Why the US must introduce limited gun controls

[Luddly Neddite]

Stephen King: why the US must introduce limited gun controls | World news | The Guardian

...Political discourse as it once existed in America has given way to useless screaming. Although I'm a blue-state American now, I was raised a red one, and I've spent my life with at least half of one foot still in that camp. It gives me a certain perspective. It also allows me to own my handguns – I have three – with a clear conscience.

Even if I were politically and philosophically open to repealing the Second Amendment (I'm not), I don't believe that repeal, or even modification, would solve the problem of gun violence in America. The guns are already out there and the great majority of them are being bought, sold and carried illegally.

also don't believe the National Rifle Association's assertion – articulated by Wayne LaPierre, its vice-president, each time there's another mass murder by gun in a school or a shopping mall – that America's "culture of violence" plays a significant role in kid-on-kid school shootings. If you take a close look at the dozen top-grossing films of 2012, you see an interesting thing: only one (Skyfall) features gun violence.

In video gaming, shooters still top the lists, but Super Mario Brothers and Pokémon enjoy perennial success, and when it comes to Wii, the 2012 bestseller was a pop-music sweetie called Just Dance 4. The assertion that Americans love violence and bathe in it daily is a self-serving lie.

Most Americans who insist upon their right to own as many guns (and of as many types) as they want are, by and large, decent citizens. They are more apt to vote for increasing law enforcement funds than they are for increasing school improvement funds, reasoning that keeping kids safe is more important than getting them new desks.

They can weep for the dead children and bereft parents of Sandy Hook, then wipe their eyes and write to their congressmen and women about the importance of preserving the right to bear arms....

 

[OODA_Loop]

Nothing about criminals. Just the inanimate object.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

My own opinion is that we need to make it damned hard for criminals, terrorists, illegals and the mentally ill to buy guns.

In addition, we need to make high capacity clips completely illegal for anyone to own outside the military. The reason is obvious: every mass shooter who has been able to kill many people has used a high capacity clip.

Laws will never insure that every drug dealer or mass shooter will be unable to get the weapons he wants but if that makes us give up, why do we bother to pass any laws at all?

 

[9thIDdoc]

Nope. Less control is the reasonable way to go. Keep your hands OFF my Constitutional rights. They are not negociable.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I was unsure about surrounding Constitutional rights, but after reading Stephen King I think we can give up 2 or 3 of them easily

 

[OODA_Loop]

My own opinion is that we need to make it damned hard for criminals, terrorists, illegals and the mentally ill to buy guns.

We changed drunk driving by making the penalties stronger so people think twice before risking it.

Not by making cars for non-drunk drivers harder to get.

The diametric to what you wish to do with guns. Present penalities and system do not deter.

 

[The Rabbi]

My own opinion is that we need to make it damned hard for criminals, terrorists, illegals and the mentally ill to buy guns.

In addition, we need to make high capacity clips completely illegal for anyone to own outside the military. The reason is obvious: every mass shooter who has been able to kill many people has used a high capacity clip.

Laws will never insure that every drug dealer or mass shooter will be unable to get the weapons he wants but if that makes us give up, why do we bother to pass any laws at all?

Police carry "high cap clips" and often scary AR-15 rifles. Should we disarm them too?

 

[Politico]

If no one else has them there's no reason for the police to. The world will be happytime.

 

[Grandma]

My own opinion is that we need to make it damned hard for criminals, terrorists, illegals and the mentally ill to buy guns.

We changed drunk driving by making the penalties stronger so people think twice before risking it.

Not by making cars for non-drunk drivers harder to get.

The diametric to what you wish to do with guns. Present penalities and system do not deter.

"Not by making cars for non-drunk drivers harder to get."

Actually, it is harder for drunk drivers to get cars, at least in Ohio. They have to buy high risk insurance and they have to buy special orange-and-red plates for their cars, after going through drunk-driving classes. The charges and fines can hurt their credit rating too, if they're buying a car. It's not impossible for them to get cars, but it's much more expensive.

 

[The Rabbi]

If no one else has them there's no reason for the police too. The world will be happytime.

I predict unicorns will abound.

 

[OODA_Loop]

My own opinion is that we need to make it damned hard for criminals, terrorists, illegals and the mentally ill to buy guns.

We changed drunk driving by making the penalties stronger so people think twice before risking it.

Not by making cars for non-drunk drivers harder to get.

The diametric to what you wish to do with guns. Present penalities and system do not deter.

"Not by making cars for non-drunk drivers harder to get."

Actually, it is harder for drunk drivers to get cars, at least in Ohio. They have to buy high risk insurance and they have to buy special orange-and-red plates for their cars, after going through drunk-driving classes. The charges and fines can hurt their credit rating too, if they're buying a car. It's not impossible for them to get cars, but it's much more expensive.

Yes exactly puinishes drunk drivers....... not non-drunk drivers.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The Secret Service won't need bad bad guns anymore either, amiright?