The power of the NRA is obscene.
66
M-16, AR-15, AK-47, etc. Unless you are active duty Armed Forces and in either in combat or on a training range, or a member of SWAT team, you have no reason whatsoever to have either access or possession of such a weapon.. EVER. PERIOD!!
In fact, the Armed Forces restrict access to weapons to circumstances of active combat, training or needs of duty assignment, such as walking guard duty.
In fact, the Armed Forces restrict access to weapons to circumstances of active combat, training or needs of duty assignment, such as walking guard duty.
66
First they killed wives and girlfriends, and I did not speak out—
Because I do not protect women.
Then they killed the slaves and children of slaves, the immigrants, the poor, the lost, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a slave, an immigrant, poor, or lost.
Then they came for the Jews, the Sikhs, the Muslims, the Christians and I did not speak out—
Because I did not celebrate in their house of worship.
Then they killed the gays, the transgender, those seeking only to find themselves but who hurt no one, and I still did not speak out-
Because I have allowed myself to be convinced that somehow those people were beneath me and I was not one of them.
Then they killed the children, people in movie theaters, hospitals, nightclubs, restaurants, homes, schools, and parks; doctors, teachers, police officers, firemen, pastors, people walking across the street, people sitting in their homes, and yet I did nothing
Because I believed that I had some sort of superior right to what I want above all those people's right to live in peace.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me. I deserve my solitude for I have chosen to remain silent.
#orlando
#EndGunViolence
#NotOneMore
#MassShooting
#DoWeHaveTheWillToChange
Because I do not protect women.
Then they killed the slaves and children of slaves, the immigrants, the poor, the lost, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a slave, an immigrant, poor, or lost.
Then they came for the Jews, the Sikhs, the Muslims, the Christians and I did not speak out—
Because I did not celebrate in their house of worship.
Then they killed the gays, the transgender, those seeking only to find themselves but who hurt no one, and I still did not speak out-
Because I have allowed myself to be convinced that somehow those people were beneath me and I was not one of them.
Then they killed the children, people in movie theaters, hospitals, nightclubs, restaurants, homes, schools, and parks; doctors, teachers, police officers, firemen, pastors, people walking across the street, people sitting in their homes, and yet I did nothing
Because I believed that I had some sort of superior right to what I want above all those people's right to live in peace.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me. I deserve my solitude for I have chosen to remain silent.
#orlando
#EndGunViolence
#NotOneMore
#MassShooting
#DoWeHaveTheWillToChange
78
Go try and buy a gun. Then get back to us on how easy it wasn't.
15
It isn't the NRA that is complicit, it is our lawmakers.
30
I'd add that all 247 million Christians in this country are complicit as well.
19
It just boils down to: vote in Democrats at all levels of power.
48
As a supporter of the Second Amendment., I say give everyone a gun.
Just be sure it's a musket!
Just be sure it's a musket!
29
With Obama being in Office for 8 years and over a decade since the assault weapon ban has expired, you would think that anyone who want such a weapon would have had ample chance to buy one already. So, why the fear on such a ban? If you truly wanted or needed one, you would have already bought one if not a dozen.
13
Right on. A lifetime hunter and former military officer, I know that
Automatic rifles have NO place in civilian hands. Had I seen an AKA while hunting, I would have run home and hidden- if I couldn't take the gun away.
Automatic rifles have NO place in civilian hands. Had I seen an AKA while hunting, I would have run home and hidden- if I couldn't take the gun away.
56
The N.R.A. and its sycophants in the Senate and the House are directly responsible for the Orlando carnage.
51
Public Enemy #1: Terrorists;
Public Enemy #2: Obstructionist Republicans in the House and Senate;
Public Enemy #3: The NRA.
Public Enemy #2: Obstructionist Republicans in the House and Senate;
Public Enemy #3: The NRA.
70
Thank you! How anyone or any group - aside for a terrorist organization - could object to closing the current loophole that allows those on the No Fly list to obtain guns is beyond the thinking of any rational person.
38
It is undeniable that these assault weapons are not designed for personal protection nor hunting.
- background checks are sensible
- waiting periods are sensible
The NRA has become entrenched in greed, hate and fear. It is amazing the Republican party leadership continues to align with the NRA. This is an example of the Republican party being the 'stupid party'. You cannot listen to LaPierre and believe NRA views are good for the country.
- background checks are sensible
- waiting periods are sensible
The NRA has become entrenched in greed, hate and fear. It is amazing the Republican party leadership continues to align with the NRA. This is an example of the Republican party being the 'stupid party'. You cannot listen to LaPierre and believe NRA views are good for the country.
