Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

GUNS: Nation needs common-sense limits

Letter by James G. Venturini, Tacoma on July 26, 2012 at 2:01 pm with 121 Comments »
July 26, 2012 2:29 pm

Re: “Obsessing over ‘assault weapons’ won’t prevent gun crimes” (Patrick O’Callahan column, 7-26).

O’Callahan apparently doesn’t recognize his own capacity to sound “unintentionally ridiculous” while defending semi-automatic weaponry. His own minor inconvenience at the target practice range apparently trumps the common sense of banning weapons that he admits – despite some lame protestations – are designed to be extremely and efficiently deadly to large numbers of humans.

It’s time for responsible gun owners, who one hopes are still the majority, to stand up to the NRA and the politicians who are afraid of them. Ending private ownership of such weapons, closing the gun show loophole and employing mental health background checks for gun purchases do not threaten to end gun ownership by the general populace, but are common sense and far from ridiculous.

Leave a comment Comments → 121
  1. Good start James. Stand by for abuse from the gun nuts.

  2. sumyungboi says:

    Two of my “assault” rifles include match grade rifles which are used in High Power, Service Rifle matches. High Power matches can be but are not limited to CMP, meaning “Civilian Marksmanship Program”, the purpose of which is to encourage civilian proficiency of military arms. The initial focus is on young people, but CMP matches involve all ages. There’s a reason, and an important one, that many people own those horrible assault rifles you loathe.

  3. LeePHill says:

    phallic symbolism

  4. wadsbrau says:

    Would you be happier if, instead of killing several people with guns, the weirdos were to expload a bomb killing everyone? It happens alot in other oparts of the world. Even in places where they can get fully automatic weapons. Criminal activity such as this will find a way. These things (gun bans) are just knee-jerk reactions because humans need to find a way to deal with this sort of thing. Ban the guns. Go ahead. It won’t stop these things from happening.

  5. LeePHill says:

    Wadsbrau – why doesn’t Canada have the same problem as the US seems to have?

  6. aislander says:

    Yeah. Good thing Norway doesn’t have the same problem with violence as the US. And Rwanda had very few people killed with guns during its internecine conflict. Gotta ban those semiautomatic machetes, though…

  7. why do you think no other nation including japan during ww2 did not try to invade the good old usa,lawabiding citizens have guns lots of them take away our gun rights and nations like mexico our neighbour would take over our nation without a fight would you like to be called the united mexcian state go ahead take our guns away and see what happens.

  8. aislander says:

    Seriously, though: it is typical of liberalism to address a problem of the spirit with a materialistic solution.

  9. It is a national health problem, not one of spirit. Nice try at the spin though.
    30,000 or so killed each year by guns including homicides, accidents and suicides. Countries with fewer guns have fewer gun deaths, Duhhh!

  10. dph, a little close to being a racist there, eh?

  11. yeah, how many events has Norway had islander?

  12. aislander says:

    Think, Pub; all the way back to last year…

  13. If more privately-owned firearms make people safer (as many gun advocates claim) then because we have the highest private firearm ownership in the world, we should also have the lowest violent crime rate in the world.

    But we don’t. We have among the highest violent crime rates in the world.

    Gun ownership: http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_gun_own_gun_per_100_res_2007-guns-per-100-residents-2007

    Homicide rate per 100,000: http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_gun_vio_hom_ove_hom_rat_per_100_pop-rate-per-100-000-pop

    Assaults: http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_ass-crime-assaults

    Robberies: http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_rob-crime-robberies

  14. sumyungboi says:

    Publico: “yeah, how many events has Norway had islander?”

    They had a pretty bad one last year, some loon killed sixty nine people. Of course, that was preceded the same day by a bomb that killed eight. Gun licensing procedures are fairly strict in Norway.

    Norway has a population about that of Washington State’s I-5 corridor. If one were to consider those killed per capita, you’d have to kill over 4,600 in one day in the USA to be on par.

    If statistical odds stay true, about 110 people will die today in traffic accidents. About 9 people will drown. Maybe you guys should focus on real problems.

    publico: “30,000 or so killed each year by guns including homicides, accidents and suicides”

    Would you like to break that down statistically?

  15. aislander says:

    It is not legitimate to compare different cultures, but it is legitimate to compare areas that share the same culture and different laws.

    In the United States, areas that honor the freedom with which this nation was founded, and therefore have fewer restrictions on gun ownership, have less violent crime.

    E.g.: Chicago, which has extremely restrictive gun ownership laws has a VERY high rate of violent crime, including gun violence…

  16. GrandMaster says:

    Firearms are used in self defense 3 million times per year in the U.S.
    Most of the time without a shot having to be fired. A great thing about this situation is obummo is now getting on the anti-freedom bandwagon- his re-election chances just went to zero! ha HA!

  17. bobcat1a says:

    Grndmaster, are you really asserting that every year one out of every 100 people in the US uses a firearm in self-defense? Really????

