-
Next: The Benghazi Select Committee
May 13, 2013 | 94 comments
-
Nobody Died in Watergate
May 9, 2013 | 148 comments
-
Benghazi Bullchips
May 6, 2013 | 184 comments
-
Obama’s Thin Red Line
April 29, 2013 | 207 comments
-
Why Has No One Taken Credit?
April 22, 2013 | 189 comments
Loose Canons
The Unserious Gun Control Debate
The fix is in that won’t fix anything.
(Page 2 of 2)
The only way to stop the use of “assault weapons” in these mass murders is to confiscate them, an unconstitutional infringement on our Second Amendment rights as Justice Scalia wrote in the DC v. Heller decision. A ban on their sale is also unconstitutional. As Scalia wrote:
It may be objected that if weapons that are most useful in military service—M-16 rifles and the like—may be banned, then the Second Amendment right is completely detached from the prefatory clause. But as we have said, the conception of the militia at the time of the Second Amendment’s ratification was the body of all citizens capable of military service, who would bring the sorts of lawful weapons that they possessed at home to militia duty. It may well be true today that a militia, to be as effective as militias in the 18th century, would require sophisticated arms that are highly unusual in society at large. Indeed, it may be true that no amount of small arms could be useful against modern-day bombers and tanks. But the fact that modern developments have limited the degree of fit between the prefatory clause and the protected right cannot change our interpretation of the right.
Scalia also wrote that the prohibition of carrying firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, and other reasonable restrictions, are constitutional. His decision is serious, and any gun-oriented solutions to mass murders have to be consistent with it.
There is a need for serious action, but it’s not a question of more or fewer guns in the hands of Americans. The serious action needed urgently is to get the dangerous mentally ill off the streets and make schools a harder target. Nothing else — certainly not the demands Obama will make — will do anything to prevent another Newtown-like massacre.
About the Author
Jed Babbin served as a Deputy Undersecretary of Defense under George H.W. Bush. He is the author of several bestselling books including Inside the Asylum and In the Words of Our Enemies. You can follow him on Twitter @jedbabbin.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (262) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Jed Babbin
More Articles From Loose Canons
http://spectator.org/archives/2013/01/14/the-unserious-gun-control-deba
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Robbins Mitchell| 1.14.13 @ 6:21AM
Well,I call them defense weapons...not assault weapons....not that Dopey Joe would know the difference anyway.... to him anything larger than a BB gun should be banned and confiscated
Joellen| 1.14.13 @ 8:55AM
Once again, the dem/libs use an evil act to exploit their true agenda. Just this one time I agree with Obama, they are so transparent in their attempt to destroy the Constitution.
Joellen| 1.14.13 @ 8:57AM
Excuse me, I meant to say, "use this evil act to exploit, and thus set their true agenda".
TLP| 1.14.13 @ 9:57AM
I don't understand the whole premise that the guy who Ran 2,000 High Powered Automatic Weapons to the Mexican Drug Cartels, isn't serious about Gun Control.
It's not like he assigned this to one of the Stupidest people on the Planet who thinks that JOBS is a three letter word. Or, who thinks that you need to speak with an Indian Accent at the 711's where he lives. Or, that it's okay to Dry Hump some other guy's Wife in the Well of the Senate while Swearing In new Senators.
Wait a minute................
SUBVET| 1.14.13 @ 11:12AM
Hey !................anyone seen O dark 30....this could win the Ben Stein movie award. At the end the audience clapped........what a bunch of POS hollywood propaganda.
I wonder what team 6 thinks of this movie.......?
davidh| 1.14.13 @ 4:23PM
Are we to believe that Bin Laden was alive after 10 years on the run and we killed him right before Obama was re-elected? Very fortunate for Obama don't you think? Americans are a pathetic bunch, getting just what we deserve. Oh and we had to get rid of his body right away, right.
Occam's Tool| 1.14.13 @ 7:55PM
Making it easier to medicate with antipsychotics psychotics who are on outpatient commitments would help. Keep in mind that we have injectable antipsychotics that can work for weeks. All that is mising is the legal ability to do so. Thank you, ACLU.
Occam's Tool| 1.14.13 @ 8:11PM
UK demographics:
0-14 years: 17.3% (male 5,597,024/ female 5,321,456)
15-64 years: 65.8% (male 20,980,815/ female 20,479,803)
65 years and over: 16.9% (male 4,732,895/ female 5,935,169) (2012 est.)
0-14 years: 20% (male 32,050,686/ female 30,719,945)
15-64 years: 66.5% (male 104,156,828/ female 104,442,302)
65 years and over: 13.5% (male 18,424,785/ female 24,052,919) (2012 est.)
Brits are older, and rapidly aging.
US Demographics:
AlanKneeJerkLiberalBrooks | 1.14.13 @ 3:47PM
I'm serious on this debate, I want to keep my gun so to someday shoot rightists with.
Any volunteers for target practice?: all you have to do is dress up as skeets and run past me.
KennesawJack| 1.14.13 @ 4:58PM
As long as I get to be armed also, sign me up.
AlanKneeJerkLiberalBrooks | 1.14.13 @ 5:06PM
KennesawJack, you'll be first on the death list..er.. I mean, the Guest list.
KennesawJack| 1.14.13 @ 5:16PM
Let me know when the party starts.
Ghost of Cicero (NB) | 1.14.13 @ 8:35PM
Sign me up, too, Brooksie! I'd LOVE to be the one to pop you a new tuchus right between the eyes. Seriously, though, who needs a gun? I've got a 7.5 inch Ka-Bar that needs to be officially "blooded" by an enemy of MY Constitution, be they foreign or domestic. Why be a pansy? You don't think you can whip some 33 year old, 5'4, 147lb Jewish kid's arse? Considering that I've posted my address on this site a few times for various turds of your caliber, under a couple of my previous nome de plumes like NavyBrat & ConChef, you have no reason to wuss out.
Don't sing it, bring it.
Have a Nice Day
spike59| 1.16.13 @ 5:36AM
you do know you're not actually scaring anyone with your Nerf gun, right?
Rhoetus| 1.14.13 @ 10:18PM
Joe just put it in your mouth and squeeze the. . .
83WalnutElite| 1.16.13 @ 1:03AM
Handy definitions from the Left: "Arsenal" - a collection of one or more guns and or pointed sticks. "Stockpiling" - owning more than one bullet. "Assault weapon" - any physical object in the hands of a conservative.
Jack in Wi| 1.14.13 @ 7:05AM
Blumenthal, Biden, Schumur, Feinstein, the Clintons, Obama, Nadler, Bloomberg, Emmanuel, Lautenberg, Soros etc. all have plenty of heavily armed guards around them. Several of them also have pemits to pack heat themselves. Murder is as old as Cane and Abel. It isn't about inanimate guns. It is about the peaceful being able to protect themselves from tyrants and criminals. No wonder these people want us disarmed? They are want a be tyrants and real criminals, like most politicians.
pogybait| 1.14.13 @ 9:50AM
Jack, the truth is, no one really knows what the Second Amendment means and despite the right wing alarmist bleatings, Democrats do not want to take guns away from law-abiding citizens (although there’s nothing in the Living, Breathing Constitution that says they can’t after all it’s just a written guide not to be taken literally) ... look it has even eluded the best Constitutional scholars, from Rosie O’Donnell to Piers Morgan. With the second term of our progressive President, there no doubt in my mind that he is going to create a new era of peace and prosperity, free from violence, guns, want, need or sexual responsibility. With Democrat controlled senate and a soon to be liberal supreme court to provide checks and balances against those four token conservative members of the so called Republicans party, America will become a virtual gun free Heavan or Earth. Despite all the bureaucratic roadblocks, guns are somehow still falling into the hands of level headed law-abiding citizens and we need to change that it’s just not fair.
.
Pecos Pete| 1.14.13 @ 10:22AM
pogybait: You forgot to include the "right of criminals to enter homes without danger" as that would infringe upon their Constitutional Rights.
pogybait| 1.14.13 @ 10:42AM
They are only criminals prosecuted after the twenty first offense.
Rhoetus| 1.14.13 @ 10:26PM
Last night I played Monopoly with
Senator Feinstein and she landed on “Chance”
So she drew a card from the deck:
Take a ride on the Long Island Railroad
Meet Colin Ferguson
You are unarmed and Ferguson is not
You are shot dead
Do not pass go, do not collect $200
Go straight to Hell
SCMike| 1.14.13 @ 7:17AM
The “gun-show loophole” is nothing more that private sales between individuals who are not FFL-holders. Folks do it all the time. Consider the .357 Mag revolver I gave my wife for Christmas: should that be “registered” as a sale before it’s legal?
Von Mises Jr| 1.14.13 @ 9:16AM
The power for the central government to infringe upon gun ownership is not in the Enumerated Powers of the Constitution, and the Second Amendment is simply an addition to the Constitution that limits Federal Power by declaring the right to form Militias.
Furthermore, we are fools if we buy into the idea that the Federal Government can do anything right considering BJ Clinton and his regime setting a "Wall of Separation" between CIA, FBI, NSA and INS created the ability of the Al Qaeda terrorist to commit the 911 WTC attack. DC is a quandary of corruption and inefficiency that has crooks living like Kings stealing from the Treasury. Most of the politicians are in DC for the purpose of stealing for them.
Think about what ObamaCare, Dodd Frank and gun registration means. We will have ruling elite that will have our health care decisions under their purview while they monitor our debit card transactions, track our gun and ammo purchases and know whether we are Statist living off the entitlement programs, earning an income and what primaries we voted in (R v D).
I purposely do not own a debit card and pay for most items with CASH. I sleep with a similar friend as you bought for your wife to protect my wife and me. And while my guns are legal and registered, I will not surrender them to any unconstitutional gun grab since the Federal government has no power over my right to bear arms. If they think otherwise, they are badly mistaken.
Kingofthenet| 1.14.13 @ 12:38PM
Fixed for you!
The “gun-show loophole” is nothing more that private sales between individuals who are not FFL-holders, who may not necessarily know each other in the slightest, and even if they do might be hiding something from their friends, or Lovers, it allows Bubba at a gun show to hand a AR-15 to guy who just walked out of Prison yesterday, with NO protection for innocent civilians.
Bob James| 1.14.13 @ 2:04PM
Oh, horsecrap. I've purchased several firearms from private parties. ID's and bills of sale were always exchanged. In some cases, the seller insisted on running the transaction through a dealer for a NICS check. That, of course, was his choice, and added $30 to the price while accomplishing nothing.
Understand this: it is none of the feral government's damned business what I do with my private property.
Kingofthenet| 1.14.13 @ 3:35PM
What does a 'Bill of sale' and ID check do to prove someone is a Violent Felon, it that info. on a Drivers Liecence?
Ghost of Cicero (NB) | 1.14.13 @ 8:49PM
"A system of licensing and registration is the perfect method to deny gun ownership to the bourgeoisie."...Lenin
THAT'S what a nationalized system gets you, no matter HOW HARD you may try to argue to the contrary. And with THIS current "president," who's been described as THE MOST ANTI-2ND AMENDMENT politician in recent memory:
"Richard Pearson, Illinois State Rifle Association Executive Director, on then-Senator Obama — “While a state senator, Obama voted for a bill that would ban nearly every hunting rifle, shotgun and target rifle owned by Illinois citizens. That same bill would authorize the state police to raid homes of gun owners to forcibly confiscate banned guns. Obama supported a bill that would shut down law-abiding firearm manufacturers including Springfield Armory, Armalite, Rock River Arms and Les Baer. Obama also voted for a bill that would prohibit law-abiding citizens from purchasing more than one gun per month. While a state senator, Obama voted 4 times against legislation that would allow a homeowner to use a firearm in defense of home and family (Illinois Senate, S.B. 2165, vote 20, 3/25/04).”