30
If the majority of NRA members favor reasonable gun legislation that would include thorough background checks, no fly-no buy rules for those on a terrorist watch list (duh!), and maybe even banning assault weapon sales....why are they still members of this organization? Everyone knows that the NRA is a shill for the gun manufacturers and has literally no concern for public safety. Responsible gun owners (and they are in the majority) should distance themselves from these clowns.
35
The fact that an overwhelming majority of Americans favor universal background checks for gun ownership and we still don't have them proves only one thing:
Money from gun lobbyists speaks a whole lot louder than Americans do.
Money from gun lobbyists speaks a whole lot louder than Americans do.
37
Term Limits for US Congress, read, sign and share. The founding fathers thought this one out at the beginning of this not so great country anymore.
13
Not one of the freedoms enshrined in the Bill of Rights is absolute: one cannot shout fire in a crowded theater; one cannot practice a religion that involves human sacrifices; one cannot assemble large groups of people without a permit; newspapers have been prevented from publishing information detrimental to our national security during time of war. The 2nd amendment is not sancroscant--one cannot own a cannon or a machine gun. Most Amercans want to stop the carnage; it's time politicians listen to us rather than the NRA.
57
Bravo. Enough insanity. We must keep pressing our legislators for the needed laws and to allow federal funding of research on gun violence.
24
The N.R.A. should be sued for every person who has been shot, as being complicit in the shooting. The N.R.A. consistently says guns don't kill people, people kill people. Their complicity is obvious. Knowing and acknowledging that people kill people - they put instruments of killing, guns, into the hands of these people.
It would be wonderful to see tens of thousands of actions simultaneously filed against the NRA in courts across the United States with this thesis. That would not only distract them to no end, but could put them out of the business of bribing members of Congress to support their insanity
It would be wonderful to see tens of thousands of actions simultaneously filed against the NRA in courts across the United States with this thesis. That would not only distract them to no end, but could put them out of the business of bribing members of Congress to support their insanity
31
The NRA claim that innocent people might be banned from buying weapons because mistakes are made on no fly and terrorism watch lists is absolutely absurd. By the same reasoning there should be no laws at all and no legal system because sometimes people are wrongly convicted.
General Burnside Civil War hero and founder of the NRA is turning over in his grave at how venal, mercenary and unreasonable the Association he founded to promote "scientific gun ownership" has become. The NRA began as a helpful and innocent agency but has become so venal and corrupt that it is now a monster that promotes fear, paranoia, gun violence and terrorism. If America is to be a safe place again the NRA needs new leadership with a less fanatical outlook and a more practical and cooperative agenda. And that new leadership is needed yesterday.
General Burnside Civil War hero and founder of the NRA is turning over in his grave at how venal, mercenary and unreasonable the Association he founded to promote "scientific gun ownership" has become. The NRA began as a helpful and innocent agency but has become so venal and corrupt that it is now a monster that promotes fear, paranoia, gun violence and terrorism. If America is to be a safe place again the NRA needs new leadership with a less fanatical outlook and a more practical and cooperative agenda. And that new leadership is needed yesterday.
23
We must recognize that we are in the way of the future Republicans and Democrats assume American referendum on firearms in U.S, Happy Sustainability Urban 2016
1
The fact that the NRA and complicit politicians even passed a law outlawing federal funds for gun violence research is telling of their power which appears to be absolute - is frightening. Think of everything that is regulated and licensed in this country. Cars, boats, construction on your own property, children's lemonade stands, dogs, cats, fishing, hunting....why continue, there are hundreds of things. Why not a "well regulated militia"? Insanity that America has given control to these lunatics.
33
We need to decide as a country if we should value profits over innocent lives. It is that basic the NRA is a commercial lobbying group whose only mission is to increase gun /ammunition sales any way they can. It is clear republican politicians fear the NRA not only for the contributions they get but that they often support their opponent if he does not adhere to NRA agenda. They are not fighting our freedom or the constitution but for profits it is greed over innocent lives despite their rhetoric. No other western country has the mass shootings we do we should put the spotlight on NRA controlled politicians and know how we can effectively change the status quo which is apparently not working. A wild west shootout is not the answer as proposed by the NRA.
24
No meaningful bill can possibly get out of committee. But it's imperative for Democrats to offer one anyway. We can hang their refusal to discuss the real issue around the neck of each Republican running for reelection in what is only a few months from now.
15
The 2nd amendment has no provision that prevents some element of gun control. Our spineless congress members are the problem. The right to own a 70 caliber flintlock rifle in no way translates into owning semi-automatic military type weapons that are solely manufactured for the purpose of killing people.