  18. sumyungboi says:

    bobcat, he’s asserting that firearms are used in self defense three million times a year, most of the time without actually firing. Go to the back of the line, think hard, and have an answer ready.

  19. LeePHill says:

    “aislander says:
    July 26, 2012 at 4:38 pm Yeah. Good thing Norway doesn’t have the same problem with violence as the US.”

    So true. One incident, however unfortunate, doesn’t measure up to two in Colorado alone, then add the Arizona incident….and Fort Hood….and Virginia Tech…and….

    http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jul/23/nation/la-naw-norway-gun-policy-20110724

    It’s typical of conservatism to address a problem with dishonesty.

    “dph says:
    July 26, 2012 at 4:42 pm why do you think no other nation including japan during ww2 did not try to invade the good old usa”

    Someone has been asleep since 9/11/01

  20. LeePHill says:

    “firearms are used in self defense three million times a year, most of the time without actually firing.”

    It’s always nice to quote statistics that aren’t kept. The loons will nod their head and people like me will laugh at the entire thing.

  21. publico not even near being a racist just using an example why is all you left people use rasisiam in everything, and yes i am an ardent gun supporter guns do deter crime.and criminials dont like law abiding people owing guns and neither do left wing democrats.but everyone has an opinioning thanks to 2nd amendement.

  22. sumyungboi says:

    dph: “publico not even near being a racist ..”

    He heard the whistle and came running.

  23. LeePHill says:

    “his re-election chances just went to zero!”

    yeah…uh huh…..

    http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-07-25/obama-leads-romney-by-six-points-in-poll-citing-economy

    Economy is supposed to be Romney’s strong subject.

    Let’s look into Romney’s past on gun control….

    http://www.businessinsider.com/mitt-romney-gun-conrol-nra-assault-weapons-colorado-shooting-theater-2012-7

  24. LeePHill says:

    “rasisiam”

    “but everyone has an opinioning thanks to 2nd amendement.”

    “yes i am an ardent gun supporter”

    Please tell us you use trigger locks and give someone else the key.

  25. Hill, so our aggressive stance on terrorism has kept us safe? That is what your last line just stated.

    AI/Sum, great job defeating emotion with facts.

    Hill, hold your race card back, but Canada is 2.5% Black. 1/2 our our murders are by Aftican Americans. The other half are by white or Hispanic. Canada has virtually no Hispanics.

    Have fun looking at the CIA factbook and crime stats.

    Between population and ethnicity, it is apples and oranges. Also, short summers mean people are indoors more. You connect the dots.

  26. dph, how is it that you chose Mexico for your example?
    Islander, I know about the incident in Norway. The question for you was how many have there been? Compare it to our total.
    Norway has liberal gun ownership laws, not restrictive as you try to make out in your comment.
    Chicago’s gun laws are meaningless when their boundaries are easily violated. Your comparison fails any attempt at critical thought on your part. You gun nuts are unable to put forth a reasoned argument for your position. Some day we will change it and guns will not be as prevalent as they are today. We will all be better off for it when that happens. Real men don’t need a gun.

  27. aislander says:

    Eleven years ago in Montreal, a crazed man killed fourteen women. Jessica Ghawi, who died in the Aurora outrage, narrowly missed the mass shooting at the Eaton Mall in Toronto.

    The point is that perfect safety–as with perfect anything–is impossible.

    Americans, as a free people, do not choose to live their lives trying to eliminate all possible risk. It just isn’t worthwhile to trade freedom for dubious security, especially in circumstances in which the statistics do not support the sacrifice.

  28. publico they are out closest neighbour take away our gun rights and you and everyone else in the us are done period.

  29. publico i was wrong canada is closer so they could do the same. trust but verefy

  30. aislander says:

    Publico writes: “[Gun violence] is a national health problem, not one of spirit.”

    Neat trick: rolling gun violence (as a national health problem) into the area in which the federal government has recently seized a great deal more power. I can see where THAT is going…

    My assertion that the problem is one of the spirit addresses the perpetrators rather than the tools, which, coincidentally enough, is the method that Israel uses to keep El Al very free of terrorists.

    If we used left-wing ideas, however, we wouldn’t be able to ask for a photo ID from potential gun purchasers since doing so is racist and unfairly discriminates against poor criminals and underprivileged whack jobs…

  31. African. Sorry for the typo.

    Pub- our gun laws are meaningless when our borders are easily violated. Even more meaningless when our govt permits criminals to have assault weapons knowingly.

  32. Waddbrau – ‘using bombs’ – fyi – Timothy McVeigh – Oklahoma City, April 19, 1995.

    Bombs (specifically non-aerial bombs to kill and maim people has been going on almost as long as there have been bombs.

    While the devices have changed, our military are facing the same tactics that were used against us in Nam.

