While the pro-death lobby likes to quibble over what constitutes a school shooting or argues that gun violence was even worse a generation ago, it does not change the documented fact that these measures will save lives.
The most flawed narrative is that increased gun ownership actually "deters" criminals or mass shooter. In reality the criminals are more likely to shoot if they suspect that their target is armed.
None of these steps will restrict the ability of Americans to acquire firearms to hunt, for home defense, or even for conceal-carry purposes. But it will slow the flow, and that's what we need right now.
A summary is below for those of you questioning my logic. I also tried to work in a request or a question for all the folks who are hoping I could get a clue. Here's your chance to give me one.
Our latest mass shooting in Oregon - which did NOT occur in a gun-free zone - is just the latest reminder that good guys with guns, as good as their intentions might be, are oftentimes no match for bad guys with guns.
Nuclear weapons don't kill people either, and neither do military grenades. People do. But we still control and limit access to weapons of mass destruction -- not because they themselves have personified power -- but the extent of damage that can be caused in wrong hands, or even in the right hands, erroneously, needs them to be restricted.
Chances are, if you are for gun control, your member of Congress already is for it, too. National petitions don't do anything. The only way short of a Constitutional re-design of the House is a massive turn out by liberals and a massive lack of turn out by conservatives happening at the same time, leading to a change in the majority in the House.
I come from a family of gun enthusiasts. My younger brother is a firearms instructor in Iraq. My older brother, who lives in Atlanta, keeps a handgun ...
For now, we have an endless litany of tragedies to which we react with collective pathos and impotence, knowing for certain that we await the next. We have a bizarre double-standard, in which the First Amendment is spared the tortured literalism imposed upon the Second by those with ulterior motives.
This week, the nation was once again shocked by the everyday, as a gunman killed nine at a community college in Oregon. It's the uniquely American gun paradox: how something so horrifying can be so routine. As a somber -- bordering on disgusted -- President Obama noted: "we've become numb to this." In truth, this actually isn't everyday violence -- it's more than everyday. In the 274 days of 2015, we've had 294 mass shootings. And 986 since Sandy Hook in 2012. The question is, when will our level of disgust be high enough that we do what's needed to lower the body count? "If you think this is a problem," said the president, "then you should expect your elected officials to reflect your views." Until that happens, he said, we all bear a share of the blame: "We collectively are answerable to those families who lose their loved ones because of our inaction." Will we rise to the challenge?
Regardless of what the constitution may or may not allow, I can live a perfectly happy and safe life without owning a gun. I had that thought today, and it led to another: Maybe it's time to stop talking about rights and start talking about personal rationale.
Today's topics include: The 294th Mass Shooting in America This Year; Terrorist Attack on California Planned Parenthood; Huckabee Derps on Benghazi; the Next Speaker of the House is a Flaming Moron; and much more.
The victims and heroes and families should serve as a reminder of the very real, lasting human cost of these shootings. I have never lost a loved one to gun violence but perhaps it's time all of us start acting as if we had. Maybe then we'd do something about it.
Poor Jeb. He's stepped in it again. Responding to the possible need for new gun laws following the most recent school shootings and killings, this time Roseburg, Oregon, Jeb noted, "Look, stuff happens."
In the spirit of defending personal and organizational interests,I hope that the university will make provisions to protect the interests of the students, staff and faculty who want to work, teach and learn in gun-free environments where everybody can freely express his or her ideas without fear.