Regulate gun use

People with guns kill people in academic institutions like Columbine and Virginia Tech, in Kansas City and Tucson, in our national parks, our shopping malls and in our homes.

Many are smart enough to see through the fog of the National Rifle Association. Many understand that the Second Amendment mentions a “well-regulated militia” because the right to bear arms is only within that context.

It is mentioned only in the Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights. Therefore its mention is purposeful and within this context when guaranteeing the right to keep and bear arms.

It does not take a lawyer or a Supreme Court justice to understand the Bill of Rights desired a regulated use of weaponry within some kind of a well-regulated militia.

Guns do kill people. People with guns do kill people. People without guns kill far fewer people.

I support the sane regulation of all weapons of mass destruction in the United States, including assault weapons, rifles, handguns — and atomic bombs.

Roger Goldblatt
Kansas City

Comments

[I Plead the 2nd]

I like that you called rifles and handguns "Weapons of Mass Destruction". You just vindicated President Bush for invading Iraq. I assure you from first hand knowledge, there were and still are PLENTY of both in that country.

[Jarhead1982]

Is that enough data not created by the NRA for you unenlightened people to chew on?

Will wait for the patented rhetorical insults, and emotional ka ka so typified by the anti gun minority that always follows when they have no cognizant arguement to refute all this data!

[Jarhead1982]

The Times reported on August 18, 1980 on fighting between Moslems and Hindus in the Indian state of Kashmir "where the manufacture of so-called country guns is something of a cottage industry." On April 27, 1987 the Times reported widespread gun bootlegging in the Indian state of Bihar, where "even an old truck's steering wheel can be fashioned into a gun barrel at one of dozens of makeshift factories."

Thus, experience proves that even in the violently repressive police states or under primitive conditions the most sophisticated and varied kinds of weapons can be bootlegged.

In the U.S. there are of course no restrictions on the private ownership of machine tools; anyone with a little cash can buy a lathe and milling machine, and the necessary skills are readily acquired or hired. With millions of available machine tools and millions of garages and basements in which bootleg factories can be established, the number of guns that can be illegally produced is unlimited.

Predictably, the tighter that firearms restrictions would become, the greater would be the rewards for bootlegging. Thus, the only way to enforce such laws would be to emulate, and go much further than, the Communist dictatorships which themselves failed to stamp out gun bootlegging.

It would be laughable to attempt enforcement without first prohibiting the private, individual possession of the machine tools. Those remaining in factories would have to be carefully monitored and controlled. Naturally, few Americans would willingly obey bans on ownership of tools. To enforce those bans the guarantees under the Fourth Amendment against unreasonable search and seizure would have to be abandoned in order to permit random inspection of homes and shops suspected of harboring machinery or machinists.

So let us suppose Holder's Fast and Furious conspiracy had succeeded in mobilizing public support in such a way as to satisfy to the fullest the gun banning desires of Chicago Democrats. The evidence from Mao's China, the USSR, the Philippines, et al. via the NY times makes it obvious that the only way to enforce such a ban would be to abandon our long held Constitutional protections of personal freedom, property, and privacy. And that would require a fundamental transformation of American society.

Ah, but of course. That fundamental transformation is exactly what has been declared as the goal. A dead American lawman (Brian Terry) is a small price to pay for that, and as Holder has said, no apology need be given.

Geez, we havent even described how the Israelis built underground factories making thousands of sten guns (9 mm submachine guns) and millions of rounds of ammunition when the League of Nations banned weapons imports in the mid 1940's as Israel fought for independence. Much less all the weapons they managed to smuggle in, funny how that always happens!

[Jarhead1982]

So much for more guns equals more crimes BS people like goldy hawn like to have you believe.

Of course there are other countries that have recently tried gun bans, what effect did that have on their violence?

1997 Australia, Canada, England

Australia 1997 629 VCR per 100k 2007 1,024 VCR per 100k, a 32 person reduction in murders by firearms, exactly replaced by murders with knives. Funny how that trend was mirrored in England (ref AIC.GOV)

Canada 1997 980 VCR per 100k people 2009 1,324 VCR per 100k people, murder rose from 560 to 610 (Ref Statcan)

Canada $2 billion dollar plus registry, that hasn’t solved one crime, such a common trend.

