Gun control....

[Dadoftwoboys]

I am not convinced that there is a "gun problem" in this nation. I think it is more of a violence problem and a mental illness problem. I own lots of guns and have piles of ammo, but I have never had the urge to kill people.

Let's also remember that the two largest mass murders in US history were committed with airplanes and explosives.

I do not believe that tighter gun control will make any bit of difference. If I thought it would, I would gladly turn in my high capacity magazines. I believe that the answer to this awful mess we are in lies more in tougher sentencing for violent criminals, mental healthcare reform, and tighter knit communities with more of a sense of civil responsibility. We are sick as a society. We could ban all firearms, but people will only find more creative and potent ways to kill. The solution lies in looking at the problem. What ever happened to looking out for your fellow man? I refuse to believe that nobody in that whole town could tell that young man was severely disturbed. Sane people don't do these things, and crazy people show warning signs.

I guess it is easier to blame an object than to take responsibility for the problems we have created in our own society that caused all this killing.

 

[Mom2all]

I agree its the person using it and not the object that causes the problem. But I am curious as to why the 2nd amendment is fought so hard for... NOT THE RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS... I should say.. but all the things that we try to do to limit that right. So many people act like by taking away high capacity magazines or by checking the history of a person we are squashing that right. I don't believe so.

We also have a right to the pursuit of happiness. But you hear very little screaming about the laws that are in place to limit just how much happiness. There is a law against me and my honey getting naked at the national park at that water fall he loves so much.. and we've never thought to picket it. That would make him happy.

We take away the rights of epileptic people to drive & alcoholics that can't seem to drive without drinking. My grandfathers limited eye sight didn't seem to bother him when he crawled behind the wheel... the law, however did have a problem with it.. thank God. The rights of many trumped his rights to mow them down.

I have the right to freedom of speech.. but not to yell fire in a crowed theater and cause mass panic.

I have the right to buy fertilizer, but hundreds of bags and some chlorine would cause someone to show up at my door.

For that matter.. we are now controlling how many packs of allergy medicine one can buy.. not because we don't have a right to have a drip free nose.. but because people are using it to kill our children in meth labs... no protest there.

There are thousands of things that we limit or control for the betterment of all.. make that millions.. not because the car, or the fertilizer or any one object is the evil.. but because people are and we have to start somewhere.

High powered weapons.. automatic ones with clips of 30 rounds... why they are more than our law enforcement have to protect us with. Does a normal citizen need 30 rounds to be able to protect themselves? I like the military phrase.. "One shot, one kill". Its for a different meaning but to me it means a lot more. In the wrong hands.. 30 shots means 30 dead. Controlling that opportunity for them might take away from you a little.. but so does the fact that you can't have a beer and drive because some idiot out there drinks 20 and drives. We all have to alter our behavior some to see change.

I guess my question is this.. why is the effort to control, at least a little, the amount of damage one person can cause.. like all other efforts to create some kind of control.. seen by weapons activists as the end of 2nd amendment?

If this sounds judgmental.. its really not meant to be. I am a gun owner, although after my Mom died by one and her murdered died, I don't keep it here. I grew up with them hanging from a holster on my Dad's bed and on racks around the house. I'm comfortable with them, (with the exception of seeing my shot gun reminds me of having to walk the house with it) So I do want the right to bear arms. I'm just curious as to why as an American citizen, this seems to be the most fought for right.. with very little in the way of compromise from us.

I'd rather fight for the right to swim naked at that waterfall.

 

[parentastic]

According to this news, gun deaths in America since only 1968 exceed the casualty totals of all U.S. wars (by 212,994 deaths as of 2011).
Food for thoughts, isn't it?

 

[singledad]

SingleDad,

I'm not sure if it's just a language barrier between us, or if you are feeling attacked by us ladies who are disagreeing with you, I have tried but I simply can't think of any other way to break down what my thoughts and opinions are about America's gun control laws and constitutional rights.

You seem to be misunderstanding almost everything I said, it could be that my posts are long and you don't read through them all. if you did you would see that I agreed many times with you.