21
The NRA has become an adjunct to terrorists of whatever type. It also directly appeals to those who do not recognize the legitimacy of our government of the United States. The "militias" these groups form are not what the 2nd Amendment protects. Aside from hunters, people who love guns as I do for the history, and people who enjoy guns for sports shooting the NRA is an instituion for malignant dangerous necrophiliacs...active and potentially active lovers of death and destruction. The moral cowards in Congress and elsewhere empower this institution and empower death and destruction. -Rudy
24
As surely as night follows day, screeches for the banning of "assault rifles", if not for the banning of all firearms, in the hands of anyone other than law enforcement and the military, will stridently commence following Saturday night's horrific Jihadist/hate-crime event in Orlando, FL. Aside from the fact that the meaning of the term "assault rifle" has been stretched way past what it technically denotes, I want simply to remind the screechers that there is no evidence that any of the multitudinous gun control laws now on the books has kept even one firearm out of the hands of someone who wishes to own one for a nefarious purpose. Case in point, the recent assassination of British politician Jo Cox, by gunshot (also knife) in a country often held up as a very model for the kind of gun control we should have in the United States. Please think carefully and critically before you screech.
7
As is far too common on both sides in the gun-control debate, the NYT climbs onto the simplicity bandwagon again.
Yes, the even the NRA wants terrorists banned from buying guns. What it also wants (as should every American) is protection of citizens' due process rights. The terrorist lists are set up without tribunal and are difficult for any average citizen to challenge. If those lists are to be used in a way to deny a citizen fundamental rights (to due process and to keep and bear arms), citizens must have a fair, open route to appeal their placement on them.
This is at least one area where gun-control advocates and Second Amendment advocates should be able to find a solution. The quibble is over how long to block a sale before the federal government must act in an open judicial process to justify the ban.
There must be a sane compromise on this point.
Yes, the even the NRA wants terrorists banned from buying guns. What it also wants (as should every American) is protection of citizens' due process rights. The terrorist lists are set up without tribunal and are difficult for any average citizen to challenge. If those lists are to be used in a way to deny a citizen fundamental rights (to due process and to keep and bear arms), citizens must have a fair, open route to appeal their placement on them.
This is at least one area where gun-control advocates and Second Amendment advocates should be able to find a solution. The quibble is over how long to block a sale before the federal government must act in an open judicial process to justify the ban.
There must be a sane compromise on this point.
6
If every one else in the bar had a gun, there would be a much greater risk of gun violence in the bar even if the specific shooter in this case did not show up. Terrorism is only one specific cause of gun violence, and its precise involvement in this case is murky at best. Guns can cause similar disasters when coupled with mental illness, family disputes, employment grievances, bigotry, adolescent confusion, bullying, personal grudges, toddler play and poor judgment while drunk.
7
Unless you also vastly improve the border security with Mexico, focusing on the gun control aspect of this is a feel-good, simplistic, and mostly useless exercise.
Making assault weapons illegal will only make it inconvenient for criminals and terrorists to acquire weapons. Like the inconvenience of acquiring illegal drugs - easy, with current border security.
States that make it difficult to buy guns just shift the import to other states. The country as a whole, which has made drugs illegal, just shifted the import center to Mexico.
Banning assault weapons without a wall will do little. Solved (typically) just enough to add an additional sparkle of meaningless feel-goodism to the "progressive" veneer, without actually doing anything.
That's why the real solution here is exactly what Trump is doing, a two-step plan: make assault guns illegal, and seriously improve the border with Mexico. Don't say it can't be done. We've done much harder things - like send a man to the moon and win WW2.
Plus, you get a huge decrease in illegal drugs which will massively help inner-cities. Why wouldn't Dems be fully behind this? There's only one explanation: potential (next gen) Dem voters from illegal Mexican immigrants come first.
Let's make a trade: A Ban, for a Wall.
We Republicans agree to put the blood of kids in South Side Chicago over our rights in the Second amendment , and you Dems agree to put the blood of those kids over the gain of potential Dem voters from Mexico.
Making assault weapons illegal will only make it inconvenient for criminals and terrorists to acquire weapons. Like the inconvenience of acquiring illegal drugs - easy, with current border security.
States that make it difficult to buy guns just shift the import to other states. The country as a whole, which has made drugs illegal, just shifted the import center to Mexico.
Banning assault weapons without a wall will do little. Solved (typically) just enough to add an additional sparkle of meaningless feel-goodism to the "progressive" veneer, without actually doing anything.
That's why the real solution here is exactly what Trump is doing, a two-step plan: make assault guns illegal, and seriously improve the border with Mexico. Don't say it can't be done. We've done much harder things - like send a man to the moon and win WW2.
Plus, you get a huge decrease in illegal drugs which will massively help inner-cities. Why wouldn't Dems be fully behind this? There's only one explanation: potential (next gen) Dem voters from illegal Mexican immigrants come first.
Let's make a trade: A Ban, for a Wall.
We Republicans agree to put the blood of kids in South Side Chicago over our rights in the Second amendment , and you Dems agree to put the blood of those kids over the gain of potential Dem voters from Mexico.