BTW, I just bought 4 more 30 round magazines for my brand-spankin-new DPMS AR-15.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 1.14.13 @ 7:17AM
In 2012, the Obama Administration again showed its contempt for the First Amendment with its contraception mandate. Why should anyone be surprised that post-reelection, it should reveal its contempt for the Second Amendment?
CJW| 1.14.13 @ 9:09AM
Justice Ginsburg summarized the lefties' disdain for our constitution by stating she prefers the constitutions of others.
The reason is simple.
Our constituion assumes we have rights and restrains the government from infringing on those rights. Other constitutions specify rights as if the government is giving those rights. What the government gives, it takes. The Soviet Union constitution had a litany of "rights." Lefties crave the power in giving and taking rights.
It is all about power and control, one of the main reasons for the unlimited taxing power to favor certain industries and activities.
benny havens| 1.14.13 @ 7:19AM
If gun free zones are good for our kids, then we should have gun free zones around our politicians.
Alan| 1.14.13 @ 7:44AM
Actually, I would go with brain free zones around the politicians.
TLP| 1.14.13 @ 9:59AM
They already have that.
Petronius| 1.14.13 @ 11:12AM
They got it in public schools and the media.
Alan| 1.14.13 @ 3:30PM
Definately the media.
CJW| 1.14.13 @ 9:12AM
benny
I agree. We suggested last week that we replace the Secret Service with multiple signs, in all languages of course, stating the area around the P and VP, Congress, and federal buildings is a gun free zone.
You cannot walk into a federal building or courthouse without photo ID, and checking your briefcase, emptying your pockets,removing your belt and shoes, etc.
Nancy in NC| 1.14.13 @ 7:35AM
I attended a local gun show this weekend. It was packed out and guns were selling like hotcakes, even though they are much more expensive than they were three months ago. The local sheriff was processing background checks by the hundreds, so people were buying guns for the first time.
Not only were people buying guns they were verbalizing their anger with the current situation in DC.
Just the fact that the word confiscation was used by someone (even though it was Cuomo) is enough to stir the pot and make people dig in their heels.
Obama and crew are the world's best gun salesmen.
Maxwell| 1.14.13 @ 8:35AM
I was reading on ALL of my gun boards that manufacturers are cleaned out of everything! Ammo, AR15 lover receivers, complete firearms, magazines - forget about it, ammo, & extra parts. Even web sites are posting that no orders will be taken for at least 3 more months. Brownells was cleaned out of three years of magazines in a matter of hours!
Now, lets think of all the machinists that are involved in the manufacturer of these parts, many of which are not huge corporations. The CNC operators, craftsman, assemblers, & support staff, yup, more will be unemployed.
My question will be, will Barry do this by Executive Order or thru Congress? If by Executive Order will that be lawful? Ok, I know, not much is lawful with this administration. I had to ask anyhow.
Lawrence Kennon | 1.14.13 @ 7:45AM
You wrote, "we have to do a lot better than the idiotic ideas of arming janitors or teachers."
I agree, we also need to allow teachers and administrative staff to have the choice to take training and receive a permit to carry a concealed handgun, and then carry it legally in school. The really "idiotic" idea is to tell the mentally ill that a school is a "Gun Free Zone." Now that is really idiotic.
You also wrote that, "Meanwhile, there are no counter-proposals from gun control opponents." Yes, there are serious counter-proposals. Put guns in schools in the hands of responsible people. School massacres will end immediately when the mentally ill realize they have a high probability of getting shot themselves before they achieve their purpose. Most of these crazed killers want to die, but not at the hands of someone else.
OP4| 1.14.13 @ 7:55AM
Yes. Montpelier has some of it right.
When I look down a street in Dallas, I don't know who is armed although I can guess it's at least a quarter of the people out there.
Don't tell me which teachers, janitors, and / or administrators are armed - just do it. (If they have some training and a carry permit)
Appleby| 1.14.13 @ 3:45PM
One of the law firms where I worked in Atlanta had two attorneys who kept guns in their offices and we knew who they were. Several others kept guns in their cars' glove boxes. When the major who ended up in prison for his handling of the 1996 Atlanta Olympics (along with most of his friends) came to our offices to campaign, one of the armed lawyers said bluntly, "You're not getting my wallet, and you're not getting my gun." This state of affairs was in place during the Rodney King Memorial Loot'n'Shoot in Atlanta, which was one reason nobody shot at us on the way home.
Appleby| 1.14.13 @ 3:45PM
mayor. not major.
Houdini| 1.14.13 @ 10:39AM
Why in the world should we offer counter proposals? Last time I checked we still have a constitution that guarantees us the right to keep and bear arms. The meaning of the second amendment is clear and has nothing to do with hunting. I can't think of any country where the people were armed, that was subjugated by force. Crooked elections are another matter. Every despot in modern history has first taken the populations firearms. We already have literally thousands of laws designed to keep weapons out of the hands of criminals and mentally challenged (other than democrats) individuals. We have gun free zones(hows that working out for ya?) drug free zones, smoke free zones, and in Washington thought free zones. No written law will stop an individual bent on killing, robbing, or raping someone. If they did, we wouldn't have prisons.
imaginarynumber| 1.15.13 @ 4:20AM
Lawrence Kennon- "Put guns in schools in the hands of responsible people. School massacres will end immediately when the mentally ill realize they have a high probability of getting shot themselves before they achieve their purpose"
Not all mentally ill people are capable of sustained reasoned thinking...
Additionally your suggestion fails to explain why more of these mass killings don't happen on a daily basis.
It is a sad reflection of society that we have groups of people keen to demonstrate their ardent defence of rights by removing the rights of others.
When you take the guns away from the mentally ill who will be the next scapegoats? Black people, Jewish people, Lefties, single mums, poor people?
Whilst I advocate a thorough screening of all those wishing to own a gun, I do worry about the ease with which certain people are willing to stigmatise all people with "mental illness" (whatever that is) as being more inclined to mass shootings.
I am not aware of any evidence that demonstrates that those with depression, OCD, eating disorders, etc., are predisposed to random acts of violence.
Do they not deserve the same "rights" to defend their families and go hunting?
The irony is that many of you that lay the blame for gun missuse on mental illness might well be the same people that would have any application declined on the grounds of lacking sound mental judgement.
Alan| 1.14.13 @ 8:01AM
Schumer comes out and with a straight face and says that gun sellers should stop sales while the chairman and his facists work on putting them out of business. This is what passes for elected leadership in bizarro world nowadays.
Alan| 1.14.13 @ 8:02AM
This is what gives menaing to the phrase "escape from NY"
TLP| 1.14.13 @ 12:47PM
Schumer would've been at the Docks when his Hero- FDR - sent the MS St. Louis, full of Jewish Refugees seeking Assylum from Hitler's Final Solution, back to Europe, telling those people that they need to go back home, until He, and his fellow FDR Democrats can "Work This Out".
Jack London| 1.14.13 @ 8:08AM
More than 700 Americans have been shot dead in homicides and accidents since the school massacre. The big problem is with everyday violence where guns are readily available. No other developed country has anywhere near this death toll. For anyone who cares about this - which of course gun freaks don't - the only solution is to start taking millions of guns out of circulation and adopt stringent checks and security for arms remaining in private hands.
Ron M.| 1.14.13 @ 8:17AM
How long did it take you to make up that number? I for one am sick of the lies and partial truths people like you spout.
Frank Drackman| 1.14.13 @ 8:20AM
How many of those were at Sidwell Friends School, you know, the one with multiple armed guards??
I have to laugh at all the estimates of how many guns are in America, its over a billion suckers, good luck taking them.
Frank
TLP| 1.14.13 @ 10:03AM
Did somebody lobotomize McMurphy?
Frank Drackman| 1.14.13 @ 10:09AM
Probably not, T-iny L-ittle P-enis, since lobtomies are done about as often as you see a White Defensive back in the NFL.
OK, maybe not that rare.
Frank
TLP| 1.14.13 @ 10:45AM
Actually, it's T-he L-argest P-enis, seein as how you seem so fixed on it, all the time.
Frank Drackman| 1.14.13 @ 10:53AM
So you must see alot of Penis's to know that yours is "The Largest".
As the Great W.F. Fields said,
"Go away Boy, you're botherin me"
Frank
TLP| 1.14.13 @ 12:51PM
I don't see any, but I do read a lot of Dicks on this site, (one in particular) spouting Crap, and then writing his name at the bottom.
Maybe you've heard of him?
Frank Drackman| 1.14.13 @ 1:53PM
Your boy-toy? nope.
Frank
Rhoetus| 1.14.13 @ 10:30PM
Someone should lobotomize Chuckie Schumer.
Ryan| 1.14.13 @ 8:22AM
Citation, please, first. Second, how many of those guns used in crimes were obtained illegally? How many were used against people who were not allowed to arm and protect themselves?
Jack London| 1.14.13 @ 8:37AM
As you asked politely here's the info - someone is gathering tweets of gun deaths reported in the media at https://twitter.com/GunDeaths and there's a graphical display at http://www.slate.com/articles/.....oting.html where you can click through to read the story on each death.
The number is actually 812 since Newtown and is obviously an under-report as not all death reports have been gathered. The number is in keeping with annual reports.
The deaths are reported with no comment on cause - it's a count with the ability to see what happened and about time too.
As for illegal guns, how did people get them?
CJW| 1.14.13 @ 8:43AM
CommieJack
Did these guns go off automatically or did some criminal pull the trigger?
Albert Constantine Jr.| 1.14.13 @ 9:15AM
How interesting. I clicked on your site and it worked….once. I randomly selected one of the deaths depicted and clicked on Joel Bynes in Surprise, AZ, who is reported as killed by firearms on 010513. Of course, when I google the name, I learn that he was shot by the police in what appears to be an example of suicide by cop.
Of course, the investigation into the shooting does not appear to be concluded, but let us presume for our purposes that it was justified. Do we also include Bynes in the total of people killed by their government? The attached url http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/NOTE1.HTM is a list compiled that purports to have the totals (not by name, of course) of those killed by governments throughout history, including the millions credited to the totalitarian communist regimes of Mao, Stalin and Pol Pot. While I have questions about its accuracy and credibility, there is an important contrast by scale.
The Second Amendment was not created just so that the people could protect themselves from roving criminals and marauding Indians, but against totalitarian and dictatorial government.
Jack London| 1.14.13 @ 9:28AM
The links in the later 'bodies' don't seem to up at present but you can see all the stories on the Twitter feed. As for why, the idea is to report all gun deaths regardless of what happened. For me, it gives the sheer scale of the problem and puts faces to the people involved.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 1.14.13 @ 9:39AM
Gun deaths in the US (including suicide, homicide, accidents, self defense, those shot by the police) are in the hundreds per month. Deaths brought on by government (including those lined up and shot, but also through gassing, starvation, etc.) throughout the world in the millions per year of the 20th century alone.
The average person outside the US today has more to fear from their government than the average person inside the US has to fear from an armed citizenry, particularly if that person is so armed.
Of course, someone like you won't rest, Jack, until those in the US have as much to fear from their government as the former residents of Pol Pot's Kampuchea.
TLP| 1.14.13 @ 10:11AM
He's a Wnker who probably still lives with his Mum, and only leaves their Flat to pick up the Clothing Store Catalogues, with their Boys Sections, and Men's Underwear.
Ryan| 1.14.13 @ 10:13AM
That's a poor way to work it out. It's FAR too big picture, and implicates the law-abiding as part of the problem.
Criminals don't care about whether or not they are supposed to access guns.
Law-abiding citizens should have access to small arms. Period.
lost| 1.14.13 @ 1:04PM
Lets outlaw CA, NY, IL, FL, TX, MI, PA because it is apparent using statistics that those states kill people the most. See problem fixed.
CJW| 1.14.13 @ 4:51PM
We will make those states Gun Free Zones and that will solve the problem of "gun" violence.
Stephie| 1.14.13 @ 9:31AM
How many of those shooting deaths were in the wonderful berg of Chicago where the gun laws are the strictest? And how many were near the southern border where drug cartels are killing people with the weapons given to them by our justice dept?
