Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Newspaper contacts | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Time for compromise

January 20, 2013

There has been a flurry of discussion about gun control and potential bans on semi-automatic weapons since the incident that occurred at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(42)

twinder

Jan-20-13 1:10 AM

Just how would a metal detector stop an intruder who shoots his way into the building, such as was the alleged case in the Sandy Hook school shooting?

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ToTEXASfromPA

Jan-20-13 2:50 AM

"Instead of banning the ownership of these firearms, make it mandatory that everyone with a registered said-style firearm undergo a psychiatric evaluation and everyone within the household would be required to do the same."

+++

So what is the definition for passing or failing a psychiatric evaluation? Who decides and what are the criteria? Is there an appeal process? What if someone or a government defines a gun owner as being incompetent? Who maintains the list? Does this list become public information for both friend and for? What if a household resident is incompetent, does that mean no one in the household can have a firearm even if they keep it secure?

This proposal is too general and needs more specifics before it can be effective.

7 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ToTEXASfromPA

Jan-20-13 2:55 AM

"I am not an owner of a firearm;"

+++

After telling all the readers, you may consider purchasing one or getting one from a family member since it is possible you may be getting a visit. Or maybe the attack dog would be an alternative.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Loyal27

Jan-20-13 3:35 AM

"I am in favor of banning rapid load magazines and semi-automatic assault/military style firearms..."

"... I, however, support the 2nd Amendment and all legal firearm owners 100 percent."

I'm confused on your position. If you supported the 2nd Amendment 100 percent, there would be no need for this letter. The 2nd Amendment allows the people to keep the government in check... you know, our system of checks and balances. To fend off tyranny and those abroad who may desire to harm us.

I have no problem with a handful of the Presidents suggestions, such as integrating mental health records with background checks. However, even then it may become "tricky". Let's say I go through a bad breakup and seek some counseling to deal with depression. Would this prohibit me from purchasing any more firearms, or have the ones I own confiscated??? There are a lot of questions to be answered. The President has even admitted that modern sporting rifles are not

6 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Loyal27

Jan-20-13 3:37 AM

cont.

.. are not the problem, but yet it's this administrations top goal at the moment to rid the people of them or restrict them further. The statistics on crimes and types of weapons used is hard to refute...

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

sideliner

Jan-20-13 4:28 AM

"If you supported the 2nd Amendment 100 percent, there would be no need for this letter."

I have been in the past the owner of many guns over the years and support the 2nd amendment. At the same time I agree with the new legislation being proposed to limit magazines and ban assault style weapons that out gun most police forces.

"The 2nd Amendment allows the people to keep the government in check... "

Are you seriously proposing that all gun owners own those weapons to keep their government in check? Hardly...

0 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

sideliner

Jan-20-13 4:31 AM

We are quick to tell other nations what "arms" they can and cannot have but we can't do the same with our own citizens? And where is the line drawn in terms of "arms?" Can we own grenade launchers? Surface to air missiles?

0 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

mikekerstetter

Jan-20-13 4:41 AM

sideliner-"At the same time I agree with the new legislation being proposed to limit magazines and ban assault style weapons that out gun most police forces."

1) Assault Weapons are not legal in the US and are already banned.

2) My pump shotgun and pump and bolt action hunting rifles 'outgun' the handguns carried by most law enforcement.

Why can't you admit the facts regarding the proposed bans on gun control?

All you gun control advocates should google " Jessie Duff + semi-autos & pistols = gold " and watch the demonstration using 5 different semi-auto weapons; an AR-15 .223, a Browning 30-06, a 12 gauge shotgun, a .45 hand gun and a 9 mm hand gun.

5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

mikekerstetter

Jan-20-13 4:42 AM

Oops. That should read "Why can't you admit the facts regarding the proposed bans AND gun control?"

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

sideliner

Jan-20-13 5:15 AM

Fully automatic assault weapons are already illegal, but the types of weapons used in these latest of mass murders are of the type being considered for more control. And why not?

"Why can't you admit the facts regarding the proposed bans on gun control?" Mike, what facts exactly are you referring to?

And while we're on the "Why can't you admit" topic, let me ask those type of weapon owners why they can't admit that they want what they want when they want it, much like spoiled children, regardless on the impact of that "right" on the rest of the world. It seems to me that this subject won't even be considered by the NRA and other gun pros.

And speaking of the NRA, they wholesale blamed video gaming for violence then immediately introduced their own shooting video game. Talk about hypocrisy...

1 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

mikekerstetter

Jan-20-13 5:23 AM

sideliner-"Mike, what facts exactly are you referring to?"

1) The weapons you are referring to are NOT assault weapons.

2) The weapons you are referring to are the same in capability and function as a traditional semi-automatic hunting rifle.

3) The weapon you are referring to is only different in cosmetics to that traditional hunting rifle, and, by changing the stock, you can turn that hunting rifle into something that resembles an M16.

