December 16, 2012

Comments of the day

Newtown murders
 
It's wondrous to observe America's culture wars in full bloom! Once again, with this latest lunatic disaster in our sick society, we hear a ban guns chorus calling for severe restrictions on "guns". No matter that Connecticut probably has some of the most restrictive gun laws in our country. No matter that the weapons in question were legally obtained and held under the laws of that state. No matter that the aggressively named "Bushmaster" mentioned above is not much different from any other rifle that could be used for deer hunting. No matter that this country is saturated with guns and if they were "banned", does anyone suppose they are going to evaporate into thin air? Or, as the NRA might say, if guns are made illegal, only criminals will have guns. Guns are tools, and yes, guns don't kill people, people kill people. More restrictive laws will do absolutely nothing to stop these lunatic rampages. What we absolutely need is a national health care system - Tony Vodvarka

Here's a thought...how about a federal law that imposes a total gun ban for a period of time...say ten years or so...in any county in which a gun is used in a homicide. By total, I mean no private ownership, no shooting ranges, no gun stores or factories, etc. This could unite responsible gun owners with anti-gun citizens in creating programs to prevent gun homicide's underlying causes. on Why gun control doesn't work the way it's supposed to

I think the first step to "bringing us together" will require some of us not being maimed and dead from a storm of bullets on our classroom floor. Secondly, you and Baum here employ a frequent favorite rhetorical strategy of the editorial page of the Wall Street Journal: mischaracterize your opponent's position in order to take it apart. Nobody's talking about gun prohibition or taking away lower middle class white men's guns. The idea is to make it more difficult to get a gun than to adopt a pet or get a driver's license, and to limit or remove the ability of people to acquire military grade weaponry and ammunition such as those that allowed Lanza apparently to fire as rapidly as witnesses have described in news reports. Baum's political argument is vapid. This is literally a matter of life and death, and he's talking about winning elections? He sounds like Karl Rove. By his logic, we should allow Iran to acquire nuclear weapons if it means they'll help us get rid of Assad. - Paul Tullis

A Bushmaster M4? Really? You can buy them at the local Walmart in my state. More, they are readily available for sale at various flea markets in local supermarket parking lots--transactions that are legally regarded as person to person sales requiring no paperwork other than a receipt with both party's signature. The M4 is an assault rifle designed for one purpose, and one purpose only, which is launching a ballistic projectile capable of inflicting the most destructive wound possible in the most efficient way. At the very least, ought these weapons be somewhat more difficult to procure? on Why gun control doesn't work the way it's supposed to

Sam... You're too good for this!

1) Like so-called global warming much of the opposition to 'gun control' is based on the spin that evil socialists want to take all your guns. Not true, and your father in-law is a much different gun owner than the gang banger who robs a convenience store with a handgun. Start using the phrase 'handgun control' as it's more accurate. The majority of gun crimes are committed with handguns. Registration, licensing and restrictions on large capacity clips are reasonable steps towards a well regulated militia.

2) John Lott Jr. -- Eight pounds of crap in a five pound bag. The man is a shill for the gun lobby Why gun control doesn't work the way it's supposed to

Socioeconomic factors determine the rate of crime and gun crime. To say a state like Maine has less violent crime due to the well-armed citizenry is stretching belief. anyway, they are snowed in for half the year! .. there's no time to be out shooting people. :) All that being said, I am not anti-gun (I own and use firearms, have since I was very young).. but I still see the truth of savage gun violence. Violence and death that would be lessened IF people would forsake their reliance on guns, for good or ill. But people are people, I suppose. And it is ridiculous and needlessly divisive to frame this debate as for or against guns.. when in fact it should be for or against things like what recently happened in Connecticut.. I admit to hyperbole... yet to say Democrats want your guns is an oversimplification, good Democrats want a safe society with nobody shooting up the place. I think it's the angry gun owners who need to calm down since they frame their argument around their on Why gun control doesn't work the way it's supposed to

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

Tony Vodvarka, as per usual, has it right: to reduce civil violence of all kinds, provide fewer stressors and more choices, definitely including full-spectrum tax-paid healthcare.

Unfortunately, that won't do a thing to lessen ruling-class violence.

How many are aware, or care, that the death toll in that shooting is less than what the ruling class, via the military, does every week to Muslim children abroad?

Anonymous said...

Gun control: Its really no mystery. The financial elite have stolen the wealth of the country and now want to keep it.

Therefore only their muscle (the police and military) should be allowed to have guns...or we have the psychiatric community designate anyone who loves freedom (and protests the govt) as being "crazy" and therefore not allowed to possess firearms (in the name of public safety).

Virtually every genocide in this century was preceded by gun confiscation of the group that was victimized.

Again, liberals have a naive view of the role of government - and are completely unaware that it has been possessed by the ruling class (of which they also naively believe themselves to be a part of). Exactly how many of us get to fit into the 1% country club behind the walled gates?

Anonymous said...

Guns can not prevent servitude.
This is true because violence only perpetuates more violence.
Guns offer no real protection in this life, only some clouded temporal delusion.
Violence does not create security.
It only fosters notions of retaliation, retribution, and vengeance--all manifestations of assumed entitlement.
Entitlement derives from ideas of separation from the other.
The message of my Faith is that we are all one, and therefore, all vexation derives from the denial that is selfish desire.