    Aislander,
    Fewer Guns Mean Fewer Gun Homicides
    http://www.nber.org/digest/feb01/w7967.html

    Crime is down — and so is gun ownership
    http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jul/23/news/la-pn-crime-is-down-and-so-is-gun-ownership-20120722

    Some studies have found that murder rates (not crime rates in general) are higher where guns are more prevalent. However, social scientists have not found a direct causal relationship between the two factors.
    http://factcheck.org/2008/03/violent-crimes-and-handgun-ownership/

    I’ve shown you mine, now you show me yours.

    GrandMaster – Obama signed the one and only Firearms Bill that reached his desk and thinks to that bill loaded guns are now permitted in National Parks.

    If, and when gun control comes to the US it will come from the right and will be sold as a temporary, but necessary, measure needed to protect the Nation.

    To all – ever wonder why it is always the big gun grabs are always be ‘in his second term’?

    I also find it odd that we require people to prove their proficiency to car, but do not have similar requirements in terms of gun ownership.

  33. Dave98373 says:

    You can always spot the uber-liberals when they politicize a tragedy in the name of common sense gun control. This has happened after every recent tragedy in America involving guns(Sen Giffords, Virginia Tech, Cafe Racer, etc…). The reality is that even in cities which have very strict control laws (or “common sense” gun control measures), like Chicago, have very high crime rates and gun shootings. Chicago already has over 1,500 shootings so far this year and their homicides for the year are up nearly 40%.

  34. Want my guns? Come and get them?

  35. LeePHill says:

    “Dave98373 says:
    July 27, 2012 at 5:12 am You can always spot the uber-liberals when they politicize a tragedy in the name of common sense gun control.”

    You can always tell an uber conservatives when they carry the water that was pulled from the well by their pundits.

    “Hill, hold your race card back, but Canada is 2.5% Black. 1/2 our our murders are by Aftican Americans. The other half are by white or Hispanic.”

    Now THAT is funny. I’m supposed to “hold my race card back” while CT7 plays his. Tell me which of the “mass murderers” were black.

    and now….THE CLASSIC:

    “CT7 says:
    July 26, 2012 at 8:05 pm Hill, so our aggressive stance on terrorism has kept us safe?

    3,000 dead on 9/11/01, thousands more dead in Iraq and Afghanistan, still recovering from the financial issues caused by war….but…..

    we have “an aggressive stance on terrorism”….

    Well…at least we do, now that we have a president that focused on the problem and didn’t say “I don’t think about him”….

  36. LeePHill says:

    JimK…..internet tough guy, huh?

    :::::shudder::::::

  37. LeePHill says:

    Nice job of playing your Anglo Saxon card, CT7….LOL

  38. “It is not legitimate to compare different cultures … in the United States, areas …”

    It is not legitimate to compare areas of vastly different population densities. Try again.

  39. “Firearms are used in self defense 3 million times per year in the U.S.
    Most of the time without a shot having to be fired.”

    Yep, having firearms and being trained in how to use them really helped those four police officers in Lakewood, didn’t it?

  40. Dave98373 says:

    “You can always tell an uber conservatives when they carry the water that was pulled from the well by their pundits”

    You may be surprised to learn that an overwhelming number of Americans (and this would include Democrats and Republicans) do not want tougher gun control laws. Which is why Congress will not address the issue because they would be voted out of office. For most of us, we remember our history lessons. Hitler understood the gun control concept very well. After he confiscated all of the Poles weapons during his invasion, he then began systematically exterminating the unarmed citizen populations.
    LeePHill- For every person who shares an uneducated and close-minded approach to any healthy debate, is an elected leader waiting to trample the rights of all citizens and further a dangerous and deadly agenda.

  41. DC sniper. Chicago (you know, BHOs home and the city ran by his pal) every day.

    Ehill, you are correct for once.

  42. Second amendment saves the innocent once again.

    http://www.abc4.com/content/about_4/bios/story/conceal-and-carry-stabbing-salt-lake-city-smiths/NDNrL1gxeE2rsRhrWCM9dQ.cspx

    “SALT LAKE CITY (ABC 4 News) – A citizen with a gun stopped a knife wielding man as he began stabbing people Thursday evening at the downtown Salt Lake City Smith’s store.”

  43. MyBandito says:

    No doubt there are instances where a citizen with a handgun stops the bad guy. What does that have to do with the common-sense limits to the type of extreme weapons suggested in this letter?

    How many citizens with handguns were in attendance in that Colorado theater? Why couldn’t they stop the carnage?

  44. Well, that was a function of the smoke, darkness, and the crowds. He also had body armor on.

    I have talked with many military gun owners and discussed this situation. I am personally well trained in pistols and rifle he used.

    It would have been very difficult to take him out alone unless you got very lucky. Even then you would have to make a decision to possible draw fire to you and your companions, all the while risking hitting an innocent victim.

  45. LeePHill says:

    Anecdotal?

    “An off-duty police officer in Connecticut shot and critically wounded his 18-year-old daughter, apparently mistaking her for an intruder after she sneaked out of their home and re-entered through the basement.”