England 1997 820 VCR per 100k people 2009 1,667 VCR per 100k people, murders have reduced to 1997 levels after a 25% increase. (ref Home Office UK)

So much for less gun equals less violence, a trend found in every single gun ban country, prove otherwise. Oh, use government data to try if you want, the above references ARE their government databases.

Since you appear google capable, lets put you right on the DATA. Here is a summary of all that violence in a country of 65 mil versus our 312 mil.

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110218135832/rds.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs11/hosb0111.pdf

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110218135832/http://uk.sitestat.com/homeoffice/rds/s?rds.hosb0111xls&ns_type=clickout&ns_url=[http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs11/hosb0111.xls]

[Jarhead1982]

We see from US Census, and an average of NSSF & PEW surveys, that in 2009 40% of households have a firearm. That is an increase since 1997 of 9 million households to 80 million law abiding gun owners as recognized by the BATF.

We see that since 1997 per FBI UCR, that violent crime has gone from 611 VCR (Violent Crime Reported) per 100k people to 429 VCR per 100k people in 2009.

That is a 30% reduction in violent crime. Did we forget to mention that the same data shows a 20% reduction in murders?

All while at the same time we see 13-16 more states implementing concealed carry to 49 states total, and 35 states implementing concealed carry in eateries that serve alcohol. 4 states and 72 universities implemented concealed carry.

All without the predicted and much cried about blood baths predicted by such pundits as this goldy hawn suggests for oh what, something like the millionth time, yep.

[Jarhead1982]

So many claims of how unsafe law abiding gun owners are, but no facts to support those inferred claims.

One would thing that adults would have outgrown their childhood fear of the mythical boogeyman. You know, the monster they cant see, describe, or identify that lives under their bed or closet, but really a ficticous imaginary fear.

These einsteins are afraid of the law abiding gun owner, and they cant even identify the criminaals. Otherwise we would see large numbers of bad guys identified as carrying concealed by the citizens.

So where are all those police reports, we will wait... 5 years later, still waiting....20 years later, still waiting.....obituary, people died waiting patiently for evidence from the antis......evidence never presented!

Oh wait, lets do a comparison of someone supposedly safe against people who carry concealed, say like a doctor!

ATF Max 8 million CPL's US, approximately 186 million age 21 or older or 4.3% of the people licensed for CPL.

Possible deaths from CPL holders in 3 year time span from Violence Policy Center report last year, 137 or 45 per year equals .00000562 per concealed license holder. You can also review Florida's data on CCW at http://licgweb.doacs.state.fl.us/stats/cw_monthly.html it says the same thing.

JAMA http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/286/4/415 700,000 doctors in US kill 44,000 to 98,000 by medical malpractice every year or .14 per physician.

Physician is .065 or .14 /.00000562 = 12,000 to 25,000 times more likely to harm you than a CPL holder.

So where is the risk from concealed carry holders and why aren't you antis crying to ban doctors?

[Jarhead1982]

Why is it, that the police, whose best response times are 4 minutes, avg 15-20 minutes can only solve 8.75% of all violent crimes committed on a yearly basis?

FBI UCR 2008 1.38 mil VCR (Violent Crime Reported) 49% solved to prosecution, 80% success rate.

But oh wait, we have to remember those 4.8 million violent crimes the government recognizes that were not reported USDOJ National Victimization report 2008.

So based on that (1.38 mil x 49%) x 80%) / 1.38 mil + 4.8 mil = only 8.75% of the violent crimes committed are solved each year on average.

Since this country was buit in freedom of choice, we choose to be prepared.

That is unless you can show everyone how it is so insane to be prepared for any unplanned event. We will expect hard evidence that you do not hav or maintain any life, car, home, or health insurance as to be prepared for the worst case in the letter writers opinion is insane.

[Jarhead1982]

Poor whispering, you still believe the BOR was never incorporated into all the states and does not apply to KansasCity.

Review McDonald vs Chciago June 2010 and we will provide you a large qunatity of tissue as you start to bawl uncontrollably.

