five or six people before anyone even realized something bad was happening. The available weaponry changes the tactics but not necessarily the results.
I don’t think so. I think a knife attacker would get the beat down pretty early.
Our culture has changed drastically since 9/11.
How about involuntarily being admitted to an asylum?
I was going to say the opposite. Someone who knows how to wield a knife and understands anatomy could kill more than five or six in a real hurry. People are more afraid of getting cut by a knife than shot with a gun.
To expand on my previous remarks, since 9/11 it has become open season on attackers.
Just the last boilerplate bleating from the
No idea. Do such things go into the database?
Why, yes, yes we do.
At all costs.
What a pantload!
I got some interesting perspective from a former girlfriend some years ago. She was an uber-liberal, and very much against gun ownership (I used to clean my guns while we watched TV together... drove her nuts... but anyway:). Then one time when we talked about it yet ~again~ she finally tapping into what her fear was all about: She didn’t trust herself with a gun. She was afraid of becoming so angry someday that she’d just use the gun in rage. She didn’t understand how anybody could have enough self control not to just kill the next person that made them mad.
That really set me back on my heels. Now, at times I’ve been pretty darn angry at various people over my lifetime... but never even once did it occur to me to grab a gun and kill them. There must be something in the makeup of liberals— since we already know that they let emotions drive their decisions instead of reason. They act on feeling, not thinking. They don’t trust themselves with a gun, therefore they don’t trust anyone.
It’s kinda frightening to get a peek inside somebody’s head like that. And like I said... EX girlfriend.
Ooops. “...tapped into...”
Andy appears to be firmly stuck on stupid. Maybe a sharp smack to the back of the head with a Buick would cure him.
Why does anybody in America need a gun that can shoot and blow away dozens of people in only 30 seconds?
Why does the government need equipment that can shoot and blow away thousands, or even hundreds of thousands, of it's own Citizens in only 30 seconds?
It's simply amazing that you don't see the dichotomy in your own argument.
P.S. - There are still people running those tanks, jets, and flame throwers. It doesn't seem to worry you that those people might go nuts at any time and they've got more guns and equipment than anybody.
Actually it was to fill her freezer. Making liberals like Andy wee themselves is just an entertaining side benefit.
Most knife wielders fail to protect their bodies from massive trauma due to their belief that a knife is overwhelmingly intimidating and scary.
If you can’t stand, you can’t fight with fists or knives.
I wouldn't bet my life on that. Where is this "massive trauma" coming from anyway?
What Good Can a Handgun Do Against An Army?
As one of the latter, I have to say the requirements for prohibiting someone from buying a gun are quite specific and high, as well they should be when we are talking about effectively depriving someone of their right to self defense. The standard is being a convicted felon, having been involentarily committed to a mental hospital, or judged to be mentally incompetent. Just having been arrested, convicted of a misdemeanor or viewed as "mentally very shaky" (by whom?) is not adequate reason, at least not yet. Thank God.
Several martial arts and a former Rugby player.
I would think so. But good point. These days doctor-client privelege probably protects the insane.
Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!
I would like to live in a country that isn't the Wild West anymore - where nobody carried a gun.
Move to Japan.
Thomas Jefferson: "What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people reserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms, the remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them."
George Mason: "To disarm the people [is] the best and most effectual way to enslave them." "the British Parliament was advised by an artful man [Sir William Keith] who was governor of Pennsylvania, to disarm the people; that was the most effectual way to enslave them; but they should not do it openly; but to weaken them, and let them sink gradually, by totally disusing and neglecting the militia."
Adolf Hitler: "The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subjected people to carry arms; history shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subjected people to carry arms have prepared their own fall."
Hubert H Humphrey: "The right of citizens to bear arms is just one more guarantee against arbitrary government, one more safeguard against the tyranny which now appears remote in America, but which historically has always proved to be possible."
In short to kill tyrants and other criminal predators.
We’re not talking about a “knife fight” or someone flashing a knife. Consider a crowd such as the one that Loughner approached with the majority of attention focused forward. The assailant steps up behind someone alone at the back of crowd, stealthily stabs an unseen blade into the victim’s lower back, says, “Excuse me” then quickly moves on to repeat the same maneuver. Yes, you can swarm him and bring him down — they did that with the shooter. But he can kill two or perhaps five or six folks before most of the crowd realizes there’s any kind of attack going on. If one or more of the victims begins screaming, that could easily lead to more confusion rather than less.
You, my FRiend, are FUNNY!
[I would like to live in a country that isn’t the Wild West anymore - where nobody carried a gun.]
So, what’s stopping this wuss from moving?
[There are plenty of other times people find themselves with a badguy or several badguys and going gun to gun would be a lot more advantagouse then trying to knife fight with them.]
These turds want you and I to go cell phone to gun.
Brother, you’re preaching to the preacher, not the choir.
These people suffer from obvious and debilitating mental disorders.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.