  46. sumyungboi says:

    O’Callahan was absolutely correct in his editorial. I disagree with him on his stance regarding self defense, he’ll remember our argument about the guy in Roy who shot the copper thieves. But to hear a bunch of emotion based gibberish based on ignorance of the topic by people most of whom don’t own any firearms, well, it would be funny if it wasn’t important.

  47. rivitman says:

    We will have “common sense” gun laws when we repeal about 4\5ths of the gun laws already on the books.

    Meanwhile, we had such a gun ban passed in 1994. It had no discernible effect on anything. It lasted ten years. When it expired, crime went….wait for it….down.

  48. Hill, there is a problem with your story. As a trained police officer, one would expect further hostile intent before he engaged.

    Was it the weapon’s fault or the guy behind the weapon? If he hit her with an ax, would you blame the ax?

    Either way, you leftists can make anything political. Shameful.

  49. And now Hill thinks police officers should not have guns. They will use “hope” defending the people from criminals

  50. sumyungboi says:

    bandito: “What does that have to do with the common-sense limits to the type of extreme weapons suggested in this letter?”

    The Ruger Mini-14 is not exactly an extreme weapon. The 5.56 nato round, we call it a .223 out here in the civilian world, is well known for being an extremely accurate round, and is the caliber of choice for varmint hunters. In addition, the M-16 (.223 cal) accounts for well over 90% of high power, service rifle match shooters, in my experience.

  51. SandHills says:

    Same-o-same-o discussion between entrenched values with a widening gulf between them. The reallity is that the 2nd Amendment is not going to be altered to outlaw private firearms – so the liberals just have to swallow that as a fact of life.

    Now in terms of automatic assault weapons – while there are good arguments made to ban them, it is seen as infringement of the 2nd Amendment. And while the events like Aurora and Columbine are tragic (and even one tragedy like them is one too many), there are more deaths each day in accidents in which drivers are being irresponsible handling their vehicles.

    Even if ONLY law abiding citizens are allowed to be licensed to own a firearm – say only a single shot .22 (and in an utopian society where there are no criminal elements) – there is absolutely no way to prevent any human from “going rogue” and killing a fellow human. Just as there is no control over drunk, tired, texting, drivers on our highways.

    So the argument of different values continue to tear at the fabric of our nation – with a gulf so wide that no compromises can be found.

  52. MyBandito says:

    CT7 wrote: “Was it the weapon’s fault or the guy behind the weapon?”

    Guns don’t kill people, people with guns kill people?

  53. sumyungboi says:

    CT7: “And now Hill thinks police officers should not have guns”

    Noticed that. Next time ehill calls 911 at 3am because someone’s crawling through the window and he doesn’t have a gun, maybe the cops can rush out and use harsh words.

  54. SandHills says:

    Mybandito….and people with vehicles kill even more….

  55. MyBandito says:

    But not on purpose, SandHills.

  56. People kill people.

  57. SandHills says:

    Dead is dead – whether by going crazy with a gun, or getting drunk, texting, or pushing endurance – and many times more deaths than a human going crazy – something no body has figured out how to stop.

    My point was about the culture of guns versus the culture of anti-guns – which is only one of many issues that have a gulf so wide that there is no compromise in sight. And I read these wide scisms here on this forum daily.

    dead is dead, can we agree at least on that….if so, what additional controls would you propose on vehicle ownership and operation?

  58. With millions of guns in circulation already, and the Second Amendment not going anywhere anytime soon, it is a day late and a dollar short to ban weapons.

  59. CT7,
    ‘borders easily violated’ Honestly CT, do you really believe American is awash with guns due to a tide of illegal imports? Tell me have you finalized your purchase of that new bridge to nowhere?

    ‘gov permits / criminals with assault weapons’ rather than continuing to bedazzle us with you gross ignorance try do some research, beginning with ‘requirements to obtain a Class 3 Federal Firearms License’.

    Dave,
    The major difference between the mass shootings you refer to and crime related shootings is the mass shooters got their guns legally whereas the criminals do not.

    The tragedy is that had the states and the nation been ENFORCING the current gun-control laws many of the mass shooters wound not have been able to get their guns legally.

    To all gun owners – First rule of defensive shooting – Good against paper does not mean good against flesh and blood.

  60. LeePHill says:

    Do conservatives purposefully leap off a verbal cliff or are they just foolish about reasoning?

    Someone submits anecdotal evidence about a positive for gun ownership. I do the same, except demonstrate how it can go wrong.

    The conservative conclusion is that I don’t think police should have guns….which, of course, I said nothing of the sort.

    These are the same people that claim liberals don’t submit valid points in arguments. Uh huh.

    The one thing we can depend on, with conservatives is that they carry the water for the talking point of the week –

    “Either way, you leftists can make anything political. Shameful”

    Why would gun safety and control be “political”? I find it to be common sense. Who is trying to control political agenda and elections with the gun issue???? THE NRA. Are they “leftist”? NOPE.

    Another right wing sound machine talking point bites the dust.