Ideas, much less rights do not have physical boundaries.

[Jarhead1982]

The courts have ruled how many times the police have no duty much less legal liability for their failures to protect individuals:


Bowers v. DeVito, 686 F.2d 616 (7th Cir. 1982) (no federal constitutional requirement that police provide protection)
Calogrides v. Mobile, 475 So. 2d 560 (Ala. 1985); Cal Govt. Code 845 (no liability for failure to provide police protection)
Calogrides v. Mobile, 846 (no liability for failure to arrest or to retain arrested person in custody)
Davidson v. Westminster, 32 Cal.3d 197, 185, Cal. Rep. 252; 649 P.2d 894 (1982) (no liability for failure to provide police protection)
Stone v. State 106 Cal.App.3d 924, 165 Cal Rep. 339 (1980) (no liability for failure to provide police protection)
Morgan v. District of Columbia, 468 A.2d 1306 (D.C.App. 1983) (no liability for failure to provide police protection)
Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C.App 1981) (no liability for failure to provide police protection)
Sapp v. Tallahassee, 348 So.2d 363 (Fla. App. 1st Dist.), cert. denied 354 So.2d 985 (Fla. 1977); Ill. Rec. Stat. 4-102 (no liability for failure to provide police protection)
Keane v. Chicago, 98 Ill. App.2d 460, 240 N.E.2d 321 (1st Dist. 1968) (no liability for failure to provide police protection)
Jamison v. Chicago, 48 Ill. App. 3d 567 (1st Dist. 1977) (no liability for failure to provide police protection)
Simpson’s Food Fair v. Evansville, 272 N.E.2d 871 (Ind. App.) (no liability for failure to provide police protection)
Silver v. Minneapolis, 170 N.W.2d 206 (Minn. 1969) (no liability for failure to provide police protection)
Wuetrich V. Delia, 155 N.J. Super. 324, 326, 382, A.2d 929, 930 cert. denied 77 N.J. 486, 391 A.2d 500 (1978) (no liability for failure to provide police protection)
Chapman v. Philadelphia, 290 Pa. Super. 281, 434 A.2d 753 (Penn. 1981) (no liability for failure to provide police protection)
Morris v. Musser, 84 Pa. Cmwth. 170, 478 A.2d 937 (1984) (no liability for failure to provide police protection)
“Law enforcement agencies and personnel have no duty to protect individuals from the criminal acts of others.” -Lynch vs North Carolina Department of Justice 1989

[Jarhead1982]

By the way, how many of those mass shooters could have been stopped had a doctor or someone in authority did their job eh? So the doctors and the nine Army officers (disciplined for their failure in the FT Hood shooters case) who had opportunities to stop Cho (Va Tech), the N Illinois shooter, the Major at Ft Hood, and now the sheriff who failed to do his job in Arizona?

Guess you will insist that it was the NRA or 80 million law abiding gun owners responsible for those failures to notify or enforce the laws instead of the government & BATF who failed to do so right?

Oh geez, more examples of the goverments inability, or as I prefer, refusal to enforce the existing laws.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/03/21/national/main280557.shtml

Undercover congressional investigators using fake IDs were able to skirt mandatory background checks and purchase guns in all of the five states where they tried, according to a report issued Wednesday.

The General Accounting Office study concluded that the national background check system for purchasing guns "cannot ensure that the prospective purchaser is not a felon."

The system checks only whether the gun buyer had a criminal history but does not require any check to see whether the name or identification being used by the buyer is real.

[Jarhead1982]

Of course we see from the USDOJ Background Check & Firearm transfer report 2008

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/html/bcft/2008/bcft08st.pdf Brady Check report that of the 99 million checks for purchases from licensed sources only, since 1994.

We see a total of 1.67 million valid rejections, a 68% decrease in felons attempting to buy from a licensed source, and 58% of those rejected being felons.

We see that between 2000-2008 only 13,024 were prosecuted, or less than 1%.

We of course see how the anti gun lobby claims such effectiveness of this pathetically useless law with the hard data they can present that the 1.66 million plus who weren’t prosecuted then didn’t go and buy from an unlicensed source?

