Skip to main content

     No democratic legislation int his country has ever called for a ban on all guns; rather we call for gun CONTROL. We need tighter gun control in this country and the reasons should be obvious. How many innocent children have to die before the access to deadly weapons becomes more difficult? I hope the recent tragedies in Aurora, Colorado and Newtown, CT bring to light the importance of gun control reform. Gun control is not a threat to our freedom, and it can save thousands of lives. This is my opinion piece that I couple with my research article "Guns In America".

     More people die from gun shots in the United States than any other country in the civilized world, we also have more gun-related crimes, over all, than any other country in the world. According to the statistics from the FBI, 6,009 people were murdered with handguns in America in 2010, which was 67.5% of all murders in the country that year. There were 8,775 total firearm crimes reported in the U.S. in 2010. The highest rates of gun crimes in the Unites States come primarily from states where gun laws are most lenient. South Carolina and Tennessee dominate the board in their rate of gun crimes per capita.
      Our constitutional rights are very much valid and important, but no right is absolute, without exception or consideration for particular circumstances. Even the sacred right to freedom of speech is limited in that you cannot knowingly spread false information (although no one is telling that to Fox News), you cannot call in a fake bomb threat and incite terror, and you cannot threaten someone’s life or purposefully insight violent actions. The second amendment right to gun ownership is equally as relative.
      When the Second Amendment was ratified, the founding fathers had very little or no understanding of mental health and stability. Medicine and medical knowledge was still very primitive at the time and psychology was not a known practice or science until late into the 19th century. So the founding fathers never gave a thought to those who were mentally unstable and should not own guns, nor to young boys with guns who were treated like men from a very early age. Guns at the time were also far less dangerous than they are today, their guns shot one weak bullet at a time and it took a long time to reload. There were no weapons of mass destruction, no bombs, no silencers, and no automatic rifles, and there was no way for the first congress to anticipate the future of weapons technology.
      Children who are not even old enough to vote or drive have access to deadly weapons. If a nine year old were allowed behind the wheel of a car, even with an adult, it would be a crime and the parent would be charged for negligence and child endangerment, at least. Yet I have seen and heard of children as young as four and five who are taken to shooting ranges and taught to shoot. This practice, even with older children, desensitizes them of the dangers of guns. Children’s brains are NOT developed enough to handle the dangers and responsibilities of handling a gun. They are not mature enough to comprehend the severity of the potential consequences. The human frontal lobe, which is the home of consequential thinking, rationalizing, and decision making, is not fully developed until the age of about twenty-five. Children are also not physically coordinated enough to safely handle a gun, which is why we also don’t let young children play with sharp things, boiling water, and fire!
      I am an advocate for the restriction of guns from everyone under the age of twenty-one. I believe that if you pass a written safety test you should be able to acquire a firearm learner’s license when you’re eighteen.  With the learner’s license you may go to approved shooting ranges, be issued a gun, and practice shooting targets under strict supervision. Once you turn twenty-one you should then be able to have a psychiatric evaluation, a written safety test, and a shooting range test. If you pass the tests, you can get a license to buy and own certain hand guns and rifles for self-defense. We are required to be tested in multiple ways to get a license to drive; it is only logical that it should be at least as difficult to attain a license to own a deadly weapon. Cars are also registered, and no one questions it, and it is far more important that guns be registered so that crimes are easily traced back to the offender. It should also be a law that all firearms must be locked away securely and unloaded when not in use.
      Assault weapons and automatics should be strictly prohibited. I am viciously against hunting, but even if you are pro-hunting there is no reason for anyone to have automatic assault weapons. Automatic weapons are meant to kill people in an attack. They are not used in hunting, are impractical for self-defense, and no civilian has any business with such dangerous weapons. In an ideal world such weapons would not even exist, but as long as they do they must be kept from those unqualified to use them.
      For those that would argue that they fear of a massive military uprising against the American people, you are exactly the type of paranoid nut that I do not want handling guns. The fact is that most of the people in our military would not turn on the American people (their own people) even if they were ordered to. Also, if the far-fetched, unlikely scenario occurred wherein the government and military utterly, blatantly, and violently turned on us and made this country a military state at gunpoint, we are not going to be saved by a crowd of civilians with a few assault weapons. The fact is that the American people have already been taken over, but it has been done in subtler ways, through economic disparities and corporate control of our government.
     The reason that our weak gun control laws go utterly unchallenged is that the NRA, weapons manufacturers, and rich Christian institutions have strict monetary ties with the political “right”. The NRA supplies the right-wing with a mountain of campaign contributions and, in return, the politicians vote for and pass legislation that “protects the second amendment”, and keeps gun restrictions weak. The NRA and the GOP also fool the general public by asserting that the Democrats and liberals want to “take away your guns”, and ban guns entirely. They also feed into baseless conspiracy theories about “socialist” military take overs. The second amendment is a Republican talking point used to distract the masses and gain followers who don’t understand that the right-wing’s true agenda is to take over the people by sucking our way of life dry and turning us into ignorant, desperate subjects and sheep.