  61. X- connect that to Fast and Furious. I understand you may not know what I am referencing from only watching MSNBC.

    Mound, the Second Amendment has been around and debate on for more then a week. Wake up and smell your unwashed ignorance.

  62. aislander says:

    MyBan: I HAVE been attacked while riding my bicycle by a whack job driving a car. $25K in ER costs later, I’m not ready to ban cars, but I AM in favor of streamlining commitment procedures.

    That works for both cars AND guns…

  63. SandHills says:

    So Lee, by standing on your “holier-than-thou” principles, do you truly believe you have any constructive way to bridge this widening gap between conservatives and liberals in this country? Or by winning, at least in your own mind, argument points on a forum as if it is all agame?

    It appears that both sides want a winner-take-all scenario – fully expecting those who don’t view the world the same way to just roll over and accept the other side dictating a radical change (or no change at all) to the status quo.

    As far as guns – only a dictatorial government could even try and remove guns from the hands of gun owners – at which point it becomes blood sport, not just bantering debate points on a forum like this.

  64. sumyungboi says:

    Sandhills, to further your point, when these mass shootings happen as did in Colorado, they’re rare events and brought on by some lunatic who popped a gasket, and it makes sensational news. Traffic deaths, and there will be over 100 today in the USA, are caused by otherwise normal people who will just happen to make a bad decision. (drinking, texting, HIA, etc.) That stuff is not sensational, there’s no political push to restrict driving privileges, and so there’s no puppets demanding it.

    For what it’s worth, it was either the same day or the day after the Colorado shooting, a van in Texas wrecked and killed twelve people. Barely a peep.

    Regarding other gun related deaths, there are some pretty high numbers being thrown about, half of which are suicides, many are gang related, which I personally regard as natural selection, and many are homicide by people who weren’t legally in possession of their guns, anyway. Yes, law regarding gun ownership did not prevent those criminals from getting guns. So what should we do? Put further restrictions on lawful citizens, or get serious about shaking down known felons?

  65. Since ehill has no problem posting 12-year-old data on gun violence, I thought it might be interesting to look at some 5-year-old data on overall murder rates/ rankings per 100K of populations for all countries of the world:

    http://www.photius.com/rankings/murder_rate_of_countries_2000-2004.html

    Hmmm… who’s that down there at #78 behind scores of countries wherein gun ownership is illegal or restricted?

    The argument that legalized gun ownership causes more homicides simply doesn’t hold water. In fact, when looking at crime rates per capita where the US ranks # 8, there are at least four countries where gun ownership is outlawed or restricted that rank ahead of the US.

  66. sumyungboi says:

    lee: “The conservative conclusion is that I don’t think police should have guns….which, of course, I said nothing of the sort”

    Get over yourself, lee, you’re not that important. We were talking about ehill.

  67. modyfied says:

    Jim Jones did it with Kool-Aide, lets ban soft drinks! Makes about as much sense as banning an object because a human used it. Cars, Knives, Nail guns,, salt, cholesterol, electricity, clubbings, machetes, flouride…..on and on, and not a single object banned because it was used by another human to cause someone elses death. Bathtubs,Bicycles,Skiing,motorcycles, all have been involved in accidental death, so even discharging a handgun “accidentally” shouldn’t put it in this category either. Where am I going with this? Nowhere, its a dead-end conversation to be discussed in a philosophy clas, impossible to eliminate the effects in the real world…

  68. aislander says:

    modyfied writes: ” impossible to eliminate the effects in the real world…”

    You are so right, but lefties either don’t live in the real world, or they are shameless about exploiting events to further their agenda.

    I think it’s both, but the balance one way or the other depends on the particular lefty…

    Nothing is perfect and nothing is perfectible.

  69. sumyungboi says:

    modyfied: “its a dead-end conversation to be discussed in a philosophy clas”

    Wrong. The Second Amendment, private arms ownership is the law of the land, and simply cannot be reduced to theory. People like their constitutionally protected free speech also, and I doubt you’d find too many people willing to put it aside for the purpose of a philosophical discussion of its merits.

  70. SandHills says:

    Sum… And to add to your comment, those 12 killed in that vehicle accident were illegals, another lightening rod issue separating entrenched veiwpoints.

    Comments on this forum reflects the underlying problem we are having in this country – up to, and including, national policy out of Congress, the Administration, and even SCOTUS. A great divide, with rocks – in the form of sound bites – thrown across the schism between both sides – no compromise, no solutions, and we all lose.

  71. modyfied says:

    sumyungboi “Wrong. The Second Amendment, private arms ownership is the law of the land, and simply cannot be reduced to theory”

    Where in my comment did I say “ban” anything? Where did I say specifically “gun” ? I didnt. The general statement was for all that want to go down the path of “banning” objects, be it guns, or any other “weapon” that causes deaths. It was rhetorical, and had nothing to do with stomping out our God given right of free will, or our constitutional laws. BTW, I carry, believe in the 2nd, and wholly believe armament protects us from tyranny, foreign, and domestic.

