Submitted by Guest Blogger, Lawrence Rafferty
In light of the tragic shooting today in Arizona, I have to wonder aloud if automatic weapons should be banned by this country. I realize that the 2nd Amendment right to own a gun is strongly defended by the NRA and other right-wing groups, but I am sick and tired of reading about all of the shootings the past couple of years. Whether it was the shootings earlier this year at various United States Marine sites around the country or the California shootout in July with the guy who was trying to attack the ACLU and the TIDES non-profit organization; the vitriol seems to be on the rise. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40978517/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/ And with politicians fanning the flames, this vitriol is not bound to be diminished anytime soon.
The Second Amendment is a very concise Amendment. “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.” http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#Am2 We have seen various attempts over the years by the Feds and many States and municipalities to restrict gun ownership. The recent Supreme Court case of McDonald , et al vs. City of Chicago, Illinois, et al affirmed the fundamental right of Americans to own a gun by a 5-4 decision. http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-1521.pdf The McDonald decision did not give us any guidance on what kind of restrictions to that fundamental right the Supreme Court would allow. However, how can automatic weapons or high-powered rifles be exempt from an outright banning of their ownership or at least significant restrictions on their use? Can a good faith argument really be made that an automatic weapon is necessary for personal protection?
The Supreme Court Justices do not live in a bubble and they must see what damage these weapons have already brought to families across the nation. Don’t they?
This is a very interesting and heated discussion and I find myself being swayed this way and that by the various arguments.
I would like to point out one thing though about this tragic story. I would say that if 1% of the population (very conservative figure) is psychotic/schizophrenic/narcissistic,
or any combination thereof, that would account for 3 million people running around the country who are mentally impaired. If 5% of those (also highly conservative figure)are homicidal than there would be about 150,000 homicidal people walking around. The likelihood of many of those committing such a heinous crime is very high, after all that is where serial killers come from. In the end I think that until science discovers a sure way to identify/isolate these psychopathic killers, then all the legislation trying to prevent this kind of incident is futile. bob, Esq. amply made the point in his recounting of the John Lennon murder.
To: James M: Thanks for the vid of Chris Rock. That’s EXACTLY what I meant. 🙂
Blouise,
It certainly is.
Elaine,
Re: Palmetto State Armory … That is beyond disgusting
Jason –
I absolutely agree with what you say. I have twice in my adult life responded to inner city homes where innocent people lay bleeding on the floor, injured in raids – in both cases, it was the wrong house.
I am completely dismayed with the way various segments of our government abuse its citizens. I also have no confidence that it will get better, in any foreseeable future.
But in my regretful opinion, we have as a nation evolved??? to the point where the consideration of “taking up arms” in case a government-gone-bad starts smashing down doors, and expecting to survive the onslaught?
That seriously strikes me as cartoon fantasy.
Whatever the decent citizenry hopes to do to prevent such carnage, it best happen way, way before the shooting starts.
From Columbia Free Times (1/11/2011)
S.C. Company Sells Engraved “You Lie” Component For AR-15 Rifle
http://www.free-times.com/index.php?cat=1992209084141467&act=post&pid=11861101110850039
Excerpt:
A South Carolina gun and accessories company is selling semi-automatic rifle components inscribed with “You lie” – a tribute to the infamous words of 2nd District Republican Congressman Joe Wilson when he shouted at President Barack Obama during a congressional speech about national health care reform in the fall of 2009.
“Palmetto State Armory would like to honor our esteemed congressman Joe Wilson with the release of our new ‘You Lie’ AR-15 lower receiver,” reads a portion of the company’s website.
The product “is neither endorsed nor affiliated with Joe Wilson or his campaign,” according to a line of text at the bottom of the page. A picture of Wilson holding a rifle and standing in the company’s gun shop appears on the same page. The company offers the components, marked “MULTI to accommodate most builds,” for $99.95 apiece.
