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)

Bufftrev1

Jan-21-13 5:30 PM

Hi john, not by a long shot. The first four, perhaps five commandments are nothing more than gods ego run amok. Out of 7 plus billion souls on earth, less than 2 b worship or believe in a christian god, meaning many, many more people believe in another diety, or in none at all.. the last two commandments are a judgement call, imho.

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

JohnZook

Jan-21-13 3:04 PM

Brev- Be very careful. You are getting very close to what is called the "Ten Commandments". You're right when you say we can pass laws that say it's illegal to do these things, but people are free to make the decision to violate them, knowing that the citizenry have deemed them illegal. Thus laws don't prevent crime, they inform us that it is wrong to break them.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

wwhickok

Jan-21-13 6:55 AM

LaughIn, I agree with your statement in its entirety, valid point.

Would like to thank everyone to that has commented to this point for taking the time to read my letter and share your points of view. I'll definitely consider what you have all said when it comes to reading and developing on opinions on this issue in the future.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

wwhickok

Jan-21-13 6:51 AM

Reeder - b.s. no one is blaming legal gun owners. And for the record when I talk about potential additional bans, that's not what I'm trying to do. This letter was meant to spark conversational debate about possible solutions. I've yet to hear a point..outside of Reeders' that hasn't had some validity to it, even if it was one that didn't agree with my letter.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

wwhickok

Jan-21-13 6:49 AM

Richardson - I respectfully resent that statement. I didn't put any inmates on the street, nor would I consider myself a liberal, fact is, I don't consider myself anything. The closing of psychiatric facilities was a mistake, what they should have done was improve the evaluation process and staff of those facilities.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

wwhickok

Jan-21-13 6:47 AM

Enigma, I do see your general point however, and I don't disagree with it. However, as stated in my previous comment, you're wrong about my motives.

sheets, not sure how to respond to your message, I take it you disagree with my letter, fair enough. As far as it being a slippery slope, perhaps you're right, but the general point of my suggestion was to address mental health associated with gun crimes. Have an alternative idea? I'm all for better ideas.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

wwhickok

Jan-21-13 6:44 AM

" 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)."

Not a bit of that's true. It has nothing to do with what I do or do not like. I have dislike or hatred for guns. I'm talking about banning the guns heavily used by criminals. But I also understand where people are coming from who are advocating to not issue more bans.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

wwhickok

Jan-21-13 6:40 AM

local law enforcement would. I would say this should be a private list because if you make it public, you open the door to individuals being targets of crime because they are 'known unarmed citizens'. As for telling all the readers I don't own a firearm, I'm not afraid of someone targetting me. Just because I don't own a firearm doesn't mean I'm defenseless.

Loyal, my letter was simply meant to spark a reasonable conversation. Which I'm glad to see it seems to have done. I don't mind listening to other peoples' points of view, especially when it's done in a controlled and civil manner.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

wwhickok

Jan-21-13 6:36 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?" - Twinder

Valid Question. What I'm suggesting are possible precautions, that's all. I understand the difficulties of stopping shooters and I, no more than anyone else, do not have all the answers.

Texas, in regards to your evaluation question. I agree with each of your points. I can't say what would be deterined as pass/fail, because I am not by any stretch of the imagination a licensed Psyhciatrist, I am not the person who should be making that call and yes, there should definitely, imo, be an appeal process. I do 100% agree that it needs more specfics, thank you for your input Texas. I wouldn't have a problem saying 'someone in the home can own a firearm, as long as it's secured', though I do believe there needs to be specific security requirements anyway. As far as who keeps the list, I would think

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Bufftrev1

Jan-20-13 7:07 PM

Hi johnzook, I used to think the same thing, regarding the concept of legislating morality. But, I am starting to think legislation is a key component in the equation. It's probably safe to say, even in these divisive times, we can all agree murder is immoral behavior. So, in response, we as a society have crafted legislation that makes murder illegal. It may not be enough of a deterrent to eliminate the act of murder but it likely plays a strong preventative role as the consequences for committing murder can be severe and the fact that there consequences is well known. The same is true for rape, robbery and a significant number of other actions that most of society has agreed are unacceptable.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

LaughIn

Jan-20-13 6:27 PM

Wes, how many government employees, police officers, military personnel need mental health evaluations? Should this be a onetime procedure or performed annually? Medication doesn't always help and yearly reviews do not always target these type of potential problems on a paper document.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

JohnZook

Jan-20-13 5:07 PM

You cannot legislate morality. You cannot shut down the black market for guns. You cannot justify law abiding citizens being forced to be evaluated by government doctors to see if they satisfy the criteria of said government. Especially our corrupt government. Who picks the doctors?

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Loyal27

Jan-20-13 4:00 PM

If you want to talk about TRUTHS and FACTS of the CT incident, everyone must have a person on the inside giving them information. The media has reported the same story many different ways. One story says only handguns were used and found in the school, where another story says an 'assault' rifle clone was used.

Perhaps if the media didn't glorify these incidents and plaster the shooters picture non-stop, those that commit such acts won't want to because they won't get their 15 minutes. Unfortunately this would be considered censoring media and then it's a 1st Amendment issue.

6 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

richardson

Jan-20-13 12:58 PM

"it's about controlling the adults" enigma. That is: Those of us who go voluntarily. Which is now: More than half (tic). Voluntarily? Means I won't crap in my neighbors drinking water: That is, I don't need law to tell me such.

6 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

enigma

Jan-20-13 12:28 PM

Chuck,"it is the lack of money to enforce gun laws,"

Then why pass more gun laws, if they will not be enforced? The problem isn't that there isn't enough money. The Federal government spends three trillion dollars a year. The problem is how they spend it. We pay people not to work, we invest in private companies that go bankrupt. We regulate every aspect of life. The money is spent on controlling us rather than protecting us. Even Joe Biden claims that we can't prosecute people who lie on background check forms, but they want more background checks. If they're not going to actually do the check, what's the point? This whole thing is a lie. It's not about protecting the children, it's about controlling the adults.

7 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

mikekerstetter

Jan-20-13 12:12 PM

CMReeder-"Well Mike how about stating the truth then."

What a moron. Chuck you wouldn't know truth if it grabbed you by the nads.

9 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CMReeder

Jan-20-13 12:00 PM

Well Mike how about stating the truth then.

2 Agrees | 8 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 »

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 »

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 »

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 »

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 »

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 »

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 10:07 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 »

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