  72. Parting with flock, I find the driving death/gun death a bad comparison. If you were talking suicides, guns vs some other method might be a conversation piece.

    Now, the root of this all is the leftist argument that we must be protected from any and all harm, no matter the cost or second/third order effects.

    We just saw an off duty police officer used as an anti-gun talking point. So now should all cops leave their weapons in the station? How many times have you heard of violence stopped by an off duty cop using his service pistol? Two sides to every coin, but the leftists knee jerk based on one event without thinking it through.

  73. sandblower says:

    The car-gun thing is easy and for someone to not understand the difference shows how shallow their thinking ability is. Guns are designed to kill almost exclusively. Cars are not.

  74. SandHills says:

    But snadblower, why get in such a tizzy over snapshot events where a human goes crazy – never going to stop that aspect of the issue.

    But just being “so what” over many times more deaths caused by a person – who doesn’t even have to be crazy – losing control/misjudgement/absent minded, in control of a ton of metal. Sort of makes gun owners turn a deaf ear to any self-aware logic you see in gun control.

    Other than a heavy-handed dictatorship forcing gun control (creating more Ruby Ridges than we have military or law enforcement to handle) – the only way we will see gun control is if the NRA is onboard with some sort of moderation.

    The cultural divide between your view and hardcore gun owners is to wide for even your infinitely deep thinking ability to overcome, especially with holier than thou backhanded slaps at the other side.

  75. agent8698 says:

    “Why would gun safety and control be “political”? I find it to be common sense.” It’s not common sense, it’s controversial. Anything that is controversial is not “common sense”: is the abortion issue “common sense”? Whenever large numbers of people are invested in an issue with their beliefs and values, and oppose large numbers of other people with different beliefs and values, that makes it a political issue, and it becomes more about the underlying values, beliefs, and premises, than about conlcusions. Conclusions are easy, but when basic beliefs and values clash, then you get the kind of argumentational battlefield seen above.

  76. SandHills says:

    Agent, fully agree, sadly we have a growing number of controversial issues in this country – and add in a dash of political correctness to the discussion and there is seldom any common ground to start any resolutions.

    History may very well summarize many of these divisive issues as akin to rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

  77. sumyungboi says:

    sandblower: “Guns are designed to kill almost exclusively . Cars are not.”

    That’s an old cliche argument based on .. nothing, really. As I stated above, I have two assault style match rifles which were built exclusively for competition, they have very heavy barrels, and would be a really dumb choice to go on a killing spree with.

    That aside, what you seem to be saying, is that a hundred dead people as a result of traffic accidents is acceptable, because cars aren’t meant to kill. Well, seems they did. Better stated, the cars didn’t kill anyone, but the drivers made poor decisions. Come to think of it, some cars do malfunction, blown tires, etc., and people do die because of that. Guns don’t fire themselves.

  78. “Ending private ownership of such weapons” and what weapons would those be? You mean the ones that “look” scary like they did in 1994? Well that’s funny because during that so called “ban” I was able to buy a semi-auto AK. How’s that you ask? Well because it looked like this http://www.ar15.com/mobile/topic.html?b=4&f=77&t=143280 instead of like this http://www.gunauction.com/search/displayitem.cfm?itemnum=8774100

    Big differenc huh? It shot the same bullets and the high capicity mags were still legal to buy on the market. It was a COSMETIC ban only, it was a complete joke and yet many people keep touting the so called ban as a success. The ignorant folks who wouldn’t know a gun from a coffee can think they can make wise policy, complete fools.

  79. “And now Hill thinks police officers should not have guns>”

    Either point out where I said such a thing or be branded a liar. Your choice.

  80. “The argument that legalized gun ownership causes more homicides simply doesn’t hold water.”

    Nice strawman argument. I didn’t say such a thing.

  81. ” who’s that down there at #78 behind scores of countries wherein gun ownership is illegal or restricted?

    Did you notice that the worst offenders are “down there”, brainiac? Did you notice that the murder rate in this country is higher than in the Palestinian territories?

  82. sumyungboi says:

    ehill, I did notice that there were lots of places lower than #78, and lots of them have strict gun control.

    Also, that list is pretty bogus. Two things, first, the palestinians don’t usually murder themselves. Being rather uncivilized tribesmen, they’d rather kill other people, this is why launching rockets into Israel is such an attractive alternative when they let off their prehistoric steam. Second, those figures come from the governments of the nations listed. Burma #2 as the country with the least homicides? Please …

  83. I am sure the stats from Palestine are spot on. Please move there and tell me you feel safer.

    There are 2 of you Hills. Figure out the conversation above before you post something that makes you look stupid. Heck, your partner “Lee” even responded.

    Nice wallpaper.

  84. aislander says:

    It’s SO cute when they take the same last name…

  85. MyBandito says:

    islander says, “I HAVE been attacked while riding my bicycle by a whack job driving a car. $25K in ER costs later, I’m not ready to ban cars, but I AM in favor of streamlining commitment procedures.”