5
I would agree with those who note that with so many guns already in circulation, it is unlikely that limits on new guns or amendments to the second amendment are going to happen. On the other hand, perhaps we need to expand the use of the second amendment by insisting that all gun owners justify that ownership by being enrolled in well organized state militias. As part of their annual militia duties, they would have to have training on and enforce gun safety. They could participate in cleaning up and dealing with disasters and incidents as happened in Orlando. Any additional gun purchases would require verification that they were in good standing with their state militia. The state militias could then screen out those who were not cooperative or who showed emotional instability which would prevent their participation (and thus their ownership of weapons).
8
This discussion has reached the absurd on both extremes, by the NRA who fears general confiscation of guns if any gun control legislation is enacted and by those who have suffered from or have considerable fear of suffering from gun violence who want them gone. The likelihood of being attacked by those who own guns and those who do not is statistically the same. More people are murdered by means of physical force, knives, and common household items than by means of guns. The only legal means that might limit gun violence requires some advanced knowledge of who might do so and that requires registering guns to make them simple to retrieve from individuals judged by due process to be a threat, and to assure that all who have guns secure them from misuse by anybody and proven ability to use them safely. Wholesale confiscation and strict limits on gun ownership would be both unlikely to be imposed and would probably not have much effect upon homicidal psychopaths and terrorists -- both have been able to obtain automatic weapons and explosive devices in countries where private ownership of guns is discouraged and strictly controlled.
2
If Peter Thiel can finance lawsuits that eventually bankrupted Gawker Media, I suggest all the billionaire philanthropists (I mean you Mr. Gates and Mr. Buffett) and several others, who can use the power of their money to fund lawsuits after lawsuits, to get NRA out of business and all those gun manufacturers who sell such arms and armament to ordinary folks. If our lawmakers won't make laws to stop such sales to dangerous people, then our rich citizens should use the power of purse to run NRA out of town.
13
If the F.B.I. has reason to believe that a person might be connected to terrorism, why should they not present that reasoning to an impartial judge for a legal review? A search warrant should give the F.B.I. enough power to thoroughly investigate, arrest, and bring criminal charges, if warranted. Why are you proposing to circumvent that constitutional due process?
And if no civilian anywhere should be able to possess 30-round magazines and kill 49 people, why should police and domestic para-military forces be able to? Not to mention all of the other, more lethal military hardware and equipment they currently possess, from armored fighting vehicles to flash-bangs to Kevlar body armor to snipers to night vision. Your position sounds rather fascistic to me, and I think to many other peaceful, law-abiding citizens. As evidence of that, I read today that sales of AR-15 type rifles are once again flying off the shelves of gun dealers.
And if more thorough background checks are in order, for mental illness, for example, where would you draw the line, both for the degree of mental illness and for the issue of medical confidentiality, upon which so much mental health treatment depends? And given the federal government's failure to prevent the past several mass shootings where guns were legally bought after current criminal background checks, why do you imagine that it will be more successful in stopping mass shootings through expanded background checks?
And if no civilian anywhere should be able to possess 30-round magazines and kill 49 people, why should police and domestic para-military forces be able to? Not to mention all of the other, more lethal military hardware and equipment they currently possess, from armored fighting vehicles to flash-bangs to Kevlar body armor to snipers to night vision. Your position sounds rather fascistic to me, and I think to many other peaceful, law-abiding citizens. As evidence of that, I read today that sales of AR-15 type rifles are once again flying off the shelves of gun dealers.
And if more thorough background checks are in order, for mental illness, for example, where would you draw the line, both for the degree of mental illness and for the issue of medical confidentiality, upon which so much mental health treatment depends? And given the federal government's failure to prevent the past several mass shootings where guns were legally bought after current criminal background checks, why do you imagine that it will be more successful in stopping mass shootings through expanded background checks?
6
gun control is badly needed,2d amendment was written when US was a colony of England (I know British Royals are still popular in US;but does it matter?).
It is time to amend the 2d for 21st century!
It is time to amend the 2d for 21st century!
10
Here is how President Obama can at least slowdown this madness, if not completely stop it: order Federal agencies to stop dealing with any gun manufacturer that makes financial contribution to gun lobbies l.e. NRA! NRA can not survive without their generous financial backing. In addition, he can setup a none profit foundation and ask the gun manufacturers to pay a small percentage of each sale to the fund in order to compensate for the damages to the society resulting from use of such armaments.... So, there is a lot that the President can do to reduce this carnage on our people by Executive Action without waiting for the NRA obedient Republican congress. Waiting for this or any other Republican congress to do the right thing would be a total waste of time. And, in the mean time, thousand of innocent people would die!
7
I missed the part where we elected Wayne La Pierre president; but it's only fitting, given that wholly-owned NRA subsidiary, our congress.
20
