Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page:  « First  ‹ Previous  1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (5 total)
photo
schotts
This We'll Defend
04:12 PM on 04/18/2012
I started to read this article expecting at least some cogent arguments for gun control, that I could politely debate; but was quickly disappointed.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wolflover3825
Hungry Like the Wolf.
09:09 AM on 04/19/2012
I got to the point of where she said cars don't kill people. She also stated the owning a car is a right. Well if that is the case, I know a few dozen people that are being denied their rights because they don't own a car. Should we contact the ACLU over that?
10:37 AM on 04/23/2012
They're not being denied their rights because they don't own a car. They choose to not own a car. If they can't afford it then they have denied themselves the right to own a car. I'm not saying it is a right, but your argument (or at least your wording) is invalid.
photo
bizzaro birdman
The poolhall is a great equalizer
11:52 AM on 04/19/2012
Yeah this whole piece was garbage from the get go.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
coyotefever105
A Conservative/Libertarian Rogue
01:17 PM on 04/18/2012
I also notice her credentials of "Women Ecommerce Execs". Let's be realistic, not sexist. An average adult woman is more unlikely to physically match strength with an adult male who is mugging her. A gun can help even the odds.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wolflover3825
Hungry Like the Wolf.
09:12 AM on 04/19/2012
Some are just hypocrites. Example Dianne Feinstein. She wants to ban guns altogether, but yet has a CCW permit from an area that is impossible to get one.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
RevJimIII
Grin and Barret...
06:49 PM on 04/19/2012
The same Dianne Feinstein who has recently decided to try and block national reciprocity? But, you know, they 'are not out to get our guns'... no, not at all...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
coyotefever105
A Conservative/Libertarian Rogue
11:56 AM on 04/20/2012
It's mind boggling, I know.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
coyotefever105
A Conservative/Libertarian Rogue
01:13 PM on 04/18/2012
She forgot the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, 2nd Amendment. There were no cars or planes back then. Did you know a lot of these killings are committed in gun free zones? Even if you were to place restrictions or ban guns altogether, you're going to still have crime with guns! Hasn't some of the crimes in the states allowing concealed firearms been reduced because criminals can't tell who has the guns or not?
11:59 AM on 04/18/2012
The steps needed to end gun violence.

Step One is to take advantage of high profile incidents that involve guns and to use them to get media time. People make decisions when their emotions are elevated that they would not have considered at other times.

Step Two is to marginalize legal gun use and historic precedent. Police forces should be considered as sufficient without personal security measures. Incidents of the mishandling of guns create doubt about their usefulness and their safe use.

Step Three is to make some guns seem more dangerous than others. Fear could sway the support for banning of some firearms.

Step Four is to register every sale. It’s important to know who owns guns and what type for future reference.

Step Five is a “Shall Issue” permitting process. Police can then decide a person’s eligibility for a permit based on “Good Cause” which can later be legislatively defined to limit carry to those who are law enforcement with further prohibitions as opportunities arise.

The Final step is to encourage and incentivize the forfeiture of arms. If people believe that they no longer have a need for arms and that arms are dangerous to own, they will be more likely to forfeit them. Incentives could include cash or food for information about unlicensed neighbors or family members. Lastly a serious of ongoing compliance inspections based on gun and ammunition sales registration would complete the goal of a world free of gun violence.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
tomteboda
07:50 PM on 04/22/2012
Thank you for laying out your suggestions in such plain language to warn those of us who value individual rights and liberty about how any freedom can be taken away from people. I hope people who value any and ALL freedoms pay attention to your description of the path to totalitarian control.
04:49 PM on 04/24/2012
Very well stated.

Small clarification on "shall issue" versus "may issue" though:

http://www.usacarry.com/forums/general-firearm-discussion/28-shall-issue-may-issue.html
This comment has been removed due to violations of our [Guidelines]
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
mackbolan
Libertas inaestimabilis res est
03:50 AM on 04/18/2012
don't believe me about knives being protected by the 2nd...

http://www.kniferights.org/
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
mackbolan
Libertas inaestimabilis res est
03:46 AM on 04/18/2012
the truth is that many murders are committed with items that are protected by the 2nd amendment but no one wants to ban them...
knives...clubs...bows and arrows...
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
mackbolan
Libertas inaestimabilis res est
03:39 AM on 04/18/2012
cars don't cause violence...i guess you have never heard of intentional hit and run or vehicular homicide...
07:00 AM on 04/18/2012
the car is not the cause, the person is the cause.
photo
Grumpy Man
Disappointed idealist
08:33 AM on 04/18/2012
"the car is not the cause, the person is the cause."

The gun is not the cause, the person is the cause.

Fixed.
10:21 AM on 04/18/2012
Motor vehicles are highly regulated, subject to myriad safety standards. Product safety regulation of cars and every other consumer product--except guns--has saved tens of thousands of lives and prevented hundreds of thousands of injuries. If we had taken the same approach to guns, thousands would be alive today who paid with their lives for an unregulated gun industry,.
10:02 PM on 04/17/2012
Normally less guns would mean less gun crime, but apparently American Exceptionalism also protects many of your citizens from such logic. A bit of time spent travelling would show you that ALL the other countries who are armed as much as you are violent, repressive backwaters. Yet many of you cling to the idea that your weapons actually make you safer. More guns means less fear? Good one, geniuses.

Guns don't kill people, Americans kill people. Mostly with guns. Mostly other Americans.

