[TheForge] shooting

Tue Dec 18 10:00:40 EST 2012

Although I don't say there are no attempts to ban guns, those who harp
on that point miss the point that most gun control advocates are
simply trying to restrict the types of weapons (e.g., large magazines,
high rate of fire), and the para-legal flow of weapons into the hands
of persons who should not have them.  I keep hearing that legitimate
gun owners believe these things too, so why don't they sit down and
hash out legislation that would get these things under control.

It makes no sense to prohibit purchase of guns by felons and the
insane, if that prohibition does not cover private sales as well as
gun shops.  So why does the NRA oppose such regulation?

There is no legitimate use for assault rifles or more than 3 bullets
in a clip -- a paraphrasing of WV Senator Manchin's recent comment --
so why does the NRA oppose a ban on these?

In the case of Sandy Hook, the weapons were legally owned (by the
mother) and the guy had been trained to use them.  A classic example
of the sort reiterated by the NRA.  So in this case, the problem was
that (1) that assault rifle should never have been in private hands in
the first place, and (2) the guy's insanity should have been detected
somehow.  I can see the NRA putting emphasis on the latter, but
without a high-volume clip and without a high rate of fire, SOME of
those 26 people would still be alive today.

Furthermore, it remains a problem that straw buyers buy gun after gun,
then turn around and sell them privately.  NYC has sued gun stores in
the southern states to attempt to halt what amounts to being illegal
trafficking of guns, even though current laws put it in a gray area.
There is no question that such traffic benefits criminals more than it
does law-abiding citizens.

And there's another issue to consider.  Having a gun in your home is
often touted as a means of defense, but it often leads to the death of
the gun owner or a loved one.  Thieves will target a house known to
have guns.  Gun owners routinely do NOT lock up their weapons,
sometimes even leaving them out in plain sight.  (I know of cases --
people who should know better.)  Nancy Lanza is DEAD, shot in the head
by her son before he took out his insanity upon Sandy Hook Elementary
School.  And there are many cases of young children killing people
after getting their hands on their folks' guns -- two recent ones that
I recall.  And if you show up at your door with a gun to "defend
yourself", police are likely to just shoot first and ask questions
later.  (It happened a year or two back, a few miles from me.)  A gun
is a killing machine.  It has no other purpose.

In many ways, the gun issue is like the campaign-contribution issue.
Everybody should be able to contribute money towards the campaign of
the candidate of his choice, and the SCOTUS ruled that there's
essentially no limit to allowable contributions -- all in the name of
"free speech."  But the flip side of that is that a billionaire has a
LOT more" free speech" than the ordinary working stiff!  The
six-shooter was the "great equalizer."  But the person with an arsenal
is now "more equal" than the person without one.  Are we to have an
arms race?

Curiously, some people really believe that everybody should carry
heat.  Did you read about the recent murder in NYC, in which the
murderer (a disgruntled ex-employee) targeted his victim (his
ex-boss), then calmly walked away?  A witness called police and kept
his eye on the murder.  The police confronted him and shot him dead --
and put several innocent bystanders into the hospital as well.  And
THEY were trained to use their guns.  How would your average joe
gun-owner do in a gunfight like that?  We already see children and
others shot in the ghettos from stray bullets -- how would this be
different?

I find the NRA's arguments to be specious.  I hope something better
will come from all this.

On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 8:27 AM, James <jallcorn at suddenlink.net> wrote:
> Amid all the clamor to restrict guns, I recall reading of the amendment to
> outlaw liquor...
>
> All it did was send everything underground. It turned some into criminals,
> made others rich and powerful beyond the wildest imaginations and, in the
> case of gun ownership, takes away a very effective tool. When guns are
> outlawed, the winner is the government who will have one less impediment in
> the continual struggle in its mistaken attempts to gain more control and
> more power over the people it was originally designed to assist.
>
> The second amendment exists to control the negative rights on government,
> not positive controls on people. It was put in place for that reason alone,
> and there was a revolutionary war to punctuate and prove the point.
>
> Reporters have been quick to point out Connecticut has one of the strictest
> gun laws in the nation. What a horrendous example of how effective it is.
>
> And that’s because this has nothing to do with guns other than it was the
> tool this man used to mete out his unimaginable punishment on two classrooms
> filled with young children.
>
> It’s about some type of all-consuming rage that, thankfully, most of us are
> unable and unwilling to comprehend. It’s the type of horror I would imagine
> even gives psychiatrists nightmares. It’s the type of disease that would
> find any way to express itself, and this time happened to be guns.
>
> It’s the same type of rage that seduced someone into putting poison into
> bottles of Tylenol, which eventually killed people at random. Perhaps even
> the same attitude that allows a country’s ruler to use chemical warfare on
> his own people.
>
> None of it is about the chosen weapon of destruction. All of it is about the
> individual who took their rage out on those around them whether they were
> part of their problem or not.
>
> If you think law enforcement has or will have the kind of tools necessary to
> have stopped something like this, you live in a fantasy world. I would
> recommend attending the next Police Department Citizens Police Academy to
> learn enough to at least discuss it in a cogent manner. Or just have a
> serious talk with your friendly neighborhood police chief.
>
> So as the debate rages on, it might pay to calm down a little. Think and
> discuss the situation in a rational manner that doesn’t involve knee-jerk
> reactions or agendized politics. Neither one of which could possible have
> kept this tragedy from happening.
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> TheForge mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/theforge
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:TheForge at mailman.qth.net
>
> TheForge mail list group photo site is
> http://www.photoworks.com
> Login: blacksmithblacksmith at hotmail.com
> Password: anvil
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

-- 
Bruce
NJ