Twitter @ladyrhiannon824

Read my blog at The Daily Kos  at http://www.dailykos.com/...

Youtube channel at http://www.youtube.com/...

Facebook - www.facebook.com/LadyRhiannon824

Read my blog at www.ladyrhiannon824.blogspot.com

Google+ at Rhiannon Avaneen

www.ladyrhiannon824.tumblr.com

www.ladyrhiannon824.deviantart.com

Originally posted to The Lady Rhiannon on Sat Jan 19, 2013 at 12:13 PM PST.

Also republished by Shut Down the NRA and Repeal or Amend the Second Amendment (RASA).

Poll

Do you support what Obama has done for the gun violence issues?

0%20 votes
0%28 votes
0%14 votes
0%12 votes
10%361 votes
78%2663 votes
8%278 votes

| 3376 votes | Vote | Results

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (2+ / 0-)

    Indifference is the most dangerous thing in the world. It is the fertilizer on which evil feeds and, without it, evil has no power. ~The Lady Rhiannon

    by ladyrhiannon824 on Sat Jan 19, 2013 at 12:13:43 PM PST

  •  Your last para (0+ / 0-)
    The reason that our weak gun control laws go utterly unchallenged is that the NRA, weapons manufacturers, and rich Christian institutions have strict monetary ties with the political “right”.
    provides the lynchpin.

    It's not "gun control". It's "corporation control".

    Obama's actions are -- and all "gun control" actions, no matter how laudable one might find those -- are, unfortunately, misdirected.

    It's the financialists qua corporations inc. the MIC inc. weapons manufacturers qua NRA-under-cover-of-enthusiasts (aside: and why is it labeled only "Rifle" association?).

    We've been misdirected.

    Please, so that you can accomplish your goals here -- and each of the rest of us can do likewise for the higher public purposes we -- Progs, Dems, Obama -- claim to espouse -- target the real opponents. The Banksters and their overlords.

    Reclaim the flow of money and much of the rest will follow.

    Otherwise, you remain distracted -- and you and we remain losers.

    As I said, your last para mentions the key. May I suggest you complete the framing in that context.

    For starters, see my comment here.

    United We Understand

    by dorkenergy on Sat Jan 19, 2013 at 12:39:59 PM PST

    •  reclaim the flow of money? (0+ / 0-)

      what do you mean?  Let's have practical proposals, and work on from there....

      •  Glad you asked (0+ / 0-)

        Read my other comment I linked.

        The VERY practical proposals are in the links at the end, are in the links from the last part, so I'll repeat that last part below.

        It takes a bit of effort to get your head around.

        I'll try to summarize it again here. But please recognize, this is difficult to do -- and one of the areas that needs help. To help be active in that -- once you learn the basics -- go to the last link below.

        There is no "DEFICIT" -- at the least, it's not necessarily a BAD THING. It's Government's contribution to Society.

        The Banksters and their backers have us thinking like they have in the EU -- where they do have by the shorthairs. The difference is the U.S. is a "monetarily sovereign" nation and can issue as much currency as it needs to achieve full employment. (There's no inflation until you reach that.)

        Obama doesn't understand (because he's beguiled by an arcane, misleading "school" of "economics" called neo-liberalism. All his advisors believe it.

        And even Krugman doesn't fully understand.

        The Bankers don't control us -- and gold-backing of currency isn't needed -- and we can just "print" money to repay them, be done with the "Debt" to them and otherwise spend/invest to improve society.