KennesawJack| 1.14.13 @ 11:48AM
Article on Weasel Zippers this morning; "Gun deaths in Chicago in 2012 greater than number of Coalition Forces death in Afghanistan." So much for the city with the toughest gun control laws in the nation. Gun control does no good when paired with "Chicago values".
Pecos Pete| 1.14.13 @ 1:53PM
KJ: Important News Bulletin ... There Are No Gun Control Laws in Afghanistan.
KennesawJack| 1.14.13 @ 3:21PM
Pete, check out the gun control laws in my town, Kennesaw, GA. (or should I say CRIMINAL control laws?) If memory serves, we've had one homicide here in the last 20 years.
Anthony| 1.14.13 @ 5:39PM
You're full of it Jack. Chicago, murder capitol of America, only does 5-7 murders a week. Even New York and D.C. don't make up enough of the slack to support 812 since Newton.
How many people's lives are saved each week by someone with a firearm?
Our goverment doesn't want us to know that, it would upset the leftist agenda.
Jack London| 1.14.13 @ 6:12PM
They are gun deaths - anyone shot dead with a gun for whatever reason reported in the media. The total so far extrapolates to our usual yearly toll.
Ghost of Cicero (NB) | 1.14.13 @ 8:59PM
Guess you've never stopped to even consider the number of knife crimes in England, have you, JackAss? If you are even a casual reader of Sky News, UK Daily Mail, The Telegraph, The Times, and yes, even The Guardian, you'd know that slashings & stabbings have increase EXPONENTIALLY, to the point that legislation has been considered to ban even SMALLER knives. Hell, before you know it, they'll be back at chop sticks, like the ancient Chinese under the Ming Dynasty.
You CANNOT blame the sword for the hand that wields it. To do so is the utmost form of idiocy.
imaginarynumber| 1.15.13 @ 4:44AM
In 2006/07, there were 271 homicides (in the UK) using a sharp instrument, the highest number since records began, accounting for 38% of all homicides. In 2008/09 40% of homicides used a sharp instrument, the highest proportion since records began.
In 2011/12 there were 200 homicides using a sharp instrument including knives and broken bottles the lowest number since 1996, accounting for 39% of all homicides.
Last year saw a drop of 9% in the total of all crimes involving sharp objects. Hardly evidence of an exponential increase...
www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/sn04304.pdf
35 people were gun homicide victims.
Even when you include knife crime, the total homicide rate for the UK is 4 times lower than that of the USA.
I do agree that UK knife crime is a concern but seemingly less so than American gun crime.
spike59| 1.16.13 @ 5:46AM
and in every case, i'm guessing the gun just jumped up and shot the victim, all by itself?
Cats1cowboy| 1.14.13 @ 8:31AM
Jack London was a communist. Communists in other countries start their destruction by removing weapons from their citizens. You advocate disarming US Citizens, in violation of The Second Amendment. Is that why you post as "Jack London"? Whatever reason you chose, advocating violating Our Constitution is treason. Get out of Our Country.
Boar Hunter| 1.14.13 @ 11:02AM
Texting while driving kills 6,000 annually in the U.S. alone
Read more at http://www.oddee.com/item_9800.....H82YoQq.99
Warrior| 1.14.13 @ 11:23AM
I love statistics:
According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) 32,885 people died in traffic crashes in 2010 in the United States including an estimated 10,228 people who died in drunk driving crashes, accounting for 31%.
Time to look back into prohibition!?!?!
Drunken Sailor| 1.14.13 @ 11:04AM
Hell Jack,
Knives are the second most commonly used murder weapon, lets ban them as well. While were at it we need to come up with a way to combat the 3rd most common method of murder, using hands and feet. Pretty soon we will live in Utopia where everything is covered in bubble wrap and safe.
John Navratil| 1.14.13 @ 11:41AM
Jack London,
Were you referring to Russia which has triple our intentional homicide rate? Perhaps the Baltic states, where Latvia is the only one with a rate a bit less than ours. South of the border, the only country with a rate less than ours is Peru. Of course, you meant Western Europe and Canada with total homicide rates one-fourth ours. The U.K. has just about the lowest gun homicide rate in the world but they still manage to kill by other means.
Of course you can choose to isolate homicides committed with a firearm, which make up roughly half the homicides in the U.S. and claim the U.S. has twenty times the homicide rate with firearms than other developed country. But you'd have to agree then that being murdered by some other weapon is somehow better than being shot.
Your solution is foolish as the criminal doesn't give a damn about the rules. Fortunately, that is the cohort which is killing itself with such wild abandon. Good luck rounding up the estimated 270,000,000 firearms in the U.S. But take some solace in the fact that a nation which is armed to the teeth, so few of these weapons are involved in crime. Put another way, you could round up 269,000,000 guns in law-abiding hands and have absolutely no impact on gun violence. As evidenced by other "civilized" countries, property crimes would, however, sky-rocket.
Jack London| 1.14.13 @ 1:39PM
Well John you sound defeatist - that nothing can be done because we are awash with lethal weapons. But that's the point, isn't it? If other countries with similar urban cultures such as the UK can control guns so effectively then so can we but it will take a long time. The alternative is to carry on being an awful outlier in the nations we would want to compare ourselves with.
Surely we have to move to registration, tracing, security, checking etc if lethal weapons are held in the home.
And by the way, guns account for 60% of homicides and about 75-80% for young people and in a couple of years gun deaths will outnumber car deaths.
And there are many awful 'accidents' with guns (read gross negligence) and solid evidence of a raised suicide rate among male gun owners or those with access to guns.
Pecos Pete| 1.14.13 @ 1:57PM
Caught on camera: Terrifying moment hooded gunman pointed his weapon at New York taxi driver - just seconds before he shot him three times.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new.....river.html
Watch and then tell me that not having a gun is a good thing. Maybe you'll be the taxi driver next time?
TLP| 1.14.13 @ 2:32PM
If you are willing to give up a little Liberty, for a little Security, than you deserve neither.
Benjamin Franklin.
What is it about that, that you don't understand?
Idiot.
KennesawJack| 1.14.13 @ 3:25PM
Jack, just sit back and watch what happens as the UK continues to so assiduosly develop its permanent, dependent underclass as we have. They'll wish to Hell they had arms for self-protection. It ain't the guns, it's the culture we've created in this country and the Brits are following our example.
John Navratil| 1.14.13 @ 3:22PM
Jack London,
Not defeatist, rather pleased. But you'd better start with repealing the Second Amendment. And the alternative you posit doesn't bother me a bit. There are safer countries and less safe countries but, generally, not freer. I've lived in Britain, Germany and France. Lovely places, but not for me. Actually, so long as I don't mess around with someone else's wife, get into a drug turf war or close the bars in the bad part of town, I'm as safe here as anywhere.
Registration and tracking is merely a prelude to confiscation. Furthermore, there is nothing to be gained from registration or tracking of the weapons held by law-abiding citizens. We know that criminally held weapons are obtained by theft or on the black market or from Eric Holder.
Here is a paper which you may find informative as it compares rate of firearm ownership and homicides across Europe:
http://www.law.harvard.edu/stu.....online.pdf The causality you cite between gun ownership and homicides does not exist.
...
John Navratil| 1.14.13 @ 3:22PM
...
After Australia achieved the removal of guns from society, they did not achieve any significant reduction in homicides. The homicide rates in New Zealand is comparable (10% less) to Australia's but the per capita gun ownership in New Zealand is much higher than Australia's. Luxembourg, where handguns are completely banned and long guns are all but impossible to own has a murder rate nine times that of neighboring Germany. The U.K., after a century of gun control, is seeing a pronounced rise in violent crimes - including murders. The guns come in with the drugs they are meant to protect.
Your last two paragraphs lack rigour. Our homicide rate is at a 50 year low and has been decreasing steadily for the last 30 years (the peak was 1980). The solid evidence you cite of raised suicide rates is not solid, at all. This is disaggregated data, correlations are difficult to make and one can never know if, absent the firearm, another means would be used.
Jack London| 1.14.13 @ 4:17PM
I just posted this to Pecos Pete, John:
"The number of murders and killings in England and Wales has fallen to the lowest level in nearly 30 years, Office for National Statistics figures show."
They only had 550 murders in the last reported year and only 39 were from guns. We do that in a day.
The 'Harvard' study - actually just some right-wing law students - you cite is garbage - you need to check your sources. The decimal point for Luxembourg for example is wrong. It's 0.9.
The suicide studies are solid - go look it up.
Crime rates have been declining in all Western countries. Some say it's because we phased out lead. But our homicide rate and with firearms is indisputably much higher unless you're trying to tell me the dead bodies aren't dead.
And the Australian and UK legislation was primarily to cut the risk of massacres, which has worked. The UK already had a tiny gun homicide rate. In Australia:
"...the firearm homicide rate fell by 59 percent, and the firearm suicide rate fell by 65 percent, in the decade after the law was introduced, without a parallel increase in non-firearm homicides and suicides."
From WaPo.
JD| 1.14.13 @ 4:44PM
Gun control laws have been shown to decrease gun deaths in many locales all over the world. They have been shown to increase overall crime in all those same instances. Both facts have been widely shown, absent a few claims by the highly biased.
Leftists, being stupid and bullheaded, believe that the first sentence makes the second impossible. That is because in all things they demonstrate inability to comprehend the concepts of incentive, deterrence, and indirect consequences.
I personally have never owned nor fired a gun, but it is because I prefer not to be the victim of crime that I advocate policies most likely to keep me from becoming a victim. This makes me a natural enemy of Leftism.
Jack London| 1.14.13 @ 5:09PM
Well JD you won't be able to substantiate this because gun controls in European countries such as the UK were already acting on very small gun crime rates. You also won't be able to compare say England with the US on violent crime because there are major differences in how such crime is recognized and recorded. I assume this is why you failed to provide a single source for your assertion.
John Navratil| 1.14.13 @ 6:04PM
Jack London,
I said "a pronounced rise in violent crimes - including murders". I should have said "handgun murders." Indeed the overall homicide rate is down as it is in the U.S. The handgun homicide rate went up after the Dunblane shooting. Violent crime does appear to have peaked in 2005/2006. But all that gun control did nothing to stop Derrick Bird.
See: http://www.politics.co.uk/reference/gun-crime -- "Despite the handguns ban imposed under the 1997 Firearms Amendment, research carried out following the implementation of the Act saw a 40 per cent increase in the number of gun crime incidents in the UK."
A british blogger obviously shares your sentiments (http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/dan-ehrlich/uk-gun-ownership-up-deaths-down_b_1209967.html) yet his opening sentences is: "Gun deaths last year in the UK at 51 were down by 18 percent, yet private gun ownership continues to grow with 1.8 million legally held."
The Luxembourg rate reported in the link I sent was indeed wrong. However you obviously didn't check, either, it's the third highest in Europe at 4.24 per 100,000 (almost up to U.S. standards). http://www.wort.lu/en/view/lux.....e7e7692b43
...
John Navratil| 1.14.13 @ 6:04PM
...
About strongest statement I can find on your suicide statement is "The preponderance of current evidence indicates that gun availability is a risk factor for youth suicide in the United States." Don't keep me in suspense. If you've got that solid data you claim exists, let's have a look at the source.
Mass killings, being so statistically rare, you cannot say that the Australian buy back has worked. It has just worked so far. I hope another never happens again, but this is merely a "post hoc" statement.
Love your quote about the 59 and 65 percent. Crap, however! See: http://web.archive.org/web/200.....i269t.html Do you see any break in a trend line after the Australian buy-back?
Jack London| 1.14.13 @ 6:40PM
Ok - and the Australian graph you quote ends in 2001, The figures I quoted are for a longer span after the ban. Also, like the UK, homicide and gun homicide is very low there anyway.