I don't know. Perhaps it is a language barrier. Perhaps it is the font (red + bold just looks confrontational? Sorry, but I'm a pretty visual person). But I do read your posts. And yes, I get that you agree with a lot of what I said. But somehow I do feel attacked. Not so much for my opinions on gun control as for the side comment I made on American foreign policy. But lets just call it a misunderstanding and leave it.

 

[singledad]

I am not convinced that there is a "gun problem" in this nation. I think it is more of a violence problem and a mental illness problem. I own lots of guns and have piles of ammo, but I have never had the urge to kill people.

I believe that you haven't, and I also believe that you are part of the majority.

However, can you vouch for your neighbour? All your colleagues? The weird guy with all the Nazi memorabilia, living on the other end of the street?

Unfortunately, laws have to be made for the minority, because the majority don't need them to keep from hurting others.

 

[NancyM]

I don't know. Perhaps it is a language barrier. Perhaps it is the font (red + bold just looks confrontational? Sorry, but I'm a pretty visual person). But I do read your posts. And yes, I get that you agree with a lot of what I said. But somehow I do feel attacked. Not so much for my opinions on gun control as for the side comment I made on American foreign policy. But lets just call it a misunderstanding and leave it.

O.K. truce.

I thought the red font looked pretty, No declaration of war, I promise. lol I used it because I'm not good at separating each quote in this box, so I do it over in 'Word' and while there I just added a color.
I agree that you <I>are</I> kind of getting attacked, but not in the true sense, just in the forum sense. Like the same way it happens to each of us when most people don't agree with the one person. It isn't personal.

As far as comments about America go, I live in New York and the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center effected me personally. I agree, This might make me a bit more sensitive about terrorist comments.

I have a lot more to say, but I'll just leave it at this.

 

[Dale Simmons]

Dadoftwoboys wrote: "I own lots of guns and have piles of ammo, but I have never had the urge to kill people." is great.
"I don't own lots of guns and have no piles of ammo, but I have often had the urge to kill people."
...
Now in all seriousness, we need guns to protect politicians, we need guns to kill peasants in third world countries, guns to protect corrupt public servants, guns to protect a bent judiciary, but as for protecting our kids, we must tell the attackers, "I am unarmed, so do your worst".

 

[Dadoftwoboys]

Dadoftwoboys wrote: "I own lots of guns and have piles of ammo, but I have never had the urge to kill people." is great.
"I don't own lots of guns and have no piles of ammo, but I have often had the urge to kill people."
...
Now in all seriousness, we need guns to protect politicians, we need guns to kill peasants in third world countries, guns to protect corrupt public servants, guns to protect a bent judiciary, but as for protecting our kids, we must tell the attackers, "I am unarmed, so do your worst".

Well put. I for one do not want my only avenue of protection to be the police after all, when seconds count, they are only minutes away... I do not by any means feel that I shouldn't call 911. But if I ever have to, I also have my .357 mag if they don't arrive quickly enough.

 

[Dadoftwoboys]

I believe that you haven't, and I also believe that you are part of the majority.

However, can you vouch for your neighbour? All your colleagues? The weird guy with all the Nazi memorabilia, living on the other end of the street?

Unfortunately, laws have to be made for the minority, because the majority don't need them to keep from hurting others.

I believe the solution lies in getting that "weird guy" down the street a mental health evaluation, and making sure he doesn't have access to firearms. After all, if he breaks into my house, he would find all my stuff under lock and key. Besides, if he really wanted to kill, there are many other ways to do it. Timothy mc veigh used diesel fuel and fertilizer, 911 was done with a airplane. I just don't believe that outlawing modern rifles will do any good. We need to look at the root of the problem here. I can't recall anyone in the news who used a legally obtained source to commit crime. Furthermore, there are already millions of legally purchased ar rifles in the country already. I do believe that improving background checks is A great idea though.

 

[Dadoftwoboys]

Mom2all, sorry for your loss. I do not know the circumstances, but I am definitely a firm believer that every gun owner should keep their firearms secured. I usually have 6 or more kids around the house from the ages of 6 months to 10 yrs. They have all been taught gun safety.(with the exception of the 6 mo. Old) but that is no excuse to just leave the stuff lying around. If all gun owners would do the same, that would cause the most reduction in gun violence.