We also see how the USDOJ survey in 1997 where felons identified purchasing their weapons from 80% street buys, 12% retail stores, 2% gun shows.

Then that 68% reduction of attempted buys from licensed sources puts the street buys/theft at 95.52%, 3.64% retail stores, .64% gun shows in today’s numbers.

Firearm Use by Offenders, Bureau of Justice Statistics, November 2001

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=940.

Amazing how ineffective that poster child of futility is and this trend is similar with ALL gun control laws. Yet more laws will prevent criminals and terrorists from getting a firearm, ROTFLMFAO, uh yeah, and the moon is made of cheese and the sun rises in the west and sets in the east, right!

[Jarhead1982]

http://supreme.justia.com/us/390/85/

Haynes vs. U.S. 390 U.S. 85 1968 where the US Supreme Court ruled 8-1 in favor of Haynes that any law requiring a felon to self incriminate themselves and violate their 5th amendment rights was not enforceable as a charge for prosecution.

Hence criminals don't have to follow 85% of the existing gun control laws that do so, e.g. your stolen weapons, registrations, etc....

Amazing how the criminals don't have to obey these laws yet only law-abiding citizens do?

This just validates the hypocrisy that laws affect only the felons! After all, 20,000 gun laws and we see how effective a piece of legislation is at stopping violence because if it did, there wouldn't be ANY VIOLENT CRIME.

[Jarhead1982]

The government acknowledges in USDOJ National Gang Threat Assessment 2009 that 80% of all violent crimes committed in the US each year are committed by career criminals/gang members. http://www.justice.gov/ndic/pubs32/32146/index.htm

Suicidal people kinda speak for themselves.

Shall we review police studies in Chicago and NYC where between 76-80% of those involved in shootings, both shooter and injured were both involved in criminal activity at the time of the incident.

www.popcenter.org/problems/drive_by_shooting/PDFs/Block_and_Block_1993.pdf, www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/downloads/pdf/public_information/2007_firearms_discharge_report.pdf, www.nyclu.org/files/nypd_firearms_report_102207.pdf

So when are you going to address those two groups responsible for over 95% of all deaths using a firearm as frankly it is rather stupid not to address the largest reason for a problem, then again, we are talking about progressives here.

[Jarhead1982]

Lets review the following 10 mass shootings, and note what the body counts were where resistance occurred versus no resistance.

October 16, 1991, Luby’s Cafeteria, Killeen, TX, “Gun-Free”: 1 gunman, 23 murdered, 20 injured.
April 20, 1999, Columbine, “Gun-Free”: 2 gunmen, 13 murdered, 24 injured. Many were murdered AFTER the police were “on scene”.
April 16, 2007, Virginia Tech, “Gun-Free”: 1 gunman, 32 murdered, 25 injured. Most were murdered AFTER the police were “on scene”.
Feb 14,2008 Northern Illinois University, 1 gunman, 5 dead, 18 injured, gunman kills self long before police arrive to engage.
Nov 5 ,2009 Ft Hood Texas, 1 gunman, 13 dead, 30 wounded. Military personnel on base are BANNED from having a weapon, but the shooter did, and it was almost 9 minutes before police responded

Gun Free Zone 5 incidents

Defenseless victims murdered: 86
Defenseless victims injured: 117

December 17, 1991 Shoney’s Family Restaurant, Anniston, AL: 3 gunmen, 20 hostages, one ARMED customer (Thomas Glenn Terry). Police finally arrived to find one dead robber, one wounded robber and the third had fled when the shooting started. NO INJURED INNOCENTS.
October 1, 1997, Pearl High School: 1 gunman, 2 murdered, 7 injured: Stopped by ARMED vice principal.
January 16, 2002, Virginia Appalachian School of Law: 1 gunman, 3 murdered, 3 injured. Killer was stopped when confronted by two ARMED students.
Dec 9 2007, Colorado Springs, New Life Church, 1 gunman 2 murdered, 3 injured, gunman stopped when armed woman shoots gunman, who then turns gun on self and commits suicide, while 100 other church members are in church.
May 4th, College Station Georgia 2 gunman, 10 victims, 1 dead gunman, 1 victim wounded. The 2 thugs robbing a party begin discussing if they have enough bullets to do the job. One man retrieves his firearm, kills one thug, chases the other off.

