A liberal and a conservative walk into a bar. The bartender’s like, “what is this, a joke?” Actually it’s quite serious, and it covers a grave topic.
DEAN CHAMBERS – UNSKEWEDPOLLS.COM – Words can not adequately communicate the degree of tragedy of the shooting incident in Newtown, Conn. and we all pray for the families of the victims. However, it is truly sad and showing a lack of civil human reaction to tragedy when the far left exploits an event like this to advance their political agenda of gun control.
Those twenty children and seven adults were killed by a truly sick individual, not guns. This tragedy is vastly unfortunate, but it should also not lead to further encroachment of Bill of Rights recognized civil liberties by calls for further victim disarmament legislation aka “gun control.”
The far left is hell bent on passing more victim disarmament legislation, in violation of the Second Amendment, despite ample empirical evidence that such legislation doesn’t make anyone safer except perhaps the criminals. Needless additional gun laws will only disarm law abiding citizens while doing nothing to stop the actions of criminals who abuse firearms. When the state of Florida banned firearms in rental cars, it lead to an epidemic of carjackings of rental cars.
In Israel, the teachers in the schools carry guns and they never have any school shootings. Guns are used by sick people in these tragedies occasionally while every year hundreds of thousands of law abiding citizens protect themselves with firearms. Why should we disarm the population from protecting themselves because of the actions of the very few sick individuals?
BRIAN K. WHITE – GLOSSYNEWS.COM – This was a horrible event and our hearts reach out to those effected. The left is not exploiting this, the left has been urging gun control for decades. When there is a shooting we hear “now is not the time” and when there isn’t we hear “don’t fix it if it ain’t broke.”
So when can we discuss it? There have been 23 school shootings since 2000, and seven just in the last ten months. Calling gun control “victim disarmament” is dishonest. The bill of rights is 225 years old, and is perhaps ready for a shift in tone, since it says nothing about high-capacity, high-powered weapons.
Typical conservative. Ignore the facts and distort reality to fit your twisted world view. The evidence is clear. Countries without guns have almost no gun deaths. Partial bans, like in Florida, are doomed to fail. We need comprehensive reform. Teachers in Israel are permitted to carry guns, but most do not. Remember, America isn’t Israel. Israel is a war zone.
The only school shooting they had was at the hands of Palestinian extremists. Why should we disarm citizens who are just protecting themselves? Because every week there is a murder where someone tries to claim “stand your ground” when there was no need for violence. Because Newtown school murderer Adam Lanza only had access to guns because his mother was hoarding them in fear.
DEAN CHAMBERS – UNSKEWEDPOLLS.COM – So the left is not exploiting the Newtown, Conn. shooting to engage in a discussion about victim disarmament but then asks what time and occasion conservatives think should be the right time to entertain the idea of victim disarmament. The question isn’t about the time but the utility of what they seek to propose while exploiting quite blatantly the tragedy.
Restricting the Second Amendment rights of individuals, the right to keep and bear arms for self defense, would not in any way prevent another shooting tragedy of this kind. So the point is, having a discussion about a proposal we both know doesn’t work, is a waste of time. Why waste our time debating an idea that doesn’t work, and is also clearly in violation of the Bill of Rights?
Let us instead focus on debating ideas that do work. Encourage the teachers to learn how to shot firearms and carry them in school. If the next shooter even suspects one teacher in that school is packing, the shooter won’t be shooting that school. Let’s push for concealed carry for everyone that has a firearms permit too.
If the shooter has no way of knowing how might be carrying concealed, the shooter won’t open fire at the risky of immediately being snuffed out by someone carrying concealed. Safe and responsible use of firearms should be taught to anyone that wants to learn, so as there are more law-abiding citizens carrying firearms there will be less crime and far fewer mass shooting tragedies.
BRIAN K. WHITE – GLOSSYNEWS.COM –
There you go again. Calling it “victim disarmament”. How dishonest. The second amendment doesn’t allow guns for self defense, but to guard against a government power growing too oppressive. Gun control is not “clearly a violation of the Bill of Rights. Fully automatic weapons are already banned, few seem to think that’s an encroachment. Maybe we should say that only firearms in existence at the signing of the Bill of Rights are allowed, specifically, muskets. Shootings happen every two weeks, so what are we to do?
You think if every teacher had a gun in his/her desk, that one wouldn’t fall into the hands of a disturbed child? That thinking is naive. There is already a world in-carry. Every state in the nation allows concealed carry, and off-duty police are usually required to carry, but the gun violence continues, and has escalated. Armed civilians do not stop mass shootings.
The truth is, the more guns per capita a nation has, the more gun crimes and gun accidents occur. If we can’t ban them outright like England has (see their 55 gun deaths last year against our 12,000) then let’s just require gun owners to carry liability insurance for when their gun is used improperly. I own two guns myself, and if I was required to pay into insurance to compensate the victims, should my guns ever be stolen or “borrowed” by my children, I’d likely be more careful. And rates would vary based on the level of security. With a trigger lock, in a gun safe, would likely be the cheapest rate, and the best for society.
Even the NRA has backed off their hardline stance. This puts you to the right of the NRA. You’re standing in lonely territory. The tide has shifted. It’s time for a reasonable, sensible gun control policy. I advocate a complete ban, even though that would mean financial loss to me. Could you accept an outcome that means a rhetorical loss to you?