 

[parentastic]

I do not know the circumstances, but I am definitely a firm believer that every gun owner should keep their firearms secured. I usually have 6 or more kids around the house from the ages of 6 months to 10 yrs. They have all been taught gun safety.(with the exception of the 6 mo. Old) but that is no excuse to just leave the stuff lying around. If all gun owners would do the same, that would cause the most reduction in gun violence.

and

I for one do not want my only avenue of protection to be the police after all, when seconds count, they are only minutes away...

If your guns are safely locked away as they should be when stored, you shouldn't have access to them "within seconds"...?

 

[singledad]

If your guns are safely locked away as they should be when stored, you shouldn't have access to them "within seconds"...?

Exactly the point I've been trying to make all along, and which have been ignored all along.

Plus, a gun that isn't loaded and in your hand and pointed at the attacker, is more likely to get used ON you than BY you.

 

[akmom]

I can retrieve, load and shoot a gun faster than an officer can arrive at my house. By at least half an hour. It takes time to break into a house too. I mean, I think I could get a weapon faster than I could break into a house. What do you envision happening? Are they dropping in from the sky, or are you so oblivious you don't hear them pull up in your driveway and start bashing in your door/window? It's not far-fetched to think you could retrieve a gun in time to use it.

 

[cybele]

Okay, I have to ask, is there a huge problem in America of people screeching up to random houses in the middle of the day and catapulting themselves through windows? Break ins happen but I have to say that method has to be one of the least heard of methods of breaking in.

In the middle of the night while people are asleep, when the inhabitants have left the house and dominating elderly or fragile people who live alone and attacking from behind as they go through their front door are really the only kinds of break ins I have ever heard happening frequently enough not to be a strange one-off type of attack.

A gun won't do squat for you if you are in any of these situations.

 

[Mom2all]

Over 230 thousand guns are stolen from homes every year in the US according to the news the other day. Sad that the protection we seek becomes the weapons they use against us.


That being said.. working in the 911 center... we do get calls for real life.. "he's kicking the door in or climbing through my window now". They happen rarely. Criminals aren't stupid for the most part. They really don't have a death wish. I can only think of 2 times someone called in 17 years with home invasion. However.. waking up to find them already there over them has happened more often. Coming home to find they'd been broken into and things taken happens several times daily.

 

[singledad]

What do you envision happening?

I envision waking up to someone pointing a gun at me.
I envision someone sneaking into the gate when I drive in after dark, and waiting pointing a gun at me when I open the car door.
I envision surprising a burglar in the house and him being between me and the safe.

And I definitely envision them holding a gun to my head and forcing me to hand over the keys to the safe, and taking my gun too, if I had one.

They're not going to drive up to your house in a V8 truck and use a baseball bat to knock out the window if they think you're home. They will sneak up and break in quietly. Picking locks, cutting windows, etc. You'd be surprised how quickly and quietly an experienced burglar can break into a house.

One of the most common phrases I've heard from victims of house-robberies, is "It was as if they just appeared from no where".

Over 230 thousand guns are stolen from homes every year in the US according to the news the other day. Sad that the protection we seek becomes the weapons they use against us.

Thank you, I was looking for that statistic a while ago, and couldn't find it. My question to everyone who says "yes, but... &lt;anything about illegal guns&gt;" is: Where do you think illegal guns come from?

 

[cybele]

My Dad used to sleep with a mallet next to his side of the bed, thinking about it, if you are disturbed by an intruder during the night, and they come in to attack you, and wake you up, you probably have more of a chance with a mallet than a gun, it's unexpected, it's within arms reach and if they are leaning over you in bed, you can hit them from behind with it much easier than you can shoot them in the back of the head with a gun.

Just me thinking out loud here though. I actually think that guns would generally be pretty useless during a home invasion, unless you keep a loaded gun on your person 24/7, even when you shower and sleep, it's not like the intruder is going to let you mosey on down to your safe and get it.

