Let me start off saying that I was raised around firearms and did actively use them for hunting while I was a youngster. I was taught gun safety and the true purpose of a firearm. A firearm is designed to kill, not to wound, maim or to backup a threat of violence, but to kill. Knowing this I learned to respect firearms and the lethal potential they posed. Over the course of the years of my youth and my military experience, I became quite proficient in their use. However, since leaving the military I have abandoned owning firearms since I have no desire to hunt. But, doing so, I have no problem in the responsible ownership and use by others. The problem really is with the numbers of firearms and their easy accessibility, including ammunition.
In a Gallup Poll published late last year, private gun ownership is up and the self reported number is 47 percent of the total population. This is the highest level since 1991. Estimates put the number of firearms at some 280 million, including all types. We are the most heavily armed nation in the world and of the 8 million new firearms manufactured each year; Americans purchase 4.8 million of them each year. Of all the homicides each year, 75 percent of them are from handguns.
Recent incidences of high profile shootings; Aurora, CO, Gabby Giffords, and Virginia Tech, bring to the forefront the real problems that firearms pose, in particular handguns. The question is what is the best course of action in light of the accessibility of firearms and ammunition.
Even if we banned handguns tomorrow, it would take centuries to get them all off the streets and out of private ownership. My best solution would be not to ban the firearms, per se; but to regulate the manufacture and purchase of handgun ammunition, including private hand loading of handgun ammunition.
We know something has to be done and to comply with the 2nd Amendment; controlling ammunition would not be a violation and those who wish to own and bear firearms, their rights would not be abridged.
The Tea Party & OCCUPY have a lot more in common that you may think. What a game changer if they could unite.
You don't Unite for OPPOSING views. The occupy crowd is tiny as it has not got legs. It has liberal news coverage but few members ,volunteers or even a platform that they endorse. They are just against success as far as the average person thinks. The class envy crowd. That's pretty hard for most to embrace if you are trying to build a life rather than beg for an existance.. We seen this time and time again. You are not going to get the tea party to join forces with the entitlement spread the wealth victim crowd. Give me break
There is only one way to win the battle of the D & R; here's hoping it can take place peacefully. Off to enjoy my Sunday away from the rat race.
So, all corporatists are against Obama? Then how come Warren Buffet, George Soros, Bill Gates, Jeffrey Immelt (GE) etc, or many of the largest corporatists in the world, are all supporting and backing Obama in this election? Is there a difference between corporatists? Are those backing Obama somehow good while those backing Romney are bad? If so, why? What distinguishes corporatists as good or evil? And what about Obama cutting checks from the public coffers to his corporatist buddies, such as Solyndra and the like? Obama's crony friends have made off with billions of the taxpayers dollars. Is that what Obama meant when he said "I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody?" It may have been good for his corporatist buddies, but I fail to see how that money helped any of us peons. You claim that Walker is a corporatist puppet and Obama isn't, but you can't point to single check written from the State of Wisconsin that went to Diane Hendricksen or the Koch Bros, can you? Not to mention, Obama had nearly four years now to raise taxes, reinstate financial regulation, etc. If that's what's needed to jump start and reinvigorate our economy, then why didn't he do any of those things yet? Health care reform could have easily waited for his second term. Your opinion about Obama doesn't really hold much water in reality, does it?
So for a political movement to have credibility, it should only try to influence the process with agitation, as opposed to directly participating in it. How exactly is that any different than lobbying, which you supposedly hate? This wasn't a very logical comment! While there is some overlap with Occupy, there isn't very much. And Occupy never gained any credibility, yet alone influence or power.
"The Wealthy need to contribute more toward the survival of the Middle and Working Classes." So the middle and working classes are unable to sustain themselves? You make those classes sound they contain a bunch of derelicts. Actually, in all reality, it's the greed of middle and working class consumerism that sold themselves down the river. Instead of buying and supporting domestic goods, they turned to purchasing cheaper foreign made products because it meant that they could have more possessions. But what they didn't realize is that their demand for cheap products was also killing their own jobs. What a bunch of MORONS!!! BTW - What kind of car do you own?
The Unions will never be able to hold together to succeed- Factory Owners. You are so wrong my friend it's silly. You really have to extend your knowledge beyond this narrow, misinformed anti-Obama world you are a slave to. Your missing out on a lot that's going on in the world. It's not too late. You still have a chance to catch up.
Facts only a tiny minority are what you could call lazy. For just about everybody in this country, they are defined by their job and derive satisfaction and self-esteem by the their job. For those people who are supposedly ripping off the system (Romney could fall within that category) bet if you peeled back their personality what you would find is a depressed person or someone who has had bad luck and has given up. Saying they are "ripping off the system" makes them feel like they are in control of things. Calling people lazy is a justification, not an explanation.
They control the Media: Murdoch, Redstone, Clear Channel (all GOP supporters). The Banks and investment firms. ALEC, Etc. By the way when leaving for Davos, Switzerland for the annual meeting of the heads of the biggest Corporations in the World, George Soros was asked what he thought was gong to happen. He said his fear was there would be blood in the streets, if things kept going the way of Wall Street, and the Right leaning Corporations. I happen to agree with him. Unemployment, rising poverty, it will explode if not addressed soon. Romney and his Bush policy redux will be the tipping point. We had a revolution once before against an Oligarch, and the Oligarchy current ruling America, is not much better than King George.