Here's a good suicide ref:
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp0805923
"The empirical evidence linking suicide risk in the United States to the presence of firearms in the home is compelling.3 There are at least a dozen U.S. case–control studies in the peer-reviewed literature, all of which have found that a gun in the home is associated with an increased risk of suicide. The increase in risk is large, typically 2 to 10 times that in homes without guns, depending on the sample population (e.g., adolescents vs. older adults) and on the way in which the firearms were stored. The association between guns in the home and the risk of suicide is due entirely to a large increase in the risk of suicide by firearm that is not counterbalanced by a reduced risk of nonfirearm suicide. Moreover, the increased risk of suicide is not explained by increased psychopathologic characteristics, suicidal ideation, or suicide attempts among members of gun-owning households."
John Navratil| 1.14.13 @ 7:12PM
Don't like those numbers, try these: http://www.aic.gov.au/statistics/homicide.html. Still no major change in homicide rates.
So your problem with guns for suicide is their lethality. Oh, damn. Much better to bleed to death slowly, I guess. Oh, well.
Jack London| 1.14.13 @ 7:44PM
Right, so you agree on the suicides.
Your Australian link isn't working but tell me - how many homicides do they have there are how long do we take to reach the same number?
Jack London| 1.14.13 @ 6:35PM
I've looked at England/UK before - the gun homicide rate is tiny, and the gun crimes are often with converted pellet guns and air rifles. It's a crowded country with a lot of our drug/urban culture and inequality plus a lot of alcohol - the tiny homicide rate is a tribute to gun control.
You are looking very silly about Luxembourg - they has four homicides in the last reported year, and only one was classed as murder. The others may have been DUIs or such like. The population is only 500,000.
John Navratil| 1.14.13 @ 7:22PM
Jack London,
So you finally get religion about small number, sampling errors and noisy data. I'll hold you to that.
The UK gun homicide rate IS small, but it doubled after Dunblane and stayed that way for several years. That's not noise.
Luxembourg's population is small and while the rate is large, the total homicides must be small (say 25). So one murder, more or less, makes about a .16 difference in the rate. Yet somehow in Luxembourg (beautiful place - love the valley) they'rr killing themselves as almost U.S. rates. What would happen in this center of finance if the gun laws were repealed? Would it turn into Mexico? Well, we'll never know, will we?
Now get about addressing my point that there are countries with restrictive gun laws and lower gun ownership rates and higher gun homicides than the U.S. (Mexico, e.g.) and tell me how that can be?
Jack London| 1.14.13 @ 7:42PM
John - the UK gun homicide is too small to be significant in any way that is related to gun ownership As far as I know, handguns are now illegal but at times the rate has been higher and lower before and after Dunblane but at all times its very low.
You don't get Luxembourg do you. One murder in a city of 500,000 - its not an epidemic.
I guess you missed the drug wars in Mexico and you've probably not visited the favelas of Rio. You are changing the comparison to emerging nations - stay on topic.
John Navratil| 1.14.13 @ 9:51PM
Jack London,
Answer the question! Is it gun laws or culture?
JD| 1.14.13 @ 7:22PM
Again, Jack, you restrict to homicide at the exclusion of all other crime. You have not defended this practice, except to insist that differences in how crimes are counted make other comparisons impossible. How convenient; you've dismissed the heart of your critics' arguments without countering it at all! And ironic, since there are clear and obvious accounting differences in health care accounting which you Leftists insist on ignoring when making dubious claims of the superiority of socialized health care!
Also, you condemn John for using Luxembourg as an example, but it was you who called out a mistaken stat about Luxembourg; he merely called out your further inaccuracy. Finally, you insist that we honor your Leftist belief that "inequality" should increase expected homicides. A foolish expectation.
Jack London| 1.14.13 @ 4:19PM
"there is nothing to be gained from registration or tracking of the weapons held by law-abiding citizens."
Don't be ridiculous. Where do illegally held weapons come from?
John Navratil| 1.14.13 @ 6:12PM
Jack London,
If my registered weapon is stolen does that make it better? If it gets smuggled in does my registration matter? It I'm caught committing a crime with my own weapon, does registration make me easier to prosecute? If a criminal buys a registered weapon, assuming the numbers haven't been obliterated, all that facilitates is tracing it back to the original purchaser.
It's you who is being ridiculous.
Jack London| 1.14.13 @ 6:43PM
Sorry John - if we can't do something as basic as trace and track lethal weapons we really do deserve not to get a hold on gun misuse and crime. And who knows - as a property rights guy as I guess you are how are you going to get your gun back if its not traceable to you?
John Navratil| 1.14.13 @ 7:07PM
Deserving is a favourite weasel term of the left. Let's get "fair" and "reasonable." Maybe you should call it "investing in safety."
Gun misuse is not a problem registration and tracing are going to solve and you know it. As the original purchaser, my guns are already traceable to me. If they are stolen, the numbers will be obliterated and they will not be. You've solved absolutely nothing.
Now you tell me what you will do with trace information when a gun, if it is traceable, is used in a crime.
Jack London| 1.14.13 @ 7:57PM
Read this John and you'll understand how important its is to establish patterns and locations for trafficking and the ways guns end up in illegal hands.
http://www.mayorsagainstillega.....report.pdf
Occam's Tool| 1.14.13 @ 8:02PM
Jack: you should read about chaos theory.
And, by the way: your arguments about gun deaths contradicts your arguments on our health care system life expectancy deficits, especially as murder is one of the highest reasons for death in young Black males, for example. The highest cause of death for Black males between 15-34 is Homicide. Actually, between ages 15-19, homicide accounts for over 50% of Black male deaths. Now, I seriously doubt that they were done with registered weapons.
spike59| 1.16.13 @ 5:48AM
" in a couple of years gun deaths will outnumber car deaths."
-------------------------------------------------------
not even close, you lying POS...in fact, FBI stats show gun deaths on a steady decline
Occam's Tool| 1.14.13 @ 7:57PM
Britain has a nice number of gun murders. Chicago has very tough gun control laws, as well.
The deaths tend to come from crooks rather than law abiding gun owners.
c. j. acworth| 1.14.13 @ 8:11AM
Mr. Babbin says that arming teachers is "idiotic", but doesn't say why. For th life of me I can't see why we don't allow those teachers who wish to carry their own piece to do so. If they are legally able to carry on the street (under the laws of their own state) why is it so idiotic to allw them to carry on the job?
TLP| 1.14.13 @ 12:55PM
You mean like Sidwell Friends, where President Marie Antoinette and David Gregory send their kids?
Cats1cowboy| 1.14.13 @ 8:22AM
Re: "Republicans were accused daily of failing to offer a counterproposal ..."
Republicans were accused daily of failing to offer violations of The Second Amendment.
There. I fixed it.
Anthony| 1.14.13 @ 8:23AM
Obozo and congress should lead by example. If guns afford no protection, then the Secret Service and the congressional police force should be disarmed. Finally, we can save some money!!!
They can protect our sacred political cows with mace, stun guns and batons.
But of course, this will never happen, the political class will always take care of itself, while leaving the commoners defenseless.
If the political whores want our guns, let them show up at our doorsteps, sans their army of protection, and demand we hand our guns over to them.
Al Adab| 1.14.13 @ 8:24AM
Ban cars that kill hundreds.
Ban hammers that kill hundreds.
Ban assault bloggers who kill brain cells.
OK so mr. killer has to carry two magazines instead of one. The guy at VT used handguns.
Nothing that changes the equipment even banning "assault weapons (which get defined on looks and capacity alone) would change anything. It took us a long time to dehumanize one another, it will take a long time to recreate respect for the life of fellow citizens.
Cats1cowboy| 1.14.13 @ 8:33AM
On average, three people die every year from choking on food. Is food next on the list of essentials to be banned?
Maxwell| 1.14.13 @ 8:36AM
Depends, if you are Bloomberg in New York, then yes, let the little people suffer a little!
Frank Drackman| 1.14.13 @ 8:38AM
You ever tried one of my Mom's Blackbean Knish's????
Deee-Lish-us, but a few hrs later you better be at MOPP 4 if you nome sane???
Frank
Jack London| 1.14.13 @ 8:40AM
Al - Do you think just as many people would die if we didn't have many guns?
Pecos Pete| 1.14.13 @ 9:01AM
Stupid Communist Jack: Do you think as many people would die if we didn't have as many:
Cars
Trains
Planes
Hammers
Knives
Hands
Mentally Defectives
Fiscal Conservatives
????
Jack London| 1.14.13 @ 9:24AM
I thought we were talking about guns Pete. Happy to have a conversation say about improving aviation safety but it's a bit off topic.
Stephie| 1.14.13 @ 9:37AM
I just don't get why you think that taking my firearms away from me will keep the crazies and criminals from killing kids in a school in CT.
Fix why they want to go on a shooting rampage in the first place. The last 3 mass killings were done by young males who were mentally ill and medicated. Why don't we find out what they were on and then go after BigPharma! I bet these boys were in ritalin at a young age and throughout their teen years. I fear the idiots in DC are missing the point but then, they get big money from BigPharma, don't they?
Jack London| 1.14.13 @ 1:46PM
Do you think Lanza's mother should have had guns?
Frank Drackman| 1.14.13 @ 2:32PM
Umm, well let me see, Homicidal Maniac living in the house..
Umm Jack, as hard as this may be for you to wrap around your pointy little haid'.
Its none of your business whether Mrs. Lanza had 1, 21, 121 guns, its America, you wanta live under a Fascist Dictatorship move somewhere with strict bans on assault rifles, "High Capacity" Magazines, you know, like Connecticut.
Frank
Occam's Tool| 1.14.13 @ 8:04PM
Considering that the same week the Connecticut murders occurred a school in China had children mass murdered by knives, I'm not sure it would have mattered much.
Again, the best thing to do would have been to involuntarily MEDICATE Mr. Lanza.
Pecos Pete| 1.14.13 @ 11:00AM
Stupid Communist Jack: I see that you don't deny that you are a Communist. And, as a Communist you would dearly love to remove all guns from citizens.
Butch| 1.14.13 @ 2:59PM
You left a couple out, Pete. According to Jared Taylor in Paved with Good Intentions, America's white crime rate is lower than any country in western Europe.
spike59| 1.16.13 @ 5:50AM
how DARE you mention a fact!
JoeS| 1.14.13 @ 9:17AM
Don't know and it doesn't matter. The argument is not about how many die and how many guns there may be. The argument is whether our liberty is more important than perceived risk of firearms possession.
We have lost the understanding that liberty carries risk. We are being asked to surrender our ability to defend ourselves and allow an incompetent government to do so. The role of government is not to guarantee our safety, it is to protect our liberty to provide for our own safety. It also has a responsibility to remove from society those that are a danger to our liberty.
We can accept government control of risk or we can be free. We can not have both.
Jack London| 1.14.13 @ 9:25AM
As I said, gun freaks don't care about the collateral death toll from having millions of guns around, as you have just demonstrated.
Stephie| 1.14.13 @ 9:38AM
You are wrong Jack.
Ryan| 1.14.13 @ 10:24AM
Yes, we do. And we want to prevent more by allowing people to defend themselves. I would attest that a "gun-free zone" is just as dangerous.
Jack London| 1.14.13 @ 1:49PM
The gun massacres are rare. It's the everyday shootings that need most attention and they will not be solved by more guns - quite the reverse, as we see all so vividly.
Occam's Tool| 1.14.13 @ 8:06PM
The everyday shootings are caused by illegal guns. The problem lies in the absence of fathers from the homes due to Liberal Social policy.
Ryan| 1.15.13 @ 8:22AM
Everyday shootings happen more in restrictive areas, where people cannot defend themselves with a gun.
I am less likely to get shot at if someone else knows I am packing.
Houdini| 1.14.13 @ 10:52AM
Jack, you keep spouting statistics re: gun deaths. These are meaningless unless you take out the number of deaths attributed to criminal acts by criminals (folks with a record that shouldn't have a gun in the first place) deaths as a result of police gunfire in performance of their duties, and deaths which result from a citizen killing a person that is committing a criminal act. The number you would be left with would be statistically insignificant in a country of over 300 million.
