10-14-2015, 02:36 PM
I didn't read the full article Maggot; only the snip you posted.
But, for me, reducing gun violence is not primarily about fewer guns; it's instead about guns in fewer hands.
I understand that some people see reducing the number and types of guns available as a means to accomplishing guns in fewer of the wrong hands. I also understand the argument in favor of banning high capacity guns/ammo and do believe that such guns/ammo probably results in a higher number of shooting victims for certain types of shooters.
If the number and types of guns/ammo is restricted based on those beliefs, but guns aren't banned, it won't be a violation of anyone's Second Amendment rights to bear arms and it won't bother me. It might do some good.
But, I remain convinced that doing everything possible to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, ALL domestic abusers, children, and those with mental illnesses (particularly illnesses and individuals bearing symptoms or histories of suicidal and homicidal tendencies) would be the most effective way to reduce intentional and unintentional gun violence and increase public safety.
That means closing background check loopholes (private transactions, internet sells...), reporting mental illness court decisions and criminal histories consistently across states into NICS, invoking criminal action against negligent gun owners who leave unlocked loaded guns (or unlocked guns and ammo) in reach of unsupervised minors, making straw purchasing a federal crime....
In order to accomplish those goals, stronger mandates and better execution/enforcement of existing laws, expanding/modifying a couple of existing laws to make the penalties harsher, and a new federal law in regards to child safety would be needed. I don't care when people scream that my advocating for those measures makes me a liberal, gun-shy, law-happy harlot who's greasing the slippery slope. Those screams sound funny and ignorant to my ears.
But, I do think the fear-based resistance and screaming objections against such moderate proposals as violations of Second Amendment rights is inaccurate, ineffective, and really starting to work against gun enthusiasts. I think such (irrational, in my opinion) resistance is pushing more of the public towards more drastic measures that would restrict all gun owners in the attempt to "well-regulate" the bearing of arms in this country.
But, for me, reducing gun violence is not primarily about fewer guns; it's instead about guns in fewer hands.
I understand that some people see reducing the number and types of guns available as a means to accomplishing guns in fewer of the wrong hands. I also understand the argument in favor of banning high capacity guns/ammo and do believe that such guns/ammo probably results in a higher number of shooting victims for certain types of shooters.
If the number and types of guns/ammo is restricted based on those beliefs, but guns aren't banned, it won't be a violation of anyone's Second Amendment rights to bear arms and it won't bother me. It might do some good.
But, I remain convinced that doing everything possible to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, ALL domestic abusers, children, and those with mental illnesses (particularly illnesses and individuals bearing symptoms or histories of suicidal and homicidal tendencies) would be the most effective way to reduce intentional and unintentional gun violence and increase public safety.
That means closing background check loopholes (private transactions, internet sells...), reporting mental illness court decisions and criminal histories consistently across states into NICS, invoking criminal action against negligent gun owners who leave unlocked loaded guns (or unlocked guns and ammo) in reach of unsupervised minors, making straw purchasing a federal crime....
In order to accomplish those goals, stronger mandates and better execution/enforcement of existing laws, expanding/modifying a couple of existing laws to make the penalties harsher, and a new federal law in regards to child safety would be needed. I don't care when people scream that my advocating for those measures makes me a liberal, gun-shy, law-happy harlot who's greasing the slippery slope. Those screams sound funny and ignorant to my ears.
But, I do think the fear-based resistance and screaming objections against such moderate proposals as violations of Second Amendment rights is inaccurate, ineffective, and really starting to work against gun enthusiasts. I think such (irrational, in my opinion) resistance is pushing more of the public towards more drastic measures that would restrict all gun owners in the attempt to "well-regulate" the bearing of arms in this country.