Your Manifest Destiny is endless civic bloodshed.
photo
Dimensio
I just don't know what went wrong!
10:40 AM on 04/18/2012
Are you able to explain why you believe crime acceptable when committed with an implement other than a firearm?
12:39 PM on 04/18/2012
It has also been found that there is no correlation between firearms ownership and homicide and suicide rates, and many of the countries with the strictest firearms prohibitions have higher homicide and suicide rates than nations without such restrictions.
http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf

Russia has extreme firearms prohibitions, yet, there murder rate is 12 per 100,000 and a suicide rate of 21.4 per 100,000. By contrast, the U.S. murder rate is 4.8 per 100,000, and the U.S. suicide rate 11.8 per 100,000.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_rate
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_rate
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
snowmom7
09:48 PM on 04/17/2012
Ok, pro-lethal weapon proponents. How do we stem the tide of violence? How do we protect innocents, which is most people, from lethal weapons that are readily available? If you disagree with the blogger, what do you propose?
photo
OdinsEye
Silenced by HP. Cant be intimidated into Facebook
10:46 PM on 04/17/2012
Instead of continuing to try the failed 75+ year tactic of blaming the object used and focusing on it, we need to focus on the actual CAUSES of violence: Primarily, those are: Ethics, Education, Economics, and the Glorification Of Violence.
photo
rikilii
Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur.
10:55 PM on 04/17/2012
1.  Stop releasing violent felons from prison on parole.

2.  Vigorously prosecute people who illegally provide guns to others who are prohibited from having them.  Currently, straw purchasers usually get a slap on the wrist.

3.  Provide criminal and mental health records to the FBI so that the existing background check system has even a small chance of working (it's ridiculous to say that all gun transfers should involve a background check, when the current background check system is crippled by lack of data).

4.  Legalize recreational drugs.

5.  Prosecute domestic abusers more vigorously.

Any one of those would go a lot farther than banning 11+ round magazines.
05:47 PM on 04/24/2012
I would add "educate" to this list. If more Americans are educated on gun safety principles, operational mechanics, and the capability for threat deterrance and neutralization, more Americans would consider owning and even carrying weapons legally. More armed law-abiding citizens means a criminal has to think twice before trying to stick up that convenience store, because the person behind the counter may just be a better shot.
photo
OdinsEye
Silenced by HP. Cant be intimidated into Facebook
09:46 PM on 04/17/2012
"There is no anti-gun group with enough money to defeat the pro-gun money."

Because there are none with 100th of the membership of the NRA.
photo
TexasTreader
Right of John Wayne
06:56 PM on 04/18/2012
I'll go you one better. A small fraction of gun owners are NRA members. There truly is no hope for success in the gun grabbers' camp.
photo
OdinsEye
Silenced by HP. Cant be intimidated into Facebook
09:45 PM on 04/17/2012
"The Violence Policy Center (spend some time on its website!)"

I'd rather not be subjected to misinformation, disinformation, and debunked information propagated by an organization led by a guy who actually publically espouses misleading people and which can hold its membership meeting in my kitchen.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wolflover3825
Hungry Like the Wolf.
10:25 AM on 04/19/2012
You must have a small kitchen then. ;)
photo
OdinsEye
Silenced by HP. Cant be intimidated into Facebook
09:40 PM on 04/17/2012
"And with respect to the Second Amendment -- why is the "right to bear arms" aspect emphasized and the "well regulated militia" part is not?"

Because the "well regulated militia" part is not the main clause of the sentence. It is part of the absolute phrase. Such phrases exist outside the grammar of the main clause to which they are attached, they are non-restrictive, and they do not create or limit the right.

"Since when did a "militia" come to mean "anyone who wants a gun"?"

Since the day the Second Amendment was penned. Nothing in the Second says that participation in a militia is a prerequisite for the right to keep and bear arms.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jeff Thompson1
12:11 AM on 04/18/2012
Not only that, 'Well Regulated" did not mean government regulation - it meant "Well Functioning"
10:24 AM on 04/18/2012
Hi OdinsEye--I notice that you have oodles of time to attack the VPC. May I inquire what it is you do for a living?
photo
OdinsEye
Silenced by HP. Cant be intimidated into Facebook
12:32 PM on 04/18/2012
Two and a half hours yesterday is "oodles of time"? Spare me the personal attacks.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wolflover3825
Hungry Like the Wolf.
10:27 AM on 04/19/2012
Same goes for you as well. Care to answer?
photo
OdinsEye
Silenced by HP. Cant be intimidated into Facebook
09:36 PM on 04/17/2012
"How come people do not interpret these laws as infringing on their right to car ownership? Because these are rational ideas and for the common good."

No. They do not interpret them as infringing a right to car ownership because 1) they are not required for car ownership -- they only apply to the operation of a vehicle on publically maintained roads and 2) because other than a general right to property, there is no specific right to own a car.
photo
OdinsEye
Silenced by HP. Cant be intimidated into Facebook
09:34 PM on 04/17/2012
"But let's just take this one cause of gun violence: Guns."

Firearms do not cause violence.

"Cars don't kill people, either. And we all accept the common sense rules around car ownership and driving -- you need a license, you must wear your seat belts, you can't drive drunk."

Driving is a privilege, not a right. Further, the restrictions you list are for the privilege of operating a vehicle on publically maintained roads, not for ownership or operating on private land. They are more analogous to concealed carry permits, not to the possession of firearms.