Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Facebook | Twitter | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Gun issue needs rational debate

January 20, 2013

The public clamor and letters to the editor pertaining to gun control nearly have gotten out of han....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(37)

republican

Jan-31-13 5:12 PM

Mr Ward--- I pretty much agree with you on this. Our jack*** president likes to go around the constitution anytime he can and he doesn't hesitate to do it. He even made the statement that the constitution gets in his way of governing a few years ago. Now isn't that just peachy! Without the 2ND Amd no other rights are worth anything. They will all just disappear over time. Everyone needs to look around the world at all the dictators who have taken their country arms away. That enables them to do as they please and rule and conquer their people. It seems far fetched, but it can happen anywhere. The reason I'm such a strong gun rights person is just for that reason. If we let them take a few here and a few there it will lead to total confiscation and that is the bottom line!

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

jeffward

Jan-25-13 12:14 PM

Doesn't anyone other than 1 person agree that this is a Constitutional issue? If Congress had to write an amendment to institute prohibition; shouldn't they have to do so to restrict gun rights? The right to drink alcohol isn't even a specified Constitutional right, until the repeal of prohibition! If it is, I am unable to find the specific wording that it is so, in the Constitution.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

gorilla

Jan-25-13 12:12 PM

Enforce existing gun laws and if necessary tweak it before passing another 2,000 page bill that no one uderstands. Of course the bad guys are not committed to obey any laws!

Senator Feinstien's is proposing "Assault Weapons" bill S.150 will include automatic weapons, semi-automatic, rifles, shotguns and handguns. The Thomas (Library of Congress) has not received the final wording of S.150.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

jeffward

Jan-24-13 9:02 AM

our rights, as provided by the constitution and the governments push of these points of view through the Supreme Court has been allowed to transpire by the public in general. Our government has joined the UN in an attempt to sequester our rights in general. I am now beginning to believe what many 25-30 yrs older than me had to say. The UN wants to control the world as a whole and the US government wants to be in charge of the UN. Many of you have heard the same from older people you have known. If we allow these laws to be instituted and restrict our rights, without following the correct process to accomplish it, we are definitely teaching our children that the rules really don’t matter. If we don’t like something, we’ll just change the rules at will to meet our needs.

2 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

jeffward

Jan-24-13 9:01 AM

This has been done completely against the Constitution, as written. It doesn’t say that our rights may be taken because of anyone’s bad behavior, including our own. To me, these laws mean nothing until the Constitution is amended further to address this issue. I say this based strictly on the writing and not allowing any of my personal prejudices, pro or con, to cloud the issue. The Constitutional rights we are provided can’t just have a law written to restrict them. That doesn’t make sense. It must be done by a Constitutional amendment. What right will be next to be infringed by un-constitutional laws; our right to freedom of speech, our right to religious freedom? Ignorance of the methods required to change (Cont’d)

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

jeffward

Jan-24-13 9:01 AM

At the time the Constitution was written, people had weapons equal to what was available to be used against them by the government. The 2nd Amendment states;” A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed”. Every law, ever written restricting anyone’s rights that are protected by the 2nd Amendment is an infringement, period. I disagree with the Supreme Court in their last writing on this. The Supreme Court basically said there is need for common sense restrictions on this right, as given by the Constitution. The 2nd Amendment doesn’t provide any remedy for taking your rights from you. (Cont’d)

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

stickhauler

Jan-23-13 10:35 PM

Denver, what is so difficult to understand? Biden says we need new gun laws, but we can't take the time to enforce current laws! So, we pass MORE laws the cops don't have time to enforce?

I've made the same statement to many anti-gun people, and present the same challenge here. Offer me even a shread of evidence that any of the proposed laws the left want will actually stop gun violence. Then, we'll talk. We don't need your insults, we don't need your hysterical hissy fits (either side of the issue).

Proposing legislation based on emotions rather than logic and reason are pointless gestures. They don't magically fix a problem.

6 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

mythravere

Jan-23-13 6:51 PM

For one thing I dont care about Michael Moore. He's on one side of the spectrum when it comes to gun control.

I dont agree with his side. But I also dont agree with unmitigated gun ownership.

Certain firearms need a wall of protection around them to make sure only responsible people get to own them.

I agree with your points though.

But when it comes to this is and really any of them we need at least one party to be rational in its argument.

With this one and almost all of them no one really is.

Just a bunch of knee jerk reactions.

5 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

slingblade

Jan-23-13 10:08 AM

However, one thing that cannot be denied, is all of these people that go off the deep end and do these mass shootings, they all have mental issues, that if the signs were recognized and there was infrastructure in place for them to get treatment early, then ALL of these may have been avoided and these people would have actually had a good shot at being productive members of society, so why don’t we take all of the $ and talking points in that direction? Is any of this not meaningful or rational points?

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

slingblade

Jan-23-13 10:07 AM

1) all the recent mass shootings like 12 laws were broken, so 13 laws would have prevented it? (really?) 2) correlation between # of guns related to deaths, well..that doesn’t hold any water either..the UK and Canada are similar to the U.S. as any other country in the world and the UK has tough gun laws and low murder by gun rate and Canada has tons of guns per capita and low murder 3) It’s the violent games and movies…well..Japan..again..and industrialized country like the US, has way more violent games and movies than the US and yet there are like 20 murders a year in that country. So, the way I see it, there are already a lot of good gun laws on the books that are not being enforced, let’s start enforcing those, then, if it appears we need more laws, let’s put it on the table and consider it. (cont)

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

slingblade

Jan-23-13 10:07 AM

(cont from below)...now..back to your point you made about "get what they want but at what cost to this nation?"...if a political leader wanted to force unwilling people..they would have to consider the "cost"...if 300 million guns are on the streets it would be a nightmare to try to control people by force..however...if police and military are the only ones with weapons..the path would be a lot easier and therefore maybe an easier decision to go down that route...now..that being said..that is just a farfetched hypothetical that is probably not close to reality...just a thought..now...back to rational argument...(cont. above)

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

slingblade

Jan-23-13 10:06 AM

cont from below.....(this has happened around the world throughout history and even in the last 75 years..so it is really that far fetched of a concept?)