Pecos Pete| 1.14.13 @ 10:58AM
You are more likely to be struck by lightening than to be shot by a gun.
Al Adab| 1.14.13 @ 11:26AM
See, Houdini has it down. The perpetrators are people who should never have access to guns anyway. They simply steal them from others.
Maybe what we need is a law making it illegal to break the law. That would certainly stop all crime wouldn't it? How many counts against the loon in CO?
KennesawJack| 1.14.13 @ 11:54AM
Your solution is elegant in its simplicity, Al. Well done. How could any lefty even think a about arguing with such logic? After all, that's exactly what they're saying outlawing guns would accomplish.
Jack London| 1.14.13 @ 2:54PM
No the number we are left with is what we start with. That's obvious. A gun death = a gun death.
Pecos Pete| 1.14.13 @ 3:41PM
A hammer death = a hammer death.
FBI statistics, 2011: "Amongst the “top ten killers” in the United States, homicide by firearms is at the bottom of the list, according to figures from the CDC and the FBI. "
Statistics from the Department of Justice also highlights the fact that over the last 40 years, the amount of guns in America per 1000 people has increased, whereas serious violent crimes have decreased.
Since the handgun ban took effect in 1982, the number of murders in Chicago committed using handguns has been 40% higher than before the ban, and has spiked even higher in recent years, proving that the gun ban actually served to cause an increase in violent crime.
Despite the fact that it is virtually impossible for an average citizen to obtain a gun through legal channels in Britain, the rate of violent crime in the UK is higher per capita than the US and the highest in the world amongst “rich” countries aside from Australia, which also instituted a draconian gun ban in the 1990's.
Pecos Pete| 1.14.13 @ 3:42PM
Preventing law-abiding people from owning guns clearly has no impact on violent crime, and if anything causes it to rise because the criminals know their victims will not be able to defend themselves.
Despite virtually all handguns being outlawed in 1996 following the Dunblane school massacre in Scotland, with law-abiding people people rushing to turn in their firearms, over the next decade gun crime in the UK more than doubled. This proves that while law-abiding citizens willingly disarmed themselves, criminals were unfazed by the new laws and continued to use guns illegally. Therefore gun control only disarms innocent people since criminals do not follow the law.
As the Wall Street Journal recently noted, “Strict gun laws in Great Britain and Australia haven’t made their people noticeably safer, nor have they prevented massacres.”
Finally, the number of murders committed with hammers and clubs in the United States routinely outpaces the number of homicides committed using a rifle. Should US lawmakers introduce urgent legislation to outlaw hammers and baseball bats?
Jack London| 1.14.13 @ 3:55PM
You don't know what you're taking about - a simple Google would tell you that in England and Wales:
"The number of murders and killings in England and Wales has fallen to the lowest level in nearly 30 years, Office for National Statistics figures show."
And only 39 of 550 were from guns - yes that's pretty much what we get through in a day. And they have fewer than two murders a day for a population of about 55 million.
JD| 1.14.13 @ 4:36PM
Jack epitomizes the typical liberal, replete with all of their fallacies.
He compares the amount of total violent crime to the amount of gun deaths and believes he is comparing apples to apples. This, more than anything, has been the lie consciously told by the entire American Left since the Newtown shooting.
Ryan| 1.14.13 @ 10:15AM
According to statistical data, probably. Criminals in the US would still get guns and attack the law-abiding - we see it in several major cities.
Law-abiding citizens should have the tools and freedom to defend themselves.
rjh| 1.14.13 @ 10:17AM
Actually, there would probably be more gun deaths...the criminals (who would all have guns) would see to that.
pogybait| 1.14.13 @ 10:08AM
Why, even the Rev. Sharpton has favored banning guns, as well as knives or should we ban all sharp objects and start a division of thought police as a preventive measure....
Tina B| 1.14.13 @ 8:35AM
Amen, and again amen.
"It took us a long time to dehumanize one another, it will take a long time to recreate respect for the life of fellow citizens."
That's the fact, from conception to old age, respect for Life has almost been eradicated. Maranatha, Lord.
Frank Drackman| 1.14.13 @ 8:41AM
You know whats really fun to shoot??
Besides A-rabs, I mean.
Books, they almost give em away at yard sales, and whats that place you can go and actually get them for free??
"Libraries" I think they're called.
And if its big enough, you can actually retrieve your round and admire either the mushrooming of a JHP, or the womanly curve of a 7.62 NATO FMJ...
Phone books are fun too, and the phone company will just bring you more...
Frank "No Flinch" Drackman
Louis Jenkins| 1.14.13 @ 9:13AM
Frank, I read somewhere that books, stacked back to back for three layers, can make a poor man's armor. Two-three phone books of an average size can stop most bullets. Just thought I'd throw that out there.
The Republican leadership in DC is sitting on their hind quarters doing nothing. As I've said, don't count on them to do anything. If there is to be a counter measure, it will have to be by the people themselves.
Frank Drackman| 1.14.13 @ 9:38AM
In Med School there was this one crazy bastard(he's a Surgeon now) who would let us shoot him with nothing but a "Guyton's Medical Physiology" keeping him from a date with a sharp knife...
It stopped 25 auto, 38 special, 9mm, 45 acp...
by that time the book was chewed up pretty well, so, I think it was "Robbin's Pathology" that was next on the block.
Probably over 1000 thick pages, thick cover's front and back.
Paper doesn't really hold up that well against a 30:06.....
Frank
mike 3/505| 1.14.13 @ 11:36AM
So a real good poor man';s body armor might be the new health care law? Glad it might have SOME practical value.
Pecos Pete| 1.14.13 @ 9:06AM
I don't think it is stupid to have certified and trained janitors, teachers, administrators and police in K-12 and down schools.
And, I don't think it is stupid to have certified and trained students in colleges and universities.
The sign on my ranch gate in rural New Mexico says: "Protected by S&W, Owner, Bad Dog"
There has never been a breach of my defenses.
Pecos Pete| 1.14.13 @ 9:10AM
I don't have a problem with background checks for the purchase of weapons with particular emphasis on mental defectives.
I do have a big problem with any attempt to restrict the purchase of ammunition, including background checks.
Restricting magazine size is ridiculous. If that piece of silliness passes Congress, then the government could restrict the size of your meal and what exactly you would be allowed to eat.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 1.14.13 @ 9:17AM
...or, in the case of NYC, the size of what you drink you are allowed to purchase...
Louis Jenkins| 1.14.13 @ 9:19AM
All gun shops in my area are out! .22 caliber, .223, 38 special, 9 mm, 357, etc. All gone. Magazines, one dealer told me he almost had a fight break out in his shop over magazines.
You jest. The government will have no qualms about what you can and can't eat, and what portions. Who knows what sickness infests the DC crowd? They lay awake at night trying to come up with ways to punish the citizens of America. One day soon we will be as the villages in rural American Hunger Games.
Stephie| 1.14.13 @ 9:42AM
Well, we cans see that the rule on how much we can eat doesn't apply to moochelle obama.
pogybait| 1.14.13 @ 10:30AM
Ahhhhh....Pecos , we already have that in New York as mayor Doomberg has limited the size of drinks, trans fats, salt and smoking with portion size next on the list. The simple fact is that anybody with a small amount of technical ability can modify as well as create a weapon, extend a magazine or reload shells. Reality has never been that strong in the liberal mind set. These feverish marxists pea brains who are screaming for the removal of all guns that want take us on the revolutionary road to utopia can't even stop people from creating computer viruses....
Pecos Pete| 1.14.13 @ 10:38AM
pogybait: Good point about NYC and computer viruses.
Now, think about their KingOcare law and how they want to computerize all medical records, all bank records, and now all gun/ammunition purchases in national databases to go along with the databases at IRS, TSA, Social Security, etc.
I can not imagine how they assume that these national databases can not be hacked, or corrupted.
pogybait| 1.14.13 @ 10:57AM
The basic point of all of this is that human nature remains the same. I am quite tired of these people in government and media who spend their days pushing the extreme limits of degeneracy and egotism and for whatever reason stand up on some soap box as a way to express their moments of clarity while they begin to think that THEY can reshape reality by good intentions or convoluted laws.
rjh| 1.14.13 @ 9:15AM
"kicking off the next stage of the gun control debate."...No disrespect intended, but I believe it is more of a gun control distraction designed to take our eyes off of further damage being done by this anti-American administration.
Louis Jenkins| 1.14.13 @ 9:22AM
rjh:
One thing you stated is correct. Anti-American Administration. Unfortunately, I disagree. If Obama can score a direct hit on the 2nd Amendment on his journey to American serfdom, then he will do it. This man knows no limits to his ways.
rjh| 1.14.13 @ 9:49AM
I do not doubt you at all. But unless obama and the gang are certifiable (and that is a possibility), I do not think they truly believe they can confiscate the almost 300,000,000 weapons in the US (I am sure his useful idiots think that is a possibility). True, they will take whatever they can get on this issue, but I don't think it will be much. The Second Amendment is not going to go away at the whim of this petty little man.
Pecos Pete| 1.14.13 @ 10:32AM
Department of Homeland Security. Fusion Centers. They are everywhere.
http://www.dhs.gov/state-and-m.....on-centers
If they can think of it, they will try it.
Louis Jenkins| 1.14.13 @ 10:47AM
Truly this will be the hardest nut to crack. Some people may go to jail, but remember, a good many will not hide upstairs nor in the closet. The goons will have been joined in the battle for the worst or the better.
Frank Drackman| 1.14.13 @ 9:23AM
OK, lets say theoretically I have a Smith & Wesson model 19, 4 inch barrel, pinned & recessed, blue, but I really like my Mom's East German Makarov, 9mm x 18, that she really enjoys, because its the pistol all the Commie Goons carried when she grew up, and she never thought she'd be able to get one, but she's willing to trade straight up...
So we both have to get background checks??, because you know, my Mom might have some heinous criminal record I don't know about?
Frank
Jack London| 1.14.13 @ 9:31AM
The only background check I'd do on you is put you in a straitjacket.
Frank Drackman| 1.14.13 @ 9:40AM
So you'd sexually assault me for exercising my 2d Ammendment rights and you wonder why peoples question your motives....
How did alcohol prohibition work out??
Frank Drackman| 1.14.13 @ 10:46AM
Thats another reason we have guns, in case some Homo tries to put you in a straightjacket, you can shoot them.
I mean if you called 9-11, screamed "Some Homo's trying to put me in a Straightjacket" even if they took you seriously, it'd be 20 minutes till they got there...
Frank
Kingofthenet| 1.14.13 @ 12:32PM
I wonder if any JEWS like to own Nazi Lugers for the same reason as your Mom?
Frank Drackman| 1.14.13 @ 1:57PM
when you use all caps like that, its like your shouting "JEWS", its rude, like when your boyfriend comes all over your face...
and as for your question real Lugers are so expensive they're rarely shot, its like those pansies that buy 69 Hemi Cuda's and dont start the engines up.
and just because my Mom's Jewish doesn't mean she can't enjoy the mechanical perfection of a Mercedes, the works of Wagner, or the Irony of the First Muslim President getting a majority of the Jewish vote...
Frank
Louis Jenkins| 1.14.13 @ 10:44AM
Frank, you mother has taken you to the cleaners. Maybe you need a certification for craziness, but I sure wouldn't give up my SW model 19.
Frank Drackman| 1.14.13 @ 10:49AM
Louis, are you a real Gun Enthusiast?
Cause nobody I know owns only one of their favorite gun, we're like Mormons, except we drink and smoke, and don't bicycle around in formal attire.
You ever shot an East German Makarov????
Russian brute force meets Teutonic precision, it's like if you combined a T-34 with a King Tiger...
But she did have to throw in one of those cool East German holsters....