Where murderers encountered ARMED resistance 5 incidents

murdered: 7
Where murderers encountered ARMED resistance; injured: 14

Wow, where no resistance occurred 9 plus times higher body count.

Yep, a higher body count is morally superior to a lower body count based on this idiot letter writer beliefs.

Many more examples available for review, just ask!

[Jarhead1982]

The second amendment as RATIFIED by the state’s.

“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.”

Maybe you can explain how for the entire history of English language, that the independent clause of a complex sentence, has always set the meaning of the complex sentence. (“the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”)

Yet several unenlightened and uneducated people here now claim the dependent clause (A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State) is the determinator of the complex sentence meaning and history and English scholars have all been wrong throughout the history of written English. Have at it einstein wannabesy, but warn us when Hades will be freezing over for you actually having data to support your claim.

Lets see, have you removed the 30 plus references from the congressional writings 1774-1789 & the federalist papers showing well regulated as to meaning well trained in the arts of war? Much less all those dictionaries that say the same thing? No, you haven’t. Reference Karpeles Museum, CA.

Maybe you removed that original draft of what became the second amendment. You know, the one that was clearly written as a collective right, but then was changed to what exists today. Why did our founding fathers change the amendment draft if it was what they wanted? Oh that’s right, actions do speak louder than words. Ref Karpeles Museum, CA again.

original proposed draft 
of 
the right to keep and bear arms 
of the 
BILL of RIGHTS 
(17 TH of 20 amendments)
on display at the Karpeles Manuscript Library 
Santa Ana, California

"That the people have a right to keep and bear arms; that a well regulated Militia composed of the body of the people trained to arms is the proper, natural and safe defense of a free State. That standing armies in time of peace are dangerous to liberty, and therefore ought to be avoided as far as the circumstances and protection of the community will admit; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to and governed by the civil power."

Then of course, here is the logic failure the anti’s always have. They always fail to prove, that the miltia existed before the armed individual.

Funny how all that was before the 2008 rulings eh?

Funny how in the 2008 Heller ruling all 9 justices agreed that bearing arms was an individual right. That 5-4 vote was on the constitutionality of the Washington D.C. gun ban, read it, you will see! But no, antis never admit to such facts/

One wonder how their ancestors ever made it to the new world when they claimed the earth was flat? One would have expected their ancestors to fall off the edge of the earth!

[Jarhead1982]

Past experience with gun control leaders such as Annette "Flirty" Stevens (Illinois Million Mom March president caught with drugs and a de-serialized handgun), Sheila Eccleston (Mothers Against Violence, imprisoned for possessing a sawed-off shotgun), James Kelly (Seattle Urban League anti-gunner caught brandishing a handgun during an argument), Bart Stupak (champion of mandatory federal trigger locks whose son later committed suicide with dad's unlocked gun), and Barbara Graham (DC Million Mom March activist convicted of a revenge shooting of an innocent person who HADN'T killed her son) suggests that frustrated gun control activists tend to go out with a bang rather than a whimper.

The moral is, if you ever happen to come across Dennis Henigan, a whispering kc or any other anti take cover. You don't want to be at Ground Zero when they go postal from their ultimate frustration that gun control has, and always will be a failure at eliminating violence.

[whispering_to_kc]

"Stupid hippies--- COME AND TAKE THEM." Posted by: Me

Nothin' brings the new faces out in high numbers like a good gun control thread does.

[Curt80]

So, just because you do not agree with a big part of who we are. You are willing to toss out the baby with the bath water? Guns and law abiding citizens do not cause the death of anyone. It is those who want to break the law that causes the death of so many America. By the same account you could say that drunk drivers causes thousands of deaths and tens of thousands of injuries each year. Then, why not remove the cars from the road?

[Me]

Stupid hippies--- COME AND TAKE THEM.

[D.L.]

"Posted by: Uncommon sense
I just would like to hear an actual argument for unlimited and unregulated gun ownership in this country."

Since nobody makes that argument, you are just trying to find a straw man to knock down.