Polls leading up to Friday's movie theater massacre in Aurora, Colorado, show there's not much support for stricter gun laws.
Voters seemed to support tighter controls right after the Columbine shootings in 1999. But, as you can see, gun control has become less and less popular over the past thirteen years.
So what’s it going to take to change the gun laws in this country?
"There should be a serious discussion and debate, not a hysterical one, not one that is so polarized that you can't have a legitimate discussion," Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter (D) said Friday on The Ed Show. "People want to be safe in America. And that's what we need to stay focused."
"I am pessimistic that we're going to make progress, or what I would consider progress on, towards sensible gun control," said Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson. "An assault weapons ban, that seems to be a no-brainer to me. But I don`t think that the conditions are there to move toward that."
"We could have changes in the law, but before that, we have to get changes in the conversation," said Bloomberg View columnist Jonathan Alter. "And that is achievable in the next few weeks if we focus on it."
What do you think?
Leave a Comment:
This is a "Mental Health Issue,"
NOT a "Gun Issue."
Keep deflecting, clowns. Holmes didn't kill people with his lack of mental health.
@TheRealChris
You are correct - he killed people using guns.
But---
No matter how tight our gun-control laws, we will always have people who have mental health issues that will could get their hands on guns - or bombs -- etc.
We need to be able to identify people with mental health issues and get them help so that they don't hurt themselves or others.
Would you like an informed opinion of your mental health?
I'm sure to you, Holmes was just another good ol' gun-toting American.
@slack
He will be judged in a court of law.
An important issue is what can be done to prevent this sort of thing from happening again.
One - stricter gun-control
Another - better mental health treatment - including identification and intervention.
How about both?
Neither one is possible. Unless you make mental testing mandatory.
Good luck with that.
@TheRealChris
Well - then - I guess we just give up and don't even try.
Really?
No. We stop people from having guns. Like the Constitution says.
Re: #27.11
Yup - that should work.
What!?!?!
The Second Amendment states:
"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."
Re: #27.13
I agree with the interpretation that this does not mean than that individuals have unlimited and unregulatable rights to possess weapons.
But, that is not how this has been interpreted - particularly in the Supreme Court rulings in 2008 and 2010.
So - the first problem with your proposal is that it would never get past the Supreme Court.
The other problem is how, exactly, you would "stop people from having guns". Confiscate all of them? Good luck with that.
No, the problem is the Supreme Court got rewriting the Constitution past the people.
Gun control is an enigma to US. I don't own any type of firearm, but am considering it now, not because of this incident, but because of the rise in drugs and violent crime that I see. I don't know, however, if it will make me any safer, and that is the enigma. Politicians need to find the place between fully automatic weapons with large bullet capacity and revolver type pistols. After all, most of our population isn't fighting a war at home, but hunters use rifles and shotguns for hunting, and in the cities, it is just plain crazy to have people carrying concealed weapons, and I point to the rationale that Zimmerman had because he had a gun and killed Trayvon Martin. If he hadn't had the weapon, he would not be in court and Martin would be alive. Think about that.
@Slack
There is NO EVIDENCE THAT TRAYVON MARTIN WAS A THREAT!!!!!!!!!!!!
And the stalking and being told to stay in the car and the questioning and the gun.
There is no evidence that Trayvon Martin was doing anything that was threatening to anyone when Zimmerman decided to approach him.
[Unless "walking while wearing a hoodie carrying Skittles and talking to his girl friend on his cell phone" qualifies as threatening.]
What happened after that - including the circumstances that resulted in the injuries to Zimmerman - is a matter for the court to decide.
@Peace
The Travon Martin incident hit the national radar because there was no police investigation.
I am confident that the investigation and trial will be fair and complete.
Why do some people always jump to broad generalizations?
"ABC News" - "Beer Summit" ...
Never mind - had it for tonight!
The fact that we put a regulation or control on the right to bear arms is not going to keep murders from happening. Gun control is like abortion. If we make them illegal, it is not going to stop them from happening. It just gives the black market more profits. Those who are prone to violence will be violent even when guns are controlled.