Frank
Louis Jenkins| 1.14.13 @ 1:15PM
No I have not. Unless you have the resources to the ammo I kinda quess it would be difficult to get a substantial quantity. As far as enthusiast, no I am not. I look at weapons as tools and the availability of ammo. Hence I would pick the SW model 19 over the Makarov. I am sure that there is ammo available for the Makarov, but the model 19 is American made. Plus you can shoot 38 cal if needed. I have an N frame SW and love the weapon. Wouldn't trade it for love or money.
Frank Drackman| 1.14.13 @ 1:36PM
Well, DUH, who would buy a gun they couldn't get ammo for?
OK, I did buy a beatup(is there any other kind) Italian 6.5 mm Carcano(never fired and only dropped once!)just to see if it was as horrible a riflr as all the idiots who don't believe LHO shot JFK say it is...
Only problem was the 6.5mm rounds were a buck a piece, and this was in the 80's when you could get a carton of cigarettes for $5...
9mm x 18 is one of the most produced rounds in the world, it was the Russians 9mm, in fact, its way cheaper than either 38 Special or .357...
Only 1 N Frame??? tsk tsk tsk
Frank
Louis Jenkins| 1.14.13 @ 2:34PM
Yes, I went on to buying other weapons. Utilitarian only, if you get my drift. 9mm x 18, I'll at least look it up and read some on it.
Louis Jenkins| 1.14.13 @ 4:52PM
Post script:
9mm x 18, one millimeter smaller in diameter compared to the 9 mm x 19 (ha ha). 9 mm x 19 used by Nato and American forces. 9 mm x 18 bullet travels at a rate of approximately 1050 feet per second, 9 mm x 19 travels at approximately 1200 feet per second. I knew there was a reason I liked the 92 F as a side arm.
Frank Drackman| 1.15.13 @ 8:13AM
Ummm who taught you about guns? Diane (Notso)Finestein??
the 9mm Makarov is 1mm shorter in LENGTH, not Diameter, DUH...
ask your Wife, she appreciates LENGTH.
and (no Homo) the Makarov is the Superior "BlowBack" design, meaning it won't jam, ever.
And I'm not sayin I don't like the 9mm, I mean the Nazis used it for cryin out loud, although its most effective on people who aren't shooting back(admittedly, like the Makarov)
And I just found a Polish version of the Makarov + 350 rounds of ammo, 2 (only 8 shot) magazines for $300,
Just gotta wait for my Background Check...
HAHAHAHAHAHA
Frank
Bill8472| 1.15.13 @ 9:32AM
God, you're so smart. I hope one day to sit at your feet to hear you hold forth in person about your gun collection. Lord, hasten the day.
atilla| 1.14.13 @ 10:22AM
UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE:
THE SECOND AMENDMENT IS THE LAW!
atilla| 1.14.13 @ 10:28AM
UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE:
THE SECOND AMENDMENT SAYS THE RIGHT ......THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.
INFRINGE: VERB. TO ENCROACH, WEAKEN, VIOLATE.
UN-CONSTITUTIONAL=NULL AND VOID
Kingofthenet| 1.14.13 @ 12:30PM
Demand your sawed off shotties and Machine Guns.
Butch| 1.14.13 @ 3:10PM
It says "arms," not "revolvers." At the time of ratification, citizens had just as much firepower as the average soldier. I think I have the right to own at least an M-16 and as many hand grenades as I can carry. Plus a couple of 50-calibers mounted on my roof.
Pecos Pete| 1.14.13 @ 3:44PM
Personally, if I could afford it, I'd own some form of a weaponized hard body vehicle. (Violet: That means a tank or similar device.)
Butch| 1.14.13 @ 5:41PM
Remember "Stripes" with Bill Murray, Pete? " . . . one heavily-armed recreational vehicle . . ."
Pecos Pete| 1.14.13 @ 7:20PM
Thank you, Butch. I had forgotten about "Stripes" and will use it in one of Tim's Games, should he ever provide the opportunity again. Loved that tank!
A. C. Santore| 1.14.13 @ 10:39AM
Scalia, whom I respect highly, is wrong on this point: "Indeed, it may be true that no amount of small arms could be useful against modern-day bombers and tanks."
Do I actually have to point out examples from contemporary history to show that small arms can defeat heavy weapons?
What we need to worry about now are stealth weapons in the anti-2nd Amendment fight - the suggestion that having "smart" or "personalized" guns is a great idea. Fact is that it will take a bit longer to eliminate them from use, but with "smart guns," the earth is patient.
Once you buy one, you can't sell it or pass it along to your heirs.
Drunken Sailor| 1.14.13 @ 11:13AM
And you double or triple the cost, not to even mention the cost in destroying or reprogramming the guns after the owner dies.
Smart guns are not the answer. They are a distraction.
SUBVET| 1.14.13 @ 11:47AM
Sailor..........this whole gun thing is a distraction.....the black magician is working overtime.
O dark 30.......propaganda......wonder what team 6 thinks.
Drunken Sailor| 1.14.13 @ 11:59AM
All too true. My guess is seal team 6 is none too pleased over that movie.
Michele San Pietro| 1.14.13 @ 11:20AM
The gun control debate is really senseless. Most Americans don't want a gun control, and what's more it is clear this will not stop madmen from committing crimes.
Slacker| 1.14.13 @ 11:30AM
Gun control isn’t really about guns. It isn’t about AR’s, school safety, magazine capacity or gun free zones. It isn’t about ideas, debate, or solutions.
This is all about blue and red Americans detesting each other. Gun control is a proxy fight in the greater culture war. Gun grabbers hate guns because guns are an identifier of traditional Americans.
It is about time your people figure out that that gun controllers don’t hate guns; they hate YOU. They hate your culture. They hate your church, your music, your pickup trucks and SUV’s, your rural lifestyle, and your food choices.
What they hate most is your white masculinity. The people who want your guns are the same people who put homosexuals in every TV show and charming black people in every commercial.
It is a waste of time to try debate the merits of particular ideas. You will have about as much luck as you do with any other cultural issue -the right always loses in the culture war. I don’t see guns being any different.
It is just a matter of when and how we lose guns rights unlesss the right learns to fight dirty.
Buck Ofama| 1.14.13 @ 11:32AM
I'm not a gun owner, but I am shopping, and I am registered for an upcoming handgun safety course. Sure, I've shot some 22's over the years, but that's nothing.
I was sitting at a restaurant yesterday, when a young couple walked in, cheerfully talking about their recent experience at the shooting range. The young "man" was very slight of build, pale, weak and rather "dufus" looking. He gleefully played a smartphone video of his earlier shooting experience.
I asked him about his visit to the range, and was surprised to learn that he- having NO firearm training- could simply walk into the gun store, rent a pistol, buy some ammo, walk to the lanes and start shooting. Later, I stopped at another gun shop and confirmed that this is true. Little, if any, attempt is made to determine whether the patron knows anything about gun safety.
I know that my description of the young fool sounds like profiling. Yes, that jackass punk struck me as the kind of beaten-down nerd that might decide that popping a few caps is his way of getting even with society for his being pushed into the high school locker too many times.
I'm POSITIVELY FOR responsible public gun ownership, but it's a potentially dangerous situation when people can simply walk into a range and start shooting without some sort of demonstration that they know what the fvck they're doing when they handle a deadly weapon.
Guns are serious business, and handling them demands a high standard of care.
Frank Drackman| 1.14.13 @ 12:06PM
You know what my gun safety training was??
My dad shooting a pumpkin with a .357 Magnum(Colt Lawman).
Its pretty simple, pointy metal hurty things come out the end when you pull the curved metal thingie.
OK, I did learn to field strip and shoot an AK-74 in umm about 5 minutes, taught by a ROK(Republic of Korea) Marine who didn't speak Engrish and I didn't speak Korrean, thats the beauty of Kalishnikoffs design, illiterate peasants can spray lead in less time than it took to type this post.
Just try doin the same with an AR-15, M-16, theres a reason the Gooks won, they had the superior Infantry weapon, as rediculous as that sounds...
Frank
Ryan| 1.14.13 @ 1:03PM
He didn't shoot anyone with it. He acted somewhat responsibly (though he should have - of his own accord - gotten training, but not mandated).
No problem.
Jack London| 1.14.13 @ 1:50PM
Can you guarantee he won't shoot someone tomorrow?
Frank Drackman| 1.14.13 @ 2:00PM
Jack, thats so stupid, Josef Mengel wouldn't have wasted a 9mm round, 50 mg of ZyclonB, or a minutes worth of Truck Exhaust on your stupid ass, please, do the world a favor, and do whatever that Internet Genius I never heard of did over the weekend...
Frank
Drunken Sailor| 1.14.13 @ 2:16PM
Can you guarentee he will?
Idiot.
JD| 1.14.13 @ 4:32PM
Guilty until proven innocent - the Leftist standard for non-Leftists.
Petronius| 1.14.13 @ 11:54AM
But we've had personalized guns for a long time. There's nothing that satisfies like a gold inlay monogram on a Colt model P or a Browning Superposed.
Now that I have your attention, I offer a little wisdom from that great sage, Dr. Benjamin Franklin on censorship: (another thing the Left loves to indulge in). "The book that you would ban from me, turns 1 reader into 3." Or as the late Senator Barry Goldwater stated on the senate floor during the debate over the Gun Control Act of 1968, which is word for word the work of one Reichsmarshal Herman Goering, "When you tell an American he can't have something, you can bet your last dollar he'll find a way to get it." Most people who own an AR or something similar probably wouldn't if the wizards of determinism ever wanted a clue and decided to leave Us alone. But the nature of government suits them to a T. It is economically parasitic and culturally despotic. The determinist believes that Freedom is a false construct, that humans are just lab rats with an attitude problem, and worst of all, that values are arbitrary. This is why they despise wealthy achievers who are better than they'll ever be.
Dear despotic, neurotic, control freaks: Hear these few words from the Nordic Sagas, written during what we now call The Dark Ages. "If it be so ordained, another way will be found."
Bill8472| 1.14.13 @ 12:03PM
We can't wait for Congress to work up and draft a bill or impeachment on President Obama. Immediate action is required.
Kingofthenet| 1.14.13 @ 12:28PM
Gun control opponents aren’t opposed to background checks.
Yeah right...Apparently the Author isn't in touch with his Paranoid Gun Nut Friends at the NRA for example, they oppose ALL calls for a Background Check for Private Sales, even a quick easy NICS check.
Ronsch| 1.14.13 @ 1:01PM
That's right...because in the formerly free US of A, you did not have to get a background check to sell YOUR personal property....microwaves, backpacks, cars, booze, XBoxes, DVD, CDs, PCs, et al....A firearm is MY PERSONAL PROPERTY...if I want to sell it, then I can to anyone I prefer....If someone shows up at my home to buy a firearm I elect to see cannot produce a valid driver's license then i do not sell it to him. I have done exactly that in the past when I sold my semi-auto Thompson 1927A1. Guy showed up, a bit grubby (but I live in Alaska and we have a number of blue collar workers, so paint stained Carhartts are nothing new) and asked to see the Thompson. He asked how much and if I would take a check...I said I would, but ID was required and I would not release the gun until it cleared. he had counter checks (first flag) and no ID (flag two.) So it was a no go....
There is nothing "quick and easy" about the NICS check...You have to have a specific ID number registered with the BATF/FBI in order to have access to the system...Then, you have to provide the type of firearms you are selling, and if they are busy, you have a wait time. You can even get a false "denied" which has to be appealed....Especially if you have a common name...The other option is provide unique identifier information...So, basically, gun owners are being registered in an "enhanced" NICS check scheme.
Kingofthenet| 1.14.13 @ 1:12PM
I don't expect private people to call the system, just have a system in place where you and the prospective new owner go to ANY regular Gun Shop, have the new buyer pay a small fee and let the dealer finish up the transaction, like when you buy a gun over the internet. Home sales go thru lawyers and so do business sales, and they don't kill people.