Maybe Ms. Maddow got an email with Bud’s post included ….
michellefrommadison,
“For those that did not understand my previous comment, I suggest that those would re-read it several times while accompanied by someone with a very high-level of education. ”
====================================================
ROFLOL
PatricParamedic-
“How hard must you try, to imagine a scenario where a SWAT team gone awry surrounds some innocent guy’s house; ducks a few bullets; then says, “Whoa! This dude shoots back. Come on, everybody. Fall back and go home. He’s got a weapon, for God sake.” ”
No, that scenario hasn’t happened. However, on more than one occasion, no-knock raids gone wrong have resulted in dead cops and living home owners.
It is debatable as to if those citizens “won”, since in many cases, they end up railroaded and in jail. Regardless of the circumstances, it is very difficult to kill a cop and not do time for it.
S.B. ordnance
PP,
Indeed, the same argument can be used to justify personal ownership of heavy ordinance and letting Bill Gates have tanks and the ability to call in air strikes.
(Karl Friedrich)
“Everyday we read here about police crimes and military atrocities. Yet by banning automatic weapons we’d have a society in which only the police and military have them.”
Yes, but when is the last time you heard of a righteous citizen vs cops shoot-out, where law enforcement lost?
How hard must you try, to imagine a scenario where a SWAT team gone awry surrounds some innocent guy’s house; ducks a few bullets; then says, “Whoa! This dude shoots back. Come on, everybody. Fall back and go home. He’s got a weapon, for God sake.”
Sorry. Whether we like it or not, it’s time for a more realistic fantasy.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OuX-nFmL0II&fs=1&hl=en_US]
Guns with no readily or easily-available bullets may help to save lives. If it’s more difficult for people to have loaded weapons, that may help to curtail the use of some guns, simple as that, no matter how many guns people may actually possess. If it takes more steps to access bullets, hopefully less people will have immediate access to them, while still maintaining their actual right of possession of the guns.
And in the meantime, to millions of thoughtful intelligent citizens in dozens of less socially frenetic countries throughout the planet . . .
We Americans must certainly resemble chimpanzees on chocolate.
michellefrommadison,
As Jason pointed out, your assumption that the government can constitutionally ban all ammunition as a method of making firearms ineffective is laughably wrong. If you want to ban firearms, start talking constitutional amendment or sea change on the Supreme Court. While you’re at it, how about leaving your undeserved attitude behind?
I’d prefer you address the points raised regarding your proposal rather than an apology for the insult.
Lord, I apologize if my previous comment offended anyone, I am truly sorry. Please forgive me. Amen. (inspirited by Larry the cable guy)
For those that did not understand my previous comment, I suggest that those would re-read it several times while accompanied by someone with a very high-level of education. Then, after reading it again, discuss it with the higher-educated person to the point that you will finally understand that if you cannot readily-access ammunition for any firearm, then gun crimes would eventually become non-existent in the general sense. The Laws do not appear to require to provide ready-access for the public’s ammunition needs, only the right to possess them. Check it out for yourselves (with all due respects to those that still don’t get it). If ready-access is impacted for ammunition, the most that potential offenders could do is to threaten someone with an unloadable gun or to try to beat you with the unloaded gun, which would likely save more lives that people actually being shot with bullets fired from a gun.
From Bloomberg
Glock Pistol Sales Surge in Aftermath of Arizona Shootings
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-01-11/gloc
Excerpts:
After a Glock-wielding gunman killed six people at a Tucson shopping center on Jan. 8, Greg Wolff, the owner of two Arizona gun shops, told his manager to get ready for a stampede of new customers.
Wolff was right. Instead of hurting sales, the massacre had the $499 semi-automatic pistols — popular with police, sport shooters and gangsters — flying out the doors of his Glockmeister stores in Mesa and Phoenix.
“We’re at double our volume over what we usually do,” Wolff said two days after the shooting spree that also left 14 wounded, including Democratic Representative Gabrielle Giffords, who remains in critical condition.
***
Sales Jump
One-day sales of handguns in Arizona jumped 60 percent to 263 on Jan. 10 compared with 164 the corresponding Monday a year ago, the second-biggest increase of any state in the country, according to Federal Bureau of Investigation data.
Handgun sales rose 65 percent to 395 in Ohio; 16 percent to 672 in California; 38 percent to 348 in Illinois; and 33 percent to 206 in New York, the FBI data show. Sales increased nationally about 5 percent, to 7,906 guns.