    I believe you, but I have to think that if your favorite loved one was maimed or killed in that movie theater, you, like me, would want to make sure that the nutcases and borderline nutcases, and the criminals, didn’t have such easy access to these weapons of mass murder.

    I’m not about banning guns. I’m in favor of common-sense regulation.

    How much firepower do you want the average citizen to possess?

  86. aislander says:

    Yeah, but only if it’s my favorite loved one…

  87. LeePHill says:

    “ehill says:
    July 27, 2012 at 2:18 pm “And now Hill thinks police officers should not have guns>”
    Either point out where I said such a thing or be branded a liar. Your choice.”

    E – that was pointed at me….of course, NEITHER of us said anything of the sort.

    It’s just aislander, 7 and boi making stuff up again….

    “FAST AND FURIOUS”….aka “Operation Wide Reciever”

  88. aislander says:

    Wide “reciever” (no matter HOW it’s spelt) didn’t let the weapons “walk…”

  89. More spin. No truth from these leftists. Mounds (both of you), do you have any pride? ‘Lee’, I know you aware that is false. After they lost track of guns THEY WERE TRACKING the program was ended. Holder and crew went off the reservation all on their own, then “hope and change” had to use privilege to protect him. Wow, some change.

  90. LeePHill says:

    “I know you aware”

    Hmmm….OK…..

    So…tell me about the Bush Administration’s program called “Wide Reciever”…..

    Oh…they don’t talk about that on FOX.

    SAY…speaking of Murdock…did you see one of his tabloids used the headline “Mitt the Twit”?

    OK…back to the subject at hand…

    “Republican lawmakers for eight months have been leading the probe into “Fast and Furious,” the controversial ATF gun operation, and trying to determine who in President Obama’s Justice Department knew what, and when they knew it.

    But it turns out there was another gun operation run by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives years before, using the same tactics of allowing guns to flow illegally onto U.S. streets and into Mexico. This operation was conducted under the Bush administration’s Justice Department.

    Damn, aislander….I guess the Washington Post doesn’t get their information (or lack of, as in your case) from the same place as you.

  91. Nice strawman argument. I didn’t say such a thing.

    STRAWMAN????? ROTFLMFAO! Uhmmmmm, that would be the four links you initially posted. The reference I made was in response to the letter-writer, braniac, get over yourself. Only your mirror is all about you… and I pity your mirror.

  92. Did you notice that the worst offenders are “down there”

    Oh… I guess I should have said “did you notice who was down there at # 121? That better, brainiac? (Note question ended with proper punctuation, brainiac.)

    Did you notice that the murder rate in this country is higher than in the Palestinian territories?

    Oh I’m sure the reportage is very accurate in the Palestinian territories – where they stone women to death for being indiscreet. (Of course, that’s not murder… nor is killing innocent Jews, homosexuals, infidels, etc, etc, etc.)

  93. aislander says:

    Wide Receiver ended when it became apparent that guns were not being effectively tracked and it was on a MUCH smaller scale than Fast and Furious, in which only a desultory effort was made to track weapons. It is obvious that tracking the weapons wasn’t the goal in F and F…

  94. “Also, that list is pretty bogus.”

    It was Clammie’s list, pal. Take it up with him.

  95. “There are 2 of you Hills. Figure out the conversation above before you post something that makes you look stupid.”

    Since neither one of us said anything like what you claimed, I guess that makes you a liar twice.

  96. “Uhmmmmm, that would be the four links you initially posted.

    I didn’t claim that “legalized gun ownership causes more homicides”, genius. That claim is a strawman argument. If you don’t know what a strawman argument is, look it up.

  97. “rather uncivilized tribesmen”

    Racism.

    “the Palestinian territories – where they stone women to death for being indiscreet.”

    More racism.

  98. Racisim

    Platitude.

    Genius

    Mockery.

    Brainiac

    Derision.

    Liar

    Invective.

    Did I miss anything?

    Oh yeah; Strawman.

    That would be your four links @ JULY 26, 2012 AT 6:05 PM

    But we shouldn’t leave out Specious,

    That would be (kind) when one says “If more privately-owned firearms make people safer (as many gun advocates claim) then because we have the highest private firearm ownership in the world, we should also have the lowest violent crime rate in the world”, and then claims there is no implication in that statement that legal gun ownership leads to higher murder rates – which are a very large segment of “violent crime”.

    Whatever.

    Go say “hi” to your mirror.

  99. alindasue says:

    aislander said, “Yeah, but only if it’s my favorite loved one…”

    Everyone is someone’s “favorite” loved one. If an argument would apply in the case of YOUR favorite loved one, wouldn’t it apply to everyone?

  100. Ha, take it to them Clamo.

    Hill o beans- can you tell the board the differences between F&F and Wide Receiver?

    So now Murdock is fair and balanced? Wait a minute, you and your ilk told me he was the devil?