        That also clears the way to form properly address the other social ills.

        That's the simple form.

        Everything you understand about "money" and what the role of government is in relation to it is completely wrong.

        ====

        Some good sources -- here by our very own:

        bunnygirl60 writing under an earlier pseudonym

        Letsgetitdone (Joe Firestone) and crew at the dKos Money and Public Purpose

        and externally

        • the MMT primer and everything else at http://neweconomicperspectives.org by UMKC economics, et al., inc Joe Firestone

        Get on board and spread the message, so we can each do something effective to accomplish our (and Obama's) goal of promoting the public purpose.

        United We Understand

        by dorkenergy on Sat Jan 19, 2013 at 01:58:18 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  so you can't explain the point (0+ / 0-)

          even to what may be a sympathetic audience?  That is a problem for you; I was open to persuasion, but do I want to wade thru n links and then see what you are selling?  

          I am not sure - because there is a damn deficit, the governments have been spending more than they received.... so whilst much of your unease about the current mess I can sympathise with, not all of it at all.

          So, if you want to try again, do, but if you are that far away from where we all stand .....  

          •  Let's try spoon-feeding. (0+ / 0-)

            Here's an oft-cited summary from what even CNBC has called “One of the brightest minds in finance.” (6/11/10)

            Warren Mosler: SEVEN DEADLY INNOCENT FRAUDS OF ECONOMIC POLICY

            1. The government must raise funds through taxation or
            borrowing in order to spend. In other words, government
            spending is limited by its ability to tax or borrow.
            2. With government deficits, we are leaving our debt burden
            to our children.
            3. Government budget deficits take away savings.
            4. Social Security is broken.
            5. The trade deficit is an unsustainable imbalance that takes
            away jobs and output.
            6. We need savings to provide the funds for investment.
            7. It’s a bad thing that higher deficits today mean higher
            taxes tomorrow.
            Put a little effort into and stop crying.

            Read the explanations at that link.

            You could really help (yourself and us) if you really wanted to.

            United We Understand

            by dorkenergy on Sat Jan 19, 2013 at 02:47:27 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  Let me know if you have any questions (0+ / 0-)

            Like I said, it takes a while to understand.

            The insights build on work done early in the century (pre-Keynes, with Abba Lerner) and have been maturing, in their implications, over the last decade.

            It is however, the first macro-economic theory that is truly descriptive -- that is, it identifies and describes the components of the system as they are -- as opposed to how the mistaken and presumptive approaches during the middle of the century -- in particular, "neo-liberal" economics claimed things were, without anything but ideological claims.

            It's simple mechanics, but what it reveals about the tools available for our government can do with respect to money. It fits the narrative handed to us by Reagan, Norquist, the Heritage Foundation, etc., that even progressives subconciously accept -- and like your statement above shows -- without question.

            But don't feel bad -- even Paul Krugman doesn't quite grasp it.

            You'll learn, for example, that, rather than austerity aka belt-tightening aka paying down the debt or a friggin "balanced budget", we need BIGGER deficits in down times. And we don't need to borrow to do that. The government -- a social construct We, the People, created -- can issue currency -- as much as needed to achieve full employment, all without fear of inflation (contrary to what you have been led to believe).

            It's something our government can do because it is "Monetarily Sovereign" (unlike the EU). Several nations have this capability. Ours is one.

            But the Banksters and their Backers and their acolytes, sycophants, and other deluded and self-serving, don't want you to know.

            They want you to think that the Government has to tax or borrow in order to spend.

            And that's a lie.

            Just spend some time trying to understand.

            United We Understand

            by dorkenergy on Sat Jan 19, 2013 at 08:04:08 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Ben Bernanke understands it. That's what QE is. (0+ / 0-)

              Bernanke saved our sorry asses but he's very much unappreciated because he was so generous with the big banks & Wall St.

              look for my eSci diary series Thursday evening.

              by FishOutofWater on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 06:03:00 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  More re his understanding (0+ / 0-)

                Per Pavlina R. Tcherneva in her NEP piece remarks first on Krugman's incomplete understanding of Bernanke and goes on to say:

                Monetary policy just can’t do it alone. Fiscal policy must come to the rescue. Professor Bernanke understood this. …

                Bernanke also knows that the US has infinite ability to finance these fiscal components … All of this is clear both from his academic writings and policy actions.