The 2nd Amendment was meant to give citizens the right to protect themselves, their property and state from any enemy.
In this country you need a license for everything from performing your trades to driving. There are mandates that make us buy services we don't need and the authorities then call those right "privileges". Taking away the right is not liberal. Any government can become tyrant. When government mandates its citizens just to benefit any group or its commerce that government will be considered tyrant.
It is obvious however, something needs to be done so the violence stops. Could be that it is better to do nothing? Or do we want to take away the right of those who are prone to violence. But, then again who will be the judge of whether a person will or wont be violent in the future?... The majority of those who have thought of violence never bring it about.
Let's start with Chicago...strict gun control, yet Obama supporters are killing each other left and right
Let's see your evidence for that ridiculous statement.
So now you're down to bare-faced lying.
You end up like you started.
@Peace
Yes - there is a surge in homicides in Chicago. So?
I am curious how you back up that statement, which I consider a pompous generalization.
No, dope, there's no evidence that the people who are killing each other are Obama supporters.
But, good try at avoiding the facts.
Get back in the car, clown.
@Peace
Regarding your (what I consider "pompous") statement:
I have worked full-time since graduating from college (except for a 4 year stretch when I had 2 babies and went back part-time for another degree). My children are grown and married and also work full-time.
I have worked with a lot of people over those years who were conservative.
Are you implying that they were the "providers" and I am a "consumer"?
@Peace
I looked back at the posts and realized that the reference to "Obama supporters" was not in your post but in #29.1 by billy3 who is wisely staying out of this.
My apologies - about that point.
Just saw your reply in #29.10 - when did you refer to President Obama being a community organizer and why is that applicable to the fact of surge in homicide rate?
@Peace
You're welcome - I guess. I just made an effort to correct an misunderstanding.
Still would like a clarification of this statement:
No one on this blog is disputing that There will Always be Gun related Tragedies, or some type of weapon used to commit an act of violence. All gun's will bring tragedy. Every one get's that, BUT WE all realize that the Assault style IS capable of Alot more destruction in a shorter amount of time versus any other style. Reality is that in the hands of a person that Know's what they are doing this unfortunately WOULD have been a heck of a lot worse. That is what WE want to minimize. Or at least TRY.
Right because you have wild west fantasies. Only a moron would try shooting in a crowded movie theater with people rushing to get out in the dark, yeah right excellent target practice settings there. Which is why we know you are clueless about what you speak on, police wouldn't even attempt to fire in those conditions because the chances of causing more deaths are so great.
Whom.... I would like to see the 50 people ID the good / bad guy under those conditions, It would have been a bigger blood bath,
Yeah amazing how they believe their skills are greater then their abilities. It's people like them who become victims of their own weapon.
The perp in Aurora was a coward, that's why he wore body armor. He would never have attempted the crime if he thought people would be shooting back... hence the reason he chose a firearm restricted theatre instead of an NRA event.
We can adopt the the following laws to attempt to control our gun massacre problem. No one says that with 250 million firearms in the country that we can end all gun violence. The idea here is to try and reduce these gun massacres while allowing responsible gun owners to have bolt action rifles, shotguns, and revolvers for sporting purposes or home defense. Mass murder is an embarrassment for our country.
1. We need to reinstate the assault weapons ban. All large capacity clips of 10 or more rounds need to be banned in civilian possession. You do not need an AK-47 or an AR-15 rifle for deer hunting.
2. Semiautomatic pistols need to be banned. The large ammunition clips can turn these semiautomatics into the weapons of choice for gun massacres because pistols are small and concealable. Most of the gun massacres in recent years, FT Hood, Virginia Tech, Tucson, the Aurora theater, Columbine, and other mass shootings involved these semiautomatics like Glock 9mm pistols with high capacity magazines.