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

slingblade

Jan-23-13 10:05 AM

@mythravere "The true gun enthusiasts should make it so that people like that dont steer the conversation for them! (such as Ted Nugent)"...well, the same can be said about the gun control people, dont let extremists like Michael Moore be your voice...let's just look at this for a moment...what "if" we could 100% remove every single firearm in the United States, except for law enforcement and military..that would make some of the gun control people very happy...no more gun deaths..right? That may be fine right now, I do not see it any politician right now as downright evil, but something we may need to consider, is the things we cannot think about right now..let's consider for example some point in the future some politician totally dupes us all into thinking they are a great person and we elect them and once in office they completely do a 180 and start doing bad things we all do not agree with (this has happened around the world throughout history and even in the

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

mythravere

Jan-23-13 6:11 AM

" Using extreme language towards any and all who disagree with their specific point of view."

Now you know what its like to be on the receiving end of that kind of BS.

Liberals have been dealt that hand time and time again since the rise of the Tea Party.

It makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside to have yourself looked at as an enemy of this nation.

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

denver

Jan-23-13 6:08 AM

"stickhauler" What Comments are you looking at?

3 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

stickhauler

Jan-23-13 12:57 AM

If, as this column states, the "gun issue" needs a rational debate, why not have one? All I'm seeing the anti-gun side, the side who claims to be all progressive and stuff, is exactly what the column says the pro-gun side is doing. Using extreme language towards any and all who disagree with their specific point of view.

The fact is this: There are currently laws on the books that, if enforced, would have prevented the murderers in these mass killing from laying their hands on a firearm. We have laws that prohibit mentally ill individuals from having access to firearms.

I saw a quote from VP Biden, in response to a question of why we need more laws passed, when we don't even enforce laws about lying on BATFE Form 4473. His answer was "We don't have time to enforce those laws." Huh?

I'm a trucker, our daily hours of service logs are Federal forms, and any funny business on those forms is, in essence, lying on a Federal form. I can assure you, lies on those forms

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

republican

Jan-22-13 10:50 PM

People of this great nation are in fear of what has happened to UK and Australia. They had their firearms confiscated due to the liberal agenda and now those countries are ruled instead of governed. We don't want that in the US. I lived in the UK for three years and it is really a different world over there. The violent crime is about 3x higher than here per capita of course. Gun violence is lower but overall violent crime is very high. I don't think anyone wants that to happen here.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

AaronS

Jan-22-13 9:12 PM

The people defending the right to bear arms rave is James Madison, George Washington, Ben Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, Alexander Hamilton and a host of other founding fathers. You really should research the topic and read those words instead of watching CNN and MSMBC and listening to idiots like Bill Maher, who recently stated that "most of the Constitution is BS."

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

mythravere

Jan-22-13 8:09 PM

Well here is the problem. When you have idiots defending your rights you effectively diminish the impact of your argument.

The NRA and Ted Nugent plus all the other vociferous gun supporters have a shameful knack for making the case FOR more gun control!

Like when Ted made the super intelligent comment the he would either be dead or in jail if Obama was reelected.

I wonder what he meant by that? LOL what a dimwit! Add people like Alex Jones invoking thoughts of revolution and armed intervention. Maybe they would get what they want but at what cost to this nation?

They dont think about that. And people see that and think WOW that guy is a perfect example why guns shouldn't be in anyone's hands.

The true gun enthusiasts should make it so that people like that dont steer the conversation for them!

2 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

republican

Jan-22-13 2:40 PM

slingblade...you are absolutely right about law abiding citizens being the only ones who obey laws. I just can't understand why people think criminals and mental nuts are going to pay attention to a new law. It is absolutely ludicrous to think any differently. Why are people so dumb to think any different.? Common sense in this country is very rare these days and darn near extinct in DC.

3 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

slingblade

Jan-22-13 11:33 AM

pay "no" attention to party affiliation...nobody sticks to party ideals anyway once in office...they do what they want...or I should say..they do whatever the special interest that line their pockets want them to do.

3 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

slingblade

Jan-22-13 11:31 AM

Does anybody in DC have any critical thinking skills at all...can anybody in DC look at actual real data and make an informed decision? Will you all vote for me if I run for office? I will self limit myself to 1 term. (pay to attention to what party I am registered, does it really matter anyway?)

3 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

slingblade

Jan-22-13 11:28 AM

EVERYBODY is focusing on the WRONG thing, these mass shootings have very very little to do with making more gun laws...imagine if we spent the $ training our school counselors and teachers each year on how to recognize signs of mental health issues and then have a system in place where these individuals can talk to an actual medical doctor BEFORE they go off the deep end...laws only change behaviour in rational, moral, law abiding citizens..not criminals or people with mental health issues...how can the "smart" elected officials not see this?? That is why I am so frustrated.

4 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

republican

Jan-21-13 11:03 PM

The revolution is near!!!! Hopefully all these losers in DC can see what they are doing (the liberals) to this country and the working Americans and correct our nations course before it is too late. Jim Smith---the article was well written. However, how far do you think us working people can be pushed to pay for all the bums in this country before we finally crack?

3 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

AaronS

Jan-21-13 8:49 PM

I'm curious denver, are there any other amendments besides the 1st and 2nd that you wish to change outside the Constitutional method?

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 37 comments Show More Comments
 
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web