                What I find absolutely paradoxical is that, despite all this, he still appears before Congress and makes ominous statements about the unsustainability of the US debts and deficits and their upward pressure on interest rates, failing to distinguish between nations like Greece which do not have their own currency and those like the US and Japan which do.

                This is the conundrum: either he believes (as indicated by his research of the late 90s and early 2000s) that deficits are sustainable and cause a crowding in effect where the policy rate is under the direct control of the Fed, or he believes that they are not (as in his Congressional testimonies). Bernanke simply cannot argue it both ways.

                And we know well that in practice the operational reality is the former. In sovereign currency nations as in the US, deficits are infinitely sustainable, do not crowd out, and do not put upward pressure on interest rates.

                So yes, I too have been unable to resolve Bernanke’s paradox. How is it possible for someone to hold two completely incongruent intellectual positions? Either he has been intellectually dishonest when appearing before Congress fueling the deficit phobia of policy makers, or he has become intellectually lazy and has not taken the time to rethink the crowding out dogma he has learned in grad school in the face of his later academic work and practical experience, which point all evidence to the contrary.

                United We Understand — e MMT unum

                by dorkenergy on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 07:43:01 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

  •  Amen for sensible regulations like you suggest, (3+ / 0-)

    although the gun Cult among us will scream bloody murder (ironic isn't it?).

    How many more Americans must we sacrifice at the altar of the gun Cult (created by the NRA and the gun manufacturers) before we take back our Government and pass some sensible national regulations like FULL background checks on EVERY firearm sale/transfer, licensing and registration? (I'd like more as you suggest, but that would be a nice start.)

    Then they came for me - and by that time there was nobody left to speak up.

    by DefendOurConstitution on Sat Jan 19, 2013 at 12:40:26 PM PST

  •  I would argue for REGULATION not CONTROL. (0+ / 0-)

    using the word "control" is allowing the NRA to frame the terminology.

  •  Gun Owners Simply Don't Care (0+ / 0-)

    Don't know how to break this to you but you are preaching to two groups essentially. The choir which is people who think like you do, and gun owners. There is no way to really reach into the middle when it comes to gun ownership. Those who have been in the middle and have tried to negotiate with the left have seen the error of their ways. It simply means to greater loss of gun ownership.

    Now you have the ever hungry maws of the left in NYC, Chicago, and Maryland further restricting and tearing away at gun ownership rights. Their laws are already anti-American and incredibly strict, now they are going even further.

    Attempting to negotiate with the anti-gun crowd is fools errand for gun owners. The chipping away of freedoms will not stop no matter how much gun owners surrender till gun ownership is practically outlawed till resembles ownership in England and Australia. Something most gun owners have no interest in seeing happen.

    I do however hope the anti-Americans pass an AWB it will help breed a new wave of gun owners and liberal haters that will understand there is no negotiation with the left. Only preparation to eliminate them. Scores of originally unarmed people come to me regularly now to ask about how to get a gun, many of them Obama voters. I laugh in their faces and tell them to get on their knees for their saviour and ask for his help.

    No, now is the time to pray for peace and prepare for war should American freedoms be treaded upon. Oh and avoid the military, target the left, it'll be more effective in the long run, and don't use guns.

  •  3 recs 1.9K Facebook Likes. Go figure. (0+ / 0-)

    I guess that If I (or anyone) wants to get a larger audience social networking via FB & Twit is necessary.

    This isn't a bad post by any means but the 1.9k Facebook shares is out of this world compared to most posts on DK with far more recs.

    look for my eSci diary series Thursday evening.

    by FishOutofWater on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 05:57:29 AM PST

    •  Thank you...I think^^ (0+ / 0-)

      It is true though....if you want to get word out and attention for your work, Twitter and FB is the way to do it, and connect with groups and people that reflect your cause. Good luck.

      Indifference is the most dangerous thing in the world. It is the fertilizer on which evil feeds and, without it, evil has no power. ~The Lady Rhiannon

      by ladyrhiannon824 on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 09:11:21 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site