3. We need to outlaw all gun shows. Criminal elements are known to follow the gun show trade in the shadows. Many of these firearms are purchased illegally in this black market that follows the gun show trade, are used in subsequent crimes.
4. All businesses that sell firearms or ammunition must have a federal license to sell these items. A strict federal background check needs to be established for all gun sales and ammunition sales. The Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms and the FBI would along with the states be responsible for maintaining this federal list. There should be strict limits on the amount of firearms that one person can buy at a time and per year. Gun traders or gun collectors would have to get a special permit to buy above the amount of firearm limits per year.
5. We need to issue a license to own a firearm. We need to have all 18 year olds who want to own firearms must take a firearm and hunter safety course in high school. The students then take a test similar to a driver's test about laws and safety practices for firearms and hunting. They should also safely shoot various firearms at a range. Adults would also have to take such a test to own firearms. The state then issues a firearms license. We have to take a test for a license to drive cars so it should be the same for hunters and shooters. A judge would be able to immediately revoke this gun license for an accumulation of felonies or even a serious number of gross misdemeanor offenses. Even several DUI's or other unstable behavior would result in a loss of your firearms license. Any person determined to be insane or incompetent also would lose their firearms license.
6. If you are found to be walking around with or transporting a firearm and don't have a firearm's license you would face serious problems with the law.
We can adopt a version of these laws that still allow 2nd amendment rights to be protected for responsible gun owners. Carry and conceal laws and "stand your ground laws" would be repealed. We are probably never going to be able to register 250 million firearms in our country. But we can educate, license, and control the actions of the people who choose to own how firearms in our society. We must outlaw forbid assault weapons. Adopting a version of gun laws that incorporate these principles stated above would start to make gun massacres more difficult to pull off. Again these are only partial answers but they are where we need to start as a country.
Rex.... Have you ever considered Norway. I hear it's beautiful this time of year.
Maybe you should give it a try.
Sixpack: If you were ever in the Army in a combat zone for many months on end where you got to carry a rifle along with 70 lbs of other gear, clean a rifle, sleep with a rifle, report your rifle twice per day to your supervisor, clear the rifle every time you enter a building, and be threatened with jail if you lose the rifle, you will not think that any of these laws are all that draconian. To tell you the truth turning that rifle into the company arms room is a liberating experience after carrying for three or four months straight. Carrying a rifle around for three months or more even to the bathroom is nothing but a total pain in the ass. You should go enlist sometime then get your butt shipped to a combat zone deplpyment and then you can see first hand what I am trying to tell you.
Canada has good gun laws that allow sportsman and target shooters to own and use firearms. You don't care at all about the massacres at Columbine, Virginia tech, Aurora, FT Hood, Tucson, and many of the mass murders that have happened around the country. Where are your solutions for this problem of gun massacres? Your silence about practical solutions is deafening. I have also been to Norway and the average Norwegian has a higher standard of living and higher level of education than the average American.
Schizophrenia: Paranoid Subtype
The defining feature of the paranoid subtype (also known as paranoid schizophrenia) is the presence of auditory hallucinations or prominent delusional thoughts about persecution or conspiracy. However, people with this subtype may be more functional in their ability to work and engage in relationships than people with other subtypes of schizophrenia. The reasons are not entirely clear, but may partly reflect that people suffering from this subtype often do not exhibit symptoms until later in life and have achieved a higher level of functioning before the onset of their illness. People with the paranoid subtype may appear to lead fairly normal lives by successful management of their disorder.
Paranoid schizophrenia is the most common subtype.
People diagnosed with the paranoid subtype may not appear odd or unusual and may not readily discuss the symptoms of their illness. Typically, the hallucinations and delusions revolve around some characteristic theme, and this theme often remains fairly consistent over time. A person’s temperaments and general behaviors often are related to the content of the disturbance of thought. For example, people who believe that they are being persecuted unjustly may be easily angered and become hostile. Often, paranoid schizophrenics will come to the attention of mental health professionals only when there has been some major stress in their life that has caused an increase in their symptoms. At that point, sufferers may recognize the need for outside help or act in a fashion to bring attention to themselves.