Its purpose is to throw pieces of lead at high velocity. What use that purpose is put to is up to the person operating the firearm. "The problem really is with the numbers of firearms & their easy accessibility, including ammunition" Try buying a gun from a dealer & see how easy it is. Try buying ammunition - heck, try _finding_ ammunition - and tell us how easy it was. The only people who find it "easy" to get firearms are criminals, & they have to steal them or buy from someone who stole them. "Of all the homicides each year, 75% of them are from handguns" And nearly 100% are by people who were already criminals. (You do realize that 'homicide' /= 'crime', don't you? It includes lawful self-defense, lawful actions by police.) "the real problems that firearms pose" Which is none at all. They are inanimate objects. The problem is with the criminals who use them. Such actions affect a very small percent of the firearms in this country. "what is the best course of action" Control the criminals. Make sentences mean something. Charge people for the crimes they commit, not just the worst one they were caught doing at any 1 time. "controlling ammunition would not be a violation" Pretty sure it would be. But we have such a thing happening right now. The gov't has dried up all ammunition supplies. Let's see if the crime rate goes down. Pretty sure it won't.
1) Blames inanimate object for issues 2) Has not actually recommended solution that would have kept the guns away from the people that committed the crimes. Lyle is far more concerned with the illusion of progress than actual progress. If that is progressive movement---heaven help us.
"I think a reasonable solution would be to limit the amount of rounds that a gun can have loaded, perhaps 8" Back to the discussion of multiple attackers & how many rounds miss their target (about half, under stress). If you choose to limit your ability to protect yourself, that's your choice for you. You don't get to decide for me. "the highest number of rounds that revolvers carry" Wrong. There are revolvers with higher capacity. Of course, they're mostly .22, but we're not talking about effective calibers, just overall capacity. And the 1911 does not use clips. "one of the most socialistic organizations in the country -- the NFL" I'd say that's a flaming example of consumerism & capitalism. "a stopgap of unfettered weapon purchases" Those 'unfettered' purchases are only the privilege of those who ignore laws. The good citizens are subject to a host of laws which infringe our right. What other right would you consent to being controlled by the gov't? What other right are you willing to pay a tax, register with the gov't, let them poke around in your life to see if you're suitable before you're allowed to exercise it?
The 1st Amendment did not stop Congress from passing an anti Child Porn bill, which if I used the logic behind the 2nd Amendment argument, Congress stepped on the 1st Amendment. The 1st amendment is not very clear about what is specifically covered by free speech. No more specific than the 2nd Amendment is specific about which guns are covered, and hi capacity clips and semi auto rifles. "abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press," what does this mean? It is open to interpretation, if not, then no Anti Child Porn Law. No out cry at that action We agreed Child porn presented a danger to society and we easily passed a law banning Child Porn. Unfortunately for the Child Porn Industry, but good for society, the porn industry did not have a big enough lobby, with enough money to defend the 1st Amendment. The 2nd amendment defense is a weak. What happened to the NRA's hunter- sportsman argument. The NRA was all about the 2nd Amendment and law abiding citizens. I for one do not trust law abiding citizens with guns. Every mass murderer is described as a nice, law abiding citizen by friends, family and teachers.
Where were you when Congress stomped on the 1st Amendment. They passed an anti Child Porn Law. I don't for a second condone Child Porn, I am just making a point of the Congress outlawing something so clearly protected by the 1st Amendment. We as citizens decided it worth ridding us of Child Porn. A clear violation of the 1st Amendment. Background checks for gun purchases, no effing way, the 2nd Amendment is not specifically clear re:, Background checks, semi auto rifles, extended clips, and cop killing ammo. Yet is proclaimed to be. Having a gun is no guarantee of safety. Another law abiding gun owner bent on killing people will step up. People will die whether the they have guns or not. I,e.; Fort Hood, and every cop who died on duty. The gun is an adolescent male adult's toy. A necessity for the paranoid para- military Mountain dwellers. The increasing size in the population of people of color, a Negro POTUS, women's rights, public education, fluoride in our water, and a host of other conspiracy theories which encourage paranoia in others.. These are dangerous people, with self fulfilling prophecies. It never works out for the paranoid. They're ill. We live with this ticking time bomb. Boston Bombers were Domestic Terrorists. Whatever their motive it makes them no less Domestic Terrorists, with their brand of paranoia.
If President Cheney had listened to Richard Clark, they may have stopped the airplane hijackers before they boarded the planes. That was a very doable "if." The evidence was there. Condoleezza Rice dismissed the study and intelligence memos. Aurora: Most people trained to handle a gun, generally are no trained under fire. My niece, who served 2 tours in IRAQ, has a purple heart. She ,told me there is nothing that prepares you for taking fire. Particularly when people are dying around you. She was shot by a sniper. Not much defense vs a sniper before he kills someone and everyone who gets shot in combat is well armed. That is my argument for gun lusters who espouse the "what if Tyranny paranoia scenario." Once the incoming firing begins, the Militia, Preppers and Survivalists will surrender.. This whole gun thing is the most juvenile thing the people of America have had to deal with in the History of this country. Guns, really. That is the core of our society, armed citizens above all else. We need jobs not guns.
Most street weapons come from "nominee purchases" at gun shows, or theft. A law abiding citizen goes to a gun show and buys as many guns as possible, these guns end up back in the neighborhood being sold at a big profit. Honest commerce, except their customers are criminals. Filed down serial numbers increases the street value. Most guns taken by law enforcement in NYC come from out of state, some have been traced back to gun show purchases. Maryland is Paradise to "nominee purchases." . Without background checks this conduit for guns will be come much bigger. Private sales will exceed gun shows in time. There is MONEY in the re-selling of guns. LOTS OF MONEY. The Militias hoping to overthrow the Government; any one of our enemies would be happy to provide weapons to these traitors and seditionists. The USA does it all the time. Weapons sales are bigger than illegal drug sales.. I am assuming you have never been close to armed criminals. Well have, I live in a large east coast city, my profession opened a lot of strange doors, doors where I have had guns pointed at my face. Not fun. If I had a gun, there was no possibility for me to have pulled it out without dying before I could reach it, cock it and fire it. Me dead!