4) That you can inflict more damage with a traditional shotgun in close quarters than you can with that AR-15 or one of it's clones.

Lets start with those facts.

6 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

sideliner

Jan-20-13 5:48 AM

Hunting rifles weren't used in these massacres. How about that for a fact?

But if certain types of hunting rifles are indeed M16 types, what is it that the hunter hunts that need that kind of rapid firing power? Maybe we ought to rethink what is appropriate for sportspeople.

And if said hunter (or anyone else for that matter) is that bad of a shot that he needs 30 round clops, he shouldn't be handling a weapon in the first place.

1 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

mikekerstetter

Jan-20-13 6:20 AM

Sideliner, as I expected, you are unwilling to accept the fact that what you call 'assault weapons' are functionally no different than a semiautomatic hunting rifle. It is fact that you can change the stock to make that hunting rifle look like an AR-15 or make an AR-15 look like a hunting rifle and that function and capability are the same in either weapon. Until you can grasp that fact there can be no meaningful dialog. You are opposed to the look of the weapon, not the function. That, is FACT.

9 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

enigma

Jan-20-13 9:09 AM

Wesley says he supports the Second Amendment, but he wants to ban guns. OK, he doesn't want to ban all guns, just the ones he doesn't like. That would be like saying you support the First Amendment, but that we should ban criticism of the President (even Bush). Once you start limiting rights, the line is gone. The only acceptable restrictions on rights is when your exercise of that right harms someone else. The mere owning of an "assault weapon" does not harm anyone. The reasonable limit comes at the use of the weapon and it's already illegal to shoot people. Should we cut out people's tongues to be sure they won't shout "fire" in a crowded theatre? Banning weapons of any kind is the same thing. Infringing on rights is wrong, no matter which right it is.

7 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

msgjsheets

Jan-20-13 9:12 AM

Let's also require those same psychiatric exams for everybody in the household before anybody can purchase alcohol, or drive a car, or purchase a pocket knife or baseball bat or hundreds of other things that can cause harm. This letter is one of the most absolutely ridiculous ones I've read on this forum. Do you really want the government and the psychiatric community to have that kind of power over every household in America? Slippery, slippery slope my friends.

7 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

richardson

Jan-20-13 9:37 AM

I would guess that the elimination of most psychiatriac facilities was because of the unfair determination of who is a "nut". Now it seems that the same libs that put inmates on the street are saying that gun owners should be mentallty evaluated?

5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

richardson

Jan-20-13 9:43 AM

Never the less: I have seen people at gun ranges and other places that I felt should not be in possession, whether it be their attitude, lack of training, or utter disregard for safety.

5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CMReeder

Jan-20-13 10:07 AM

"Is it truly fair to blame all legal owners of firearms for individuals with mental health issues taking a firearm into school and injuring or killing someone?"

First off no one is blaming them. It is the proliferation of weapons in the US, it is the easy selling of weapons, it is the lack of money to enforce gun laws, it is the lack of respect for government that is to blame.

0 Agrees | 8 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CMReeder

Jan-20-13 10:15 AM

"If you had control and could do whatever you thought was necessary, what would that be? What actions would you take to improve the safety of the nation?"

People already have control Mr. Hickok the problem is they abuse it and terrorize others . When does safety over shadow freedom? How much freedom do I have to give up so you can feel safe?

Metal detectors fail, security guards are found not to be all that diligent. Guns fire accidentally because of owners not thinking. That happen recently at three separate gun shows.

1 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CMReeder

Jan-20-13 10:19 AM

Is it true you can attend a gun show carrying a loaded weapon?

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CHayes

Jan-20-13 10:47 AM

" The weapons you are referring to are NOT assault weapons."

It's just incredible. Mike repeating this statement over and over again, somehow reminds me of a slimy lawyer defending a pedophile.

1 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CHayes

Jan-20-13 10:49 AM

" Is it true you can attend a gun show carrying a loaded weapon?"

Apparently so Chuck because 5 people were shot at gun shows yesterday.

2 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

mikekerstetter

Jan-20-13 11:04 AM

CHayes-"It's just incredible. Mike repeating this statement over and over again, somehow reminds me of a slimy lawyer defending a pedophile."

Not surprising that the truth bothers you and you don't want to hear it repeated.

7 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

twinder

Jan-20-13 11:11 AM

Please define what an 'assault weapon' is then, Mr. Hughes. I agree with Mike that it is the 'look' of the gun that you cannot stand. I could show you the picture of a child's 22 caliber rifle, commonly referred to as a cricket rifle, that the owner changed the stock and hand grip so that it looks like a military weapon. The man who did it is a local ARMY soldier with five tours overseas defending all of us. His weapon is not an assault weapon any more than the AR-15 that I own is.

6 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

philunderwood

Jan-20-13 11:34 AM

Individuals have the right to own weapons and the responsibility for how they are used, stored and who has access to them rests with the owner.

6 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 42 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web