Skip to main content

View Diary: Gun safety measures supported by public, NRA still denying reality (105 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I kind of agree with your reasoning (4+ / 0-)

    But I think the problem is that the widespread availability of these kinds of weapons and magazines is a result of not restricting them earlier.  After all, virtually every gun used in committing a crime was purchased legally at some point.  These types of weapons were not always present in such large numbers.  Had we banned them at that time, they would not be readily available now, and these shootings would be perpetrated by people armed with revolvers.

    So I think you're right that the cat's out of the bag.  Nonetheless, you need to step in at some point and say that further evolution of these weapons is unacceptable.  Who knows what "assault-style" weapons and high capacity magazines will be like in 20 years?  I worry that in 2032 we'll be sitting around saying, "Well, it's too late now, but if we had banned these weapons in 2012 we wouldn't be facing them now".  Rather than addressing the current weapon supply, I think these laws are aimed at holding the line, and preventing us from having to face even more deadly weapons in the future.

    To believe that markets determine value is to believe that milk comes from plastic bottles. Bromley (1985)

    by sneakers563 on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 09:40:04 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Machine guns were banned. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sneakers563

      We don't see those making appearances all over the country anymore.

      Your point is absolutely correct in the sense that we've basically gone to a model of zero safety regulation which is just too extreme and, frankly, ridiculous.  And where we do still have some legal framework in place, the laws are often not enforced.

      The lack of enforcement of existing law is sort of like if the police and prosecutors decided to just not pursue a high percentage of people who commit murder.  Eventually, the murder rate would go up because more people would feel they could get away with it.

      I really think that this country is on the precipice of becoming one of those countries in which life is cheap - or we could choose not to be - but it is a choice - it isn't something that "just happens" for no reason, IMO.

    •  There is a little issue called in Common Use (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ctexrep, sneakers563, Hangpilot

      Per the SCOTUS ruling United States v. Miller,

      the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time”
      The AR 15 and semiautomatic handguns containing between 11 and 19 rounds are amongst the most commonly carried by police and civilians for the purpose of defense.  It is also important to note that these are NOT military weapons designed for the battlefield.  They are civilian models that cosmetically resemble those for the battlefield.

      At a minimum without legislative action and based upon the above I think without at least a SCOTUS ruling (not just legislation), a ban is a non starter.

      If at some point in such as in 2032, the (civilian) police carry phasers or plasma rifles, then according to the present rules these would also be justifiable for carry by the citizens.

    •  Your point is well taken (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sneakers563

      The technology and efficiency of weaponry has taken off - and it's time to try and reel it in.

      My concern with laws and the false sense of security they can create takes people off guard.

      Of the ~32K deaths that result from firearms each year - more than half are suicide.

      Studies have shown that over 90% of people who die from suicide have one or more psychiatric disorders at the time of their death. Luckily, there are ways to treat and control these disorders and potentially prevent suicide.
      Here's the link.

      Stonger background checks - eliminating loopholes in the B/G check process - can prevent a lot of these people from having access to guns.  Now there are other ways to commit suicide - but a gun seems to be quick and convenient.  It's too bad data isn't kept on the total number of suicides and of those committed, how many had access to guns used them vs some other form (hanging, medication etc).  Considering many who commit suicide don't really want to die - making it less convenient for those who suffer from mental illness not only protects them from themselves, but to others as well.

      This doesn't exactly address the Newtown type shooter - since the systems worked - he was just psychotic - and I have strong doubts that a person such as Lanza can be stopped by gun laws - we don't know all the facts of this persons mental state - drugs he may have been taking, if he had violent tendencies.

      I'm all for strick background checks (I think even the NRA is) - I'm for eliminating high capacity clips - I don't think tht a style of weapon is all that relevent.  If you ban assault syle weapon with limiting clip size - gun mfg will just produce larger clips for semi-auto hunting rifles - or rifles will be designed to get around the assault ban yet have the same capabilities.

      This isn't going to be easy - and really it shouldn't.  People have a legitimate right to own a firearm - that has to be balanced with everyones expectation of security and welfare regardless of gun ownership.

      The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government. - Thomas Jefferson

      by ctexrep on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 10:33:26 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site