 

[singledad]

Another example:
<URL url="http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/430112/20130131/alabama-hostage-bunker-midland-city-jimmy-lee.htm">
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/43011 ... my-lee.htm"http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/430112/20130131/alabama-hostage-bunker-midland-city-jimmy-lee.htm

Neighbours said he soon revealed antisocial and violent behaviour

He was standoffish, didn't socialise or have any contact with anybody. He was a survivalist type.

Dykes "got mad" and opened fire on Davis's truck, his neighbour told CNN

Dykes's neighbour, Ronda Wilbur, said the veteran beat her dog almost to death with a lead pipe because the animal was running on his property. The dog died a week later. "He said his only regret was he didn't beat him to death [straight] away," Wilbur said.

In another incident Dykes threatened to shoot the children of Mike and Patricia Smith, a couple living across the road.

But he had a right to own guns.

And now a man is dead, a school bus full of children are traumatized, and one 5-year old boy with special needs have lived through a week of hell. I shudder to think what would have happened if the rescue attempt didn't work out...

They also say elsewhere that he was supposed to appear in court for firing his gun at his neighbour's car on the day he attacked the children.

Considering that he had already been charged with a gun-related crime, WHY THE HELL WAS HE STILL IN POSSESSION OF HIS GUNS???? :arghh::arghh:

Edited to add this article, briefly outlining the effect that Jimmy Lee Dykes's "right to bear arms" is likely to have on little Ethan:
http://www.foxnews.com/health/2013/02/05/will-freed-5-year-old-hostage-ever-heal/[/URL]

Yes, I know it's not the gun that kidnapped him. However, Dykes's would have had a much harder time doing so if he wasn't armed...

 

[akmom]

That could have been prevented by enforcement of existing laws. (Criminals actually don't have the right to own guns.) New laws would just get ignored the same way current ones are. So no, it wouldn't have prevented a darn thing. If that community and its law enforcement didn't have the resources to expedite that case and take an obvious gun threat seriously, where are they going to get the resources to interview everyone's friends and neighbors, comb through medical records, and meticulously search the homes of every applicant? That kind of tedious effort to accommodate broad-sweeping regulations would just detract from the resources available to address obvious cases like this.

I also live in a community where traffic offenses and drug busts take priority over serious complaints... until someone is killed. Considering this guy was a Vietnam veteran, he probably had these guns for a very long time. No serious laws could have de-armed him. Are we going to search every single home in the country and scour properties for bunkers where weapons might be hidden?

 

[singledad]

That could have been prevented by enforcement of existing laws. (Criminals actually don't have the right to own guns.)

I found no info anywhere indicating that he had already been convicted of anything. Only that he had been charged and was due to appear in court. He was still "innocent until proven guilty". Unless I missed something?

That kind of tedious effort to accommodate broad-sweeping regulations would just detract from the resources available to address obvious cases like this.

Or it could motivate authorities to pay attention to obvious cases like this... (Funny how many of these tragic cases are so obvious in retrospect, but no one had the power to do anything about it before...)

Are we going to search every single home in the country and scour properties for bunkers where weapons might be hidden?

If an application (even retrospective) for a firearm license was denied, then his firearms would immediately become illegal. Thus, the first time he patrolled his property with one (as he was said to do) or pointed one at a neighbor, they could have called the cops and he could have been arrested for the possession of an illegal firearm. Also, here, the police can search your vehicle at a roadblock, so he would have been risking arrest if he drove anywhere with his gun, walked anywhere with his gun, basically took them out of hiding in any way. And in hiding, they can't harm anyone. He would also not have been able to buy ammunition, and since ammunition deteriorates over time, he would sooner or later have been without bullets he could fire. It IS possible to enforce those kinds of laws, as has been proven in many countries around the world. And considering how he conducted himself, he would probably have had his guns confiscated before he killed a man and traumatized a child.

Lax law enforcement in a few communities is a very poor excuse for not improving legislation. It is simply an addition problem that should be address in parallel. However, I don't think it is a co-incidence that the enforcement of gun-laws are so lax in a country where so many people are against gun laws. Obviously the cops don't see it as a priority, probably because they don't agree with the laws. This is where accountability should come in.

btw, this is also another example of a crime committed with a <U>legal</U> firearm, for those who say only illegal firearms are used when committing crimes...