  101. aislander says:

    God save me from the literal-minded! My “favorite-loved-one” comment was aimed at a rather inane post above, and was not meant to be taken seriously.

    Am I reduced to using emoticons?

  102. “there is no implication in that statement that legal gun ownership leads to higher murder rates”

    That’s exactly right. What I said was that higher gun ownership doesn’t lead to lower violent crime rates. I didn’t connect higher gun ownership with higher violent crime rates at all. So the question becomes, why did you jump to that conclusion? Is it because deep down inside, you think that higher gun ownership does lead to higher violent crime rates?

  103. Oh, and by the way, Clammie, calling something a “platitude” or “invective” doesn’t disprove it.

  104. CT7,

    Still waiting for you to back up your claim (“Hill thinks police officers should not have guns”).

    Got proof? Either you have it or you’re a liar. Which is it?

  105. Ha! Keep whining. Already stated it was alt I was addressing.

    If you cannot find Hill’s post, you need some help.

  106. … calling something a “platitude” or “invective” doesn’t disprove it.

    LMAO, so you have “proof” to back up your invectives, platitudes, mockeries, derisions, and lies? If you think your regular use of tired, commonplace expressions, clichés, insults, and mocking adjectives makes what you say seem true in any way, I’ve got a new one for you; delusional.

    And here’s one more for ‘ya; hypocrite.

  107. “Already stated it was alt I was addressing”

    He didn’t say anything of the kind either. Liar.

  108. “If you think your regular use of tired, commonplace expressions, clichés, insults, and mocking adjectives makes what you say seem true in any way, I’ve got a new one for you; delusional.

    And here’s one more for ‘ya; hypocrite.

    When you know you don’t have the intellectual horsepower to refute the message, try using horse-pucky. You seem to like using it.

  109. When you know you don’t have the intellectual horsepower to refute the message, try using horse-pucky. You seem to like using it.

    Like I said, hypocrite.

    Thanks for providing the usage.

  110. LeePHill says:

    “CT7 says:
    July 29, 2012 at 8:57 am Ha! Keep whining. Already stated it was alt I was addressing.
    If you cannot find Hill’s post, you need some help.”

    NO, CT7….YOU need help. You took a post were I demonstrated that your anecdotal approach to the problem had an equal and opposite anecdote and then misrepresented the entire issue with a false statement….no, wait….A LIE….concerning what I said.

  111. aislander says:

    Message for e***l: You never post a message to refute, so all that’s left is the “messenger…”

    (Oh, God! I poked the rodent…)

  112. “Like I said, hypocrite.”

    Where are my hip-waders? It’s getting deep in here.

  113. “Message for e***l: You never post a message to refute”

    See my previous post.

  114. Great post, AI. at least the other Hill tosses out softballs at regular intervals.

    Hill, you took a story of a cop shooting his daughter and tried, poorly, to add it to a debate on gun control.

    Be a man and stick by your words. Or, be a bigger man and admit a mistake (like your support for BHO).

  115. JULY 29, 2012 AT 7:18 AM
    I didn’t connect higher gun ownership with higher violent crime rates at all.

    JULY 26, 2012 AT 6:05 PM
    If more privately-owned firearms make people safer (as many gun advocates claim) then because we have the highest private firearm ownership in the world, we should also have the lowest violent crime rate in the world.

    But we don’t. We have among the highest violent crime rates in the world.

    Apparently even you don’t believe yourself.

  116. BTW, there’s no better “tell” for Yugo-sized intellectual horsepower than resorting to accusations – especially resorting to frequent accusations, of racism. It’s another Godwin’s Law corollary.

    But I’m insulting the squirrel in your cage, my apologies to him.

  117. Spent the week backpacking in the White Cloud Mountains…..I see I haven’t missed anything interesting here.

  118. “the Palestinian territories – where they stone women to death for being indiscreet.”

    More racism.

    When you can’t refute the message, call the messenger a “racist”, LOL. Yeah, veritable mental muscle car you.

  119. The only stoning of women in Palestine I have read about lately have been claims that the uber-zionist settlers were harassing Palestinians.

    Here are a few links:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8U_yAPYcmCU

    http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=07c_1176708380

    mondoweiss.net/…/80-year-old-palestinian-woman-stoned-by-settlers…

    http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=390067

  120. MililaniJag says:

    Yes We Can!!!
    Don’t forget the 5000 women stoned to death for violating Muslim Sharia law. According to WHO. Female rape victims and adulterers deserve to die? ACLU and NOW conveniently ABSENT!! You Dem/Libs must be so proud!! Don’t forget Hitlers mentor Planned Parenthood killer founder eugenicist Margrett Sanger and the killer of 40-50 Million mostly poor kids and elderly in Africa Rachel”Silent Spring”Carson. Liberals killing Millions. Not counting the 100 million killed by liberal Stalin and Mao. BTW, Don’t forget that Hitler was a liberal socialist.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=G4l267pCGdA
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfK9PdLfV8A

  121. ROTFLMAO!

*
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0