Frank Drackman| 1.14.13 @ 1:29PM
when you buy a gun over the Internet you don't have to do any of that stuff,
DUMBASS,
I mean, "Someone who doesn't know what they're talkin about"
Frank
Kingofthenet| 1.14.13 @ 1:56PM
Frank you don't know what your talking about, you cannot EVER have a gun transfered directly to you no matter what state your from if you buy over the internet, you have the gun sent to your local gun shop and pick it up there AFTER you go thru the background check.
Frank Drackman| 1.14.13 @ 2:05PM
Umm King,
Might wanta look for a good used Brain, after a background check after all(you'd be dangerous with one)
Private Individuals can go on the Internet, arrange a Private Gun Sale(Following all applicable Federal, State, and Local Laws, or NOT, they're Private Individuals, what they do in private is up to them) without any background check or involvement of these "Gun Shops".
Good luck on the Brain thang, look for a "Right Dominant" one...
Frank
Kingofthenet| 1.14.13 @ 3:32PM
So what prevents aviolent Felon from getting one in a private sale?
Pecos Pete| 1.14.13 @ 3:47PM
What prevents a violent felon from stealing one, or more? Or, bringing in really violent weapons from, say Mali, Mexico, or Afghanistan, etc.
Frank Drackman| 1.14.13 @ 3:50PM
Umm, OK, King, I know you're a bit on the slow side of the curve, so I'll do this "Suri-atum"(That means "In Order")
1: I'm pretty sure there's already a law against Felon's (non-violent too) purchasing firearms, believe it was passed not too long after a violent Felon shot Marty King (with a Hunting Rifle ) and a crazy A-rab shot Bobby Kennedy(with a 22 Revolver no Gang Member would be caught dead with)
2:what prevents you from getting a violent Felon when you hook up with some Homo off Greg's List??? OK, I know, you do a background check, yeah right.
Frank
Frank Drackman| 1.14.13 @ 1:10PM
Again, many of us in as some people call it "The Gun Culture"(so do women have a "Shoe Culture"? do Afro-Americans(HT Colon Powell) have a "Rap" culture, do Asians have a "Beat every other ethnic group in Academics" culture???)
Alot of us Gun Nuts like to Trade guns, every once in awhile, you know, like every week.
So I'm gonna have to get a NCIS(not quick & easy) check 50 times a year??????????
And maybe I don't want my Mom knowin about that DUI I got 30 years ago.....
Frank "anyone wanta trade for a Beretta 92 FS with an extra M9 slide, operating rod, spring, and barrel?" Drackman
Kingofthenet| 1.14.13 @ 1:14PM
So you are disagreeing with the author of the article? Also you not wanting your mom to know about something IS the reason for the background check, Felons have a lot of secrets too.
Frank Drackman| 1.14.13 @ 1:23PM
"Secrets"??? like whether Ted Kennedy left a sweet innocent Mary Joe Kopeckney to asphyxiate(NOT drowned, there's a difference)because he was just drunk(as usual) or maybe because she was Pregnant(No Autopsy so who knows?)
And I said "Maybe" my Mom knows all about the DUI, she bailed me out.
So that 30 + year old DUI would keep me from buying a gun?? Good thing I always buy on the black, I mean from law abiding private individuals.
Frank
Kingofthenet| 1.14.13 @ 1:54PM
This is about public safety NOT you, besides a 30 yo DUI wouldn't affect your ability to buy a weapon. FFL's who get the results of a check don't get ANY information about the person, merely the transaction is OK'ed, Held(Usually a few hours to days) or denied, they don't know what for.
Frank Drackman| 1.14.13 @ 2:08PM
Oh, so the person denied a weapon isn't given any reason for the denial??? Who makes the decision anyway? Is this Russia?? What about a 20 year old DUI? 10? 5? The current FBI investigation of YOU for Kiddie Porn(can you prove they're NOT investigating you?)
Frank
Kingofthenet| 1.14.13 @ 3:31PM
You KNOW what you did, the FBI makes the descion based on your record. To answer your SPECIFIC question though, yes they can deny you for a RECENT DWI, as that makes you a Drukard.How else could they tell? Same for recent Drug Convictions, giving a gun to a Junkie isn't a good idea. So you don't care about who can buy a gun, just say it.
Bill8472| 1.14.13 @ 3:03PM
Obviously you've never tried to get a concealed carry permit in New York City. The judges who issue those permits insist that you have to have a clean driving record, including such things as stop sign violations.
Kingofthenet| 1.14.13 @ 3:33PM
That's a local NYC thing, no one is making that a National model.
Pecos Pete| 1.14.13 @ 3:49PM
Really? Your ignorance is, as usual, showing.
ArmyAviator| 1.14.13 @ 1:09PM
Obama and Biden, along with the other idiots in Washington may be able to BAN so-called "assault weapons," but they'll be hard pressed to BAN violence and mayhem. Criminals will still do criminal things. Loons will still MURDER and massively if they desire. Several Molotov Cocktails, thrown in multiple classrooms would have cooked more kids than Adam Lanza shot with his STOLEN firearms. Background checks, waiting periods, federal registries and special taxes will not curb the criminal or "Looney Toons" guy from STEALING firearms and using them to create mayhem. When the next MURDERER decides to use Molotov Cocktails in the Mall, or School, will the Left give the weapons a "pass?' After all, Molotov Cocktails have a Communist pedigree, so they must be okay? "BiteMe" is not going to propose ANYTHING that already hasn't been sitting in the drawer, waiting for the right "crisis." Obama and his spawn eagerly await the creation of a "crisis" or the occurrance of one, in order to invoke a pre-determined solution. The coming GUN GRAB is not about Newtown, or keeping children safe...it's all about CONTROLLING the people of this nation, who would criticize or rebel against a TYRANNICAL government that the Liberal Socialists have EVERY intention of imposing on us.
Frank Drackman| 1.14.13 @ 1:19PM
In College(OK, Yes, in Alabama, home of the last 4 BCS champions BTW) a few of my buddies decided for a change of pace from our usual practice of shooting up whatever discarded home appliances we could find...
"Lets make some Molotov Cocktails"!! said Carl (who just recently retired as a decorated Marine Master Gunnery Sergeant)
and after carefully checking the various Federal, State, and local laws, OK, we just went to where we usually went to commit mayham on TV's, Fruit, Calculus books we couldn't re-sell...
Did you know it takes 6 months for eyebrows to grow back?
Frank
Bill8472| 1.14.13 @ 2:53PM
I do, having done a little fooling around with black powder and other stuff at an early age.
John Sternberg | 1.14.13 @ 1:12PM
Your friend Dale McClellan offers some great ideas. But, his ideas fall short of stopping a threat. Taser's are not always effective. Thick clothing can defeat the barbed darts as can a moving target. Ask any cop who has used Tasers. Teachers and administrators can be trained to use real firearms with real bullets, preferably rifles, that can penetrate body armor. Waiting for the police to arrive can mean the difference between life and death. No doors or walls are secure enough to stop bullets unless the whole class room is armored. Shooting through walls and windows and avoiding armored doors is easily accomplished. Arm and train teachers, do the same for volunteer parents and community members and these shootings will stop.
Arnie| 1.14.13 @ 1:20PM
Sorry, but I'm not taking any advice from a member of W's administration.
Job| 1.14.13 @ 1:21PM
late term abortions for the 20,000 practicing murderers we have per year after a 7 day waiting period.
james wilson| 1.14.13 @ 1:26PM
This is the new democratic style to address every problem. When it became clear that using cell phones while driving exponentially increased accident rates, the democratic solution was to ban one-handed driving while talking, accomplishing absolutely nothing, which is more than can be said for gun-control.
Drunken Sailor| 1.14.13 @ 2:23PM
Only in America can left leaning, pro abortion, anti-death penalty advocates try to justify their anti-gun stance by saying it will save lives. You just can't make that kind of shit up.
nathan| 1.14.13 @ 2:32PM
First New Statesman, a liberal publication in Great Britain pointed out two? years ago that despite some of the toughest gun control IN THE WORLD, guns are freely available, including class 3's and that kids take guns to school to deal with bullies. They can't stop people getting any gun they want so how do the gun controllers propose to do it here?
Here's what Jed said:
For the past forty years or so we’ve been so busy protecting the civil rights of the insane that we now have state systems that make it almost impossible to involuntarily commit the dangerously insane. These people, as forensic psychiatrists agree, can be identified before they act because they fit a fairly clear profile. It’s time for the states to take decisive action by changing their laws and spending the money that’s required to take these people out of circulation and house (and treat) them in adequately secure facilities.
As long as their Fifth Amendment due process rights are totally respected, fine. But be careful here. Again the Soviets put dissidents in asylums and drugged them to shut them up. We err again on the side of individual rights. The numbers we're talking about are small, needles in haystacks are probably easier to find profile or not. It's all too easy to see this great "profile" expand exponentially as time goes by to be defined anyway anyone wants to define it. Again, the Fifth Amendment was written for a reason, just look at the Inquisition for example.
Cloudbuster | 1.14.13 @ 2:37PM
There's no fair way to do this. There's any number of perfectly decent, innocent people walking around out there who would read on a chart exactly the same as Adam Lanza: shy, socially awkward, loner. Stripping them of their human rights in the name of preventing some hypothetical and extremely rare incident is wrong.
Cloudbuster | 1.14.13 @ 2:33PM
I stopped reading as soon as he said arming janitors was an idiotic idea.
They're probably the best people in the school to be armed -- they're generally blue-collar guys with a better chance of having been exposed to guns than your typically liberal school of education propagandist.
I should have stopped as soon as he said gun advocacy groups have offered no competing ideas to gun grabbers: patently false.
Oh, I went and read again. Damn. Another guy who thinks it's a great idea to label more people as mentally ill and round them up.
Really? You know who controls the mental health field? Liberals. You know who hoplophobic mental health professionals think are mentally ill? Gun owners.
Making it easier to declare someone mentally ill and "a danger to themselves or others" is already a scandalously subjective process. If you are willing to put your trust in random government-paid mental health professions to determine if you ought to be allowed to own a gun, you have not been paying attention.
howard lohmuller| 1.14.13 @ 2:53PM
Mr Babbin is on the right path by preventing the mentally ill from getting weapons of any kind. Another step in that direction would be for the Medical profession, Doctors, to tag those potentially dangerous people with a warning on their medical records against providing weapons or chemicals without a medical certification of competency being issued issued to the person. Also parents could be held responsible for the acts of their minor children. There will still be dangers from terrorists to deal with but the U.S. has a good record of control for the past decade.
Petronius| 1.14.13 @ 3:11PM
Ready for the surprise? If you are straight, white, Christian, normal, and disapprove of predation, perversion, parasitism, hooliganism, YOU will be adjudicated as insane according to any Liberal. What about your own doctors? If they are liberal, you get my drift.
Bill8472| 1.14.13 @ 2:58PM
Where is the discussion of changing the "dangerous to self or others" precondition for involuntary commitment of the mentally disturbed?
Some folks say that not all of the shooters are mentally ill, as if that's some kind of answer. Obviously, so many of them are that it might be effective at hindering some of the gun violence by putting those mentally ill whose behavior is worrisome under lock and key for a few days of psychiatric observation.
But it seems that the temporary deprivation of a few thousand mentally ill person for observation and classification as to danger is a taboo subject, and that it's far preferable to permanently deprives 350 million Americans of their Constitutional rights to own certain property.
JD| 1.14.13 @ 4:30PM
Strengthening the ability to commit the mentally ill is risky in a country where the ruling elites classify non-Leftist thought as insanity.
The cultural rot that motivates true lunatics needs to be fought in other ways. Meanwhile, the rest of us need to defend ourselves.
Overall, the key remains to make sure that blame for problems is properly assigned. Failure in this area is America's biggest problem of all.
PapaLonestar| 1.14.13 @ 3:04PM
One of the problems with a teacher in a classroom with a concealed firearm is that a student could crack her over the head with a stapler, knocking her out, and have a loaded gun in his hand fairly easily. This could happen even if the school didn't make it known whether and which teachers were armed. I think pepper spray, and/or stun guns should be part of the discussion.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 1.14.13 @ 5:53PM
Getting hit over the head happens to unarmed teachers often enough too.