Since there may be no observable features, the evaluation requires sufferers to be somewhat open to discussing their thoughts. If there is a significant degree of suspiciousness or paranoia present, people may be very reluctant to discuss these issues with a stranger.
There is a broad spectrum to the nature and severity of symptoms that may be present at any one time. When symptoms are in a phase of exacerbation or worsening, there may be some disorganization of the thought processes. At this time, people may have more trouble than usual remembering recent events, speaking coherently or generally behaving in an organized, rational manner. While these features are more characteristic of other subtypes, they can be present to differing degrees in people with the paranoid subtype, depending upon the current state of their illness. Supportive friends or family members often may be needed at such times to help the symptomatic person get professional help.
http://psychcentral.com/lib/2006/types-of-schizophrenia/all/1/
You will like this too. If your rich, you have no morals.
PLEASE LOOK AT THESE:
pnas.org/content/early/2012/02/21/1118373109.abstract
pnas.org/content/early/2012/02/21/1118373109.abstract
wired.com/wiredscience/2012/02/income-and-ethics/
Don't Let 'Em Take Your Gun
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0I84S9cR2TE
Going to the new hikes... well its amazing to hear from you..!!
WOW!!! I CAN'T BELIEVE HE WAS ALLOWED TO LEAVE. Obama's going to have to go back to EVERY Country This MORON VISITS TOO APOLOGIZE and GET YOUR DUMB ASSES OUT OF ANOTHER WAR!!! HOW CAN YOU TRUST THIS IDIOT WITH THE WORLD'S LEADERS? YOU KNOW HE'S A PATHOLOGICAL LIAR!!! This Capitalist really BELIEVES HE'S ENTITLED To THE WHITIE HOUSE. MITT ROMNEY is a COMPLETE MORON!!! "Look kiddies.When you grow up ands get married, have a family, get stinkin' rich, then die...Make sure you don't leave the child with the sense of a chimp, in control of lot's of $$$". Mitt Romney is the PHONIEST Human Being I have EVER seen or heard. He and all those that SUPPORT HIM is what's wrong with your Political System. Plus the FACT you NEED AT LEAST FIVE PARTIES if you REALLY WANT TO MAKE A CHANGE. This way the IMPORTANT THINGS start getting done. America...YOUR CIVIL WAR IS STILL HAPPENING. YOU ONLY THINK You're the BEST Country in the World. The FACTS though tell a completely different story. IF Romney gets elected then we Canadians need to put up an ELECTRIC FENCE ALONG OUR BORDERS and give it FULL POWER!!!
How can ANYONE take this MORON seriously? He and I am sorry to say Obama (Obama's not a Moron) are two Capitalists. The difference between the two (beside color) is INTELLIGENCE. MITT ROMNEY is the most Shallow, Bigoted, Out of Touch, Phony, Hypocrite, Ignorant, and STUPID Politician plus Human Being (if he is one) I've ever seen and heard in all my 53 yrs on this Roller-Coaster Ride (that's Life for you non-Canucks). Also, the IRA, I mean NRA does run your Government. It's like your Civil War is still ALIVE from what I see as an outsider. How the h3ll can you people call yourself the BEST Country on this planet? There are SO MANY THINGS WRONG with your Government and Society. Half of America is BLIND to most of it too. JFK was your last REAL President. The words of D.Eisenhower rang loud in his ears about the Military Industrial Complex taking control. Your middle class and poor have NO Government control down there because of your 2 Party System. You need at LEAST 3 more Party's. FIVE Parties breaks ALL the disagreements. Then things start GETTING DONE. I'd LOVE the chance to get Romney on Jeopordy. I'll pick the Subjects and each one will deal with North America. I'd put him to shame. I'm a Truck Driver and CANADIAN who KNOWS MORE ABOUT the U.S.A. & The WORLD than HE DOES. Oh...By the way. Their are some really STUPID, IGNORANT, RACIST DOUCHE BAGS in Politics AND the Media down there. Bachmann, Palin, Brewer, O'Connell, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingle, Michelle Malkin, Gretchen Carlson and Bill O'Reilly to name a few, of a very long list.