Of course, I seem to recall last year there was an incident where a 17 year old student (suspended, however) tried cracking the head of a semi-authority figure (I believe Block Watch Captain was one description) and take his weapon.
Does anyone recall how things turned out for that youth?
Frank Drackman| 1.15.13 @ 8:17AM
I got my daughter pepper spray too...
worked great until she pepper sprayed my other daughter, the one who's in Marine Officer Training now, and if she makes her CO "Happy" will be piloting a F-35 Lightning II in a year or to...
Where was I, oh yeah, Pepper Spray is like Gun Control Laws, only really works on law abiding people, to criminals, its a minor annoyance.
Frank
Thom| 1.14.13 @ 3:16PM
In all due respect to Jed (and Dale who I have a professional acquaintance with), passive measures to which you speak (armored class room door, automatic locks, etc) have the same merits as a minefield that isn't observed and covered with "fire". Just a few problems with your version of defensive war/COIN against random nutcases arriving at government sponsored killing fields.
Armored doors don't stop perps shooting through the exterior windows of the buildings. Do we
put armor over all the ground floor windows too?
Unlocked armored doors don't stop perps. The latest perp shot his way in and walked right into unlocked classrooms; what happens when they sneak in? use a homemade suppressor?
The VT perp walked right in, chained exterior doors closed and set the stage for setting the place on fire along with roaming the halls and killing anyone he would find. No one saw him do all this prep work. The Columbine Twins sneaked into their target the night before and booby trapped the place. What happens when you lock everyone in behind armored doors and the Perps set the place on fire? Do we put doors (armored) back on the high school bathrooms or just the stalls?
Thom| 1.14.13 @ 3:18PM
There are about 100,000 public schools, hordes of college and university class rooms just waiting for a single perp to violate. Do you know what a bullet proof door would cost times the number of doors
involved across the country? I feel safe in saying I can train even "teachers" and "janitors" to ruin the day of most would be perps/nutcases for a tiny fraction of the cost of a school full of armored doors. It doesn't take a Navy Seal to stop a perp. You are making the same nonsense argument the Democrats are making, we "civilians" be too stupid to defend ourselves. Ask NYC civilians shot by their own"trained" Cops how well they deal with such things. One round in the perp’s direction down the typical school hallway would change their game plan instantly from offense to being on the defensive which buy times for the super heroes to show up.
Thom| 1.14.13 @ 3:20PM
Just for clarity do we also put armored doors in all the facilities on our military post where soldiers are disarmed and attacked with impunity by Jihadist? How about armored doors in movie theater bathrooms so some people might survive nutcases? How about armored chairs in theaters so some might hide behind? This kind of thinking is why we have lost every "war" since WWII. Passive measures can be defeated by the most cunning animal on the planet all day long. I don't think turning every school, college and university into a maximum security prison is a solution to anything other than enriching the people who supply the security system mentioned. There would be a worldwide shortage of AR500 and ballistic material just trying to do NYC following this suggestion.
I have a suggestion for Jed and company. Let's put armored doors in your home and take away all your guns and put up a sign out front stating as much. Will that work for you Jed? If not why not?
Speaking of unserious..
Pecos Pete| 1.14.13 @ 3:54PM
Thom, as always. You are spot on. Good post.
JD| 1.14.13 @ 4:27PM
Leftists have consistently acted as though the only entity worth trusting with anything at all is the government. That is why they refer to non-government management of the economy as "random", "unmanaged", and "out of control".
Similarly, in their minds, there is no defense except that provided by government. That is why they cannot fathom our reasons for opposing their gun bans. To them, the only reason we can have for wanting guns is hobby (or penis size-compensation). The reason of "self-defense" is absurd, because defense is government's job.
Look at the functions government has usurped over the years. In many cases, young Americans, even those who consider themselves to be on the Right, are uneasy at the suggestion of eliminating government's role. They have been conditioned to believe that only government can do these things well, when in fact the opposite is true.
Leftists are taking yet another opportunity to reinforce the idea of the ineptitude of non-government. This is key to selling the growth of government.
Vance P. Frickey| 1.15.13 @ 1:40AM
What needs to be exposed - very loudly and publicly - is that s0-called "liberals" reserve their worst abuse for what they don't control. So-called "conservatives" do it, too... but oddly, liberals want to control our lives more closely than conservatives and have for decades.
The so-called "Affordable Care Act" has simply shifted reduced availability of care to people who are making too much money to qualify for Medicaid under Obama's loosened standards, but are themselves dependent on insurance plans which provide less care than they did before ObamaCare went into effect. Employers have had to revise the plans they offer to their employers to include higher deductibles and copays, exclude medications from policy formularies, and reduce care in general. Nancy Pelosi got her wish, we passed the law, and now America's middle class is finding out many of them are the new "working poor" who are paying for the largesse of the "Affordable Care Act" out of their own larger premiums and the cost for care that used to be covered.
It's incumbent on us all to rub Obama's (and his Congressional henchmen's) nose in this specific outcome of the "Affordable Care Act." Very seldom has the transfer of income from one group of people to another been clearer or less just.
davidh| 1.14.13 @ 3:55PM
Gladio. Do you really think that was Bin Laden?
wake up America
Ghost of Cicero (NB) | 1.14.13 @ 9:18PM
I'm tired of these idiots who blame the sword for the hand that wields it. Lanza DID NOT pass the required CT state background check when he tried to buy his own guns. The state of CT DOES have an "assault weapons" ban. One of the most stringent in the country. All the mechanisms were in place to deny this whackjob a gun. Where the failure lies, sadly, is with Nancy Lanza. By all accounts, she was DEEPLY devoted to her son. So much so that she was looking into having him committed the week before the shooting. However, she FAILED in her blatant responsibility to have her weapons secured so that he couldn't get to them.
This, to me, is gun ownership 101. My wife & I don't even have kids, but my AR-15, Benelli 12 gauge & my 3 handguns are locked up in a safe that 4lbs of C-4 wouldn't blow through. And this is how I was brought up with guns in my home. They were easily accessible, but locked up nonetheless. A quick spin of the combination dial opened up the "armory" (which only had a bolt-action .308, a Winchester Defender 1300 12 gauge & a S&W 1911 .45), in keeping with my father's honoring the hoary traditions of a Naval Officer & being able to "repel boarders."
Ghost of Cicero (NB) | 1.14.13 @ 9:18PM
"The supposed quietude of a good man allures the ruffian; while on the other hand, arms like laws, discourage and keep the invader and the plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside... Horrid mischief would ensue were one half the world deprived of the use of them..."...Thomas Paine
Vance P. Frickey| 1.15.13 @ 1:26AM
Obama, Reid, and the rest of the Congressional Left could just call Governor John Hickenlooper of Colorado if they are REALLY interested in "fixing" the proximate cause of the Newtown (and other) mass shootings - that mentally unbalanced persons had access to firearms.
As much as that problem CAN be "fixed," the Hick proposed in December that databases used to screen gun buyers get swifter updates when the mentally ill are involuntarily confined.
The proposal would require that information about individuals ordered held for psychiatric reasons be sent immediately, by electronic means, to the Colorado Bureau of Investigation (which conducts background checks prior to sales of firearms in Colorado).
Colorado's mental health commitment notices are currently sent to the federal government for its screening records before they reach the state Bureau of Investigation.
"No single plan can guarantee to stop dangerous people from doing harm to themselves or others," Hickenlooper said. "But we can help people from falling through the cracks."
Of course, Hickenlooper vectored his stance to one more closely in lock step with the President and Congressional Democrat leaders such as Deputy House Minority Whip Diana DeGette (D, CO-1) after the Newtown tragedy. In Colorado, which is a swing state populated in large part by outdoorsmen, state lawmakers aren't going to stick their necks too far out for gun control when calls to Congress are running 9-1 against more gun control.
Vance P. Frickey| 1.15.13 @ 1:45AM
Obama missed the single most urgently needed gun control law - if it is not already illegal, the President and the Attorney General of the United States should be forbidden to have the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (or other Federal agents) give assault weapons to criminals.
hrgfue | 1.15.13 @ 1:56AM
2013 Happy New Year,NFL,NBA,fashion kickoff for u
CHAUSSURES FEMME AIR MAX LTD | 1.15.13 @ 2:27AM
It’s time for the states to take decisive action by changing their laws and spending the money that’s required to take these people out of circulation and house (and treat) them in adequately secure facilities.
sickofit5| 1.15.13 @ 10:06AM
More new laws that won't be enforced. If we enforced the ones on the books already many of these issues would be covered. In fact, that would be true for every aspect of law enforcement issues, not just those that deal with weapons.
Bill8472| 1.15.13 @ 4:17PM
The point is not enforcing the new gun control laws, except in the most general way (as in forcing manufacturers to make cosmetic changes to what they make); it's to give them a political position that they can exploit by saying "Look! We've made progress on a hot-button issue!"
holmegm| 1.15.13 @ 10:56AM
Scalia: "Indeed, it may be true that no amount of small arms could be useful against modern-day bombers and tanks."
That is manifestly not true - we regularly face difficult and serious opposition to our military efforts from guerilla tactics with small arms.
Bill8472| 1.15.13 @ 4:20PM
I don't know about bombers, but tanks can throw a tread if the roadway or track is configured badly for them. Then the crew can be disposed of as they get out to inspect the damage and make repairs.
Bill8472| 1.15.13 @ 4:23PM
...then the insurgents have a tank whose only need is to put the tread back on.
Bill8472| 1.15.13 @ 4:21PM
Bombers, of course, often miss their targets. Since smart bombs are expensive, there are fewer of them and their use is reserved for high-priority targets.
Marc Jeric| 1.18.13 @ 3:04AM
In 1926, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, 26 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians were rounded up and exterminated.
Germany established gun control in 1938. From 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and other unclean races were rounded up and exterminated.
China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 30 million political dissidents, were rounded up and exterminated.
Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, were rounded up and exterminated.
Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians were rounded up and exterminated.
Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, 1,500,000 educated people were rounded up and exterminated.
Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: about 61 million. Here no account has been made of victims in Soviet- dependent Eastern Europe satellites, in Cuba, in North and South Vietnam, in Angola, in North Korea, and several other places under communist control - perhaps another 25 million victims. Today this proud tradition of mass murderers is continued in various countries under jihadist control – Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, Sudan, Algeria, and Mali – all of which are trying to establish gun control measures.
Ol' Will| 1.18.13 @ 6:09PM
"We don't want to turn the schools into an armed camp!" Blah, blah, blah!
The shooters go there because they know that no one will be there with an effective defense.
Regarding former SEAL Dale McClellan's recommendations:
A taser is only effective out to the length of the wires.
Pepper spray is effective out to the distance the juice can shoot.
Who would take a job as a "highly-trained unarmed tactical officer"? Unarmed? Isn't that asking for the same fate as the principal suffered?
Sure, install ballistic doors and get some ballistic blankets but above all allow anyone with a concealed carry permit to carry their weapons inside the schools. When states started making "shall issue" permit laws, liberals predicted "blood in the streets". It didn't happen. In fact crime continued to fall in the States which allowed concealed carry and continued rampant in places where ownership and carry are tightly restricted.
In an armed camp everyone carries openly. In the schools, no one would know if a firearm were in the school or not until the need arose to use it. Hardly an armed camp.
Ol' Will| 1.18.13 @ 6:22PM
"Scalia also wrote that the prohibition of carrying firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, and other reasonable restrictions, are constitutional. His decision is serious, and any gun-oriented solutions to mass murders have to be consistent with it."
Your apparent reading of Scalia's decision seems to be that the subject restrictions, since they are constitutional, are mandatory. You are wrong.
While such restrictions on the possession of firearms may be constitutional, they certainly aren't binding or mandatory on any legislating body. They are only permissible.