I thought lawyers were the biggest lairs until I heard Mit@!$%# speak. I guess the rich are far more prolific lairs than even politicians and lawyers, as that is what enables them to become rich.
PLEASE LOOK AT THESE:
pnas.org/content/early/2012/02/21/1118373109.abstract
pnas.org/content/early/2012/02/21/1118373109.abstract
wired.com/wiredscience/2012/02/income-and-ethics/
Thought for the day, As part of the process to become a Police Officer, The candidate Must pass a Psych Eval amongst other requirements to carry out the duties involved with Law Enforcement. Yet, John Q Public can fill out minor paperwork, wait an hr, plunk down the $$, walk out armed, and go on their merry way...... hmmm??
Here is an interesting tid bit:
http://hotdogfactory.blogspot.com/2012/07/the-nra-comments-on-deadly-aurora.html
Apparently the NRA thinks that the real danger is not guns, the real danger
is all those stupid people who go to the movies!
Guns have become their own tyranny.
Apparently, according to the NRA, to be safe at the movies one should wear
full body armour, carry a 100 clip AK 15, hand Grenades and tear gas. And
apparently thats OK with the NRA, this is the society they want us all to live
in. And this is Freedom ??? You got to be kidding!
What will you wear to the movies? Shorts and flip flops? Well you won't be
safe because the battle attire above is afterall LEGAL and fully APPROVED by the
NRA. The NRA is nothing but a pansy ass gun pusher for the arms industry. Only a
fool would join a fear mongering, freedom denying organization that sells death
for profit
Only a
fool would join a fear mongering, freedom denying organization that sells death
for profit
Sounds like the democratic Patty.
THe NRA makes no guns nor do they sell guns.
The NRA markets the blind FEAR that encourages people to buy weapons, 75% of their support comes from the gun industry. They spend more on marketing their blatant political points than any other non profit in the country. The NRA sells fear and death to insure the financial success of its corporate sponsors, as such, it is no longer a non-profit. Far from being a sportsman's organization, its the marketing arm of the gun industry. They accomplish all of this by publishing lies, distortion, half truths, and pseudo science that fails to tell the whole story.
The gun industry needs a fear driven population far more than a sensible population needs guns.
Lady Down on Love
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_MrKFNQkr0&feature=relmfu
The National Firearms Act of 1934, after the handgun registration provisions were deleted, was a concentrated attack on civilian ownership of machine guns, sawed-off shotguns, silencers, and other relatively rare firearms that had acquired reputations as gangster weapons during the years preceding its passage. Modeled on the Harrison Narcotics Act,[32] the N.F.A. based its regulatory powers on a tax imposed on traffic in the weapons, thus generating federal jurisdiction for intrastate as well as interstate transactions. The tax rate, $200 per transfer, did not seem calculated to encourage extensive commerce in these weapon.[33] The Act also provided for the immediate registration of all covered weapons, even if illegally owned¾a provision altered in 1968, after the United States Supreme Court held the 1934 provision to be an infringement on the constitutional privilege against self-incrimination.[34] [Page 139]
In my State of WI, The rules of CCW were revised, and it also Teaches about Deadly Force and how to avoid putting yourself in bad situations, Some feel that having to be licensed is an infringement of there Rights, ?? Learning about Deadly Force, which if you pull your gun it will come into play Why is that a Bad thing. To throw this out there in the Marines, Deadly force is that force which if used is known or reasonably known to cause Death or serious bodily harm, Deadly force is justified only under conditions of extreme nescessity, When all availble lesser means of force have failed or cannot reasonably be employed. It isnt reasonable to know or understand this????
I know sarge to many think a gun will save them when reality is by having a weapon you just gave a criminal something they can use on you because while your false sense of security has you putting all your faith on the gun you make yourself a target and rarely do you become aware until its to late. Like I said John Wayne fantasies, you can always tell the bad guy from the good. As any 7/11 or gas station clerk can tell you after they were robbed at gun point, take your eyes off a suspect for a split second and you have a gun in your face, unlike the movies there are no warning signs to tip you off on who is or who isn't a criminal.
You make a good point about carry and conceal laws. The guy that knows when he will use a gun to rob someone always has the advantage over the policeman or the security guard who knows not whom or when the potential gunman actually will appear. This is why the Army always sends out scouts, security patrols, and a man out on point from the rifle platoon. Its better that one man gets killed in an ambush as an early warning for all the others who can then know where to shoot back than to have the whole platoon getting killed in an ambush. So you only send one guy out to find the ambush in a rifle platoon. Its often the same for the policeman out on patrol. He does not know when or where the bad gunman will strike because that bad gunman just looks like everyone else. The guy who is going to rob you, always has the advantage because they know when and where they will rob you. You won't know it until the muzzle is in your face and then its too late. The policeman and the soldier out on point all share this same grim fate. This is why its called public service because you go out and risk your life in service of the public.
I agree that we need background checks to keep nuts from getting guns, but the second amendment is not about hunting. It is about over throwing an oppressive government. Kinda like the one if Romney gets elected. We need automatic weapons too! I have a common sense solution to the Colorado killings. Why are these types of establishments like a theater, or any gather of people have armed guards. In Israel, the restaurants have armed guards. Even a rent a cop patrolling that theater in Colorado might have stop him from entering and killing all those people! Crowds are dangerous places now! The safety in numbers theory is dead! Even our air ports in the USA have armed guards and metal detectors! Don't blame a good man like president Obama. We can blame our bad economy on the terrible influence of the republican Filibustering congress that want to drive our economy over a cliff just to please less than 50.000 rich, unscrupulous people that are hell bent on destroying the USA and world economy no matter who gets hurt or dies!
There is a document called the constitution and the right to won firearms has consistently been upheld by the supreme court.
Like many workplaces, the building where I use to work in this concealed carry state
has a sign on the entrance informing folks that no weapons are allowed inside.
Some gun advocates think that's part of the problem. Geeee You Think.
After all, folks like the orange-haired suspect in Aurora can read, too.
Colorado actually does have a concealed carry law that allows residents to
exercise their Second Amendment right in a limited manner.
It's so limited the entire town of Aurora - along with other Colorado towns
and cities with "gun-free zones" - doesn't permit anyone to carry a concealed
weapon legally even though it's the law in other parts of the state
That means the answer to one of the most asked questions after the Aurora
shootings became a moot point: "Why didn't someone with a concealed weapon just
take the guy out?
The answer: They would have been breaking the law..
Some will now seek even more gun laws than ever, while others will insist
less is more. But basically, concealed carry gun laws are no guarantee against
crime or violence.
With folks like the orange-haired suspect out there, some laws are destined
to be broken.
“Headquartered in Plano, TX, Cinemark Holdings, Inc. is a leader in the motion picture exhibition industry with 459 theatres and 5,181 screens in the U.S. and Latin America as of March 31, 2012,” their website reports. Cinemark owns the Century 16 movie theater in Aurora, Colorado, scene of last night’s mass shooting. Cinemark doesn’t allow anyone other than law enforcement officers to carry legal firearms in their theaters. The ban hadn’t escape the attention of some of Cinemark’s law-abiding, gun-toting customers—even before last night’s homicidal frenzy. Make the jump for the story of a Cinemark patron ejected from the cinema for Open Carrying [via defensivecarry.com] . . .
If you don't beleve me, CALL THEM !!! all their looking after is there bottom line.
they should also be held accountable....
We should encourage more responsible people to carry concealed weapons. If crazy criminals knew many people carried guns, they would be less likely to act out because most are cowards to begin with.
Gun control should be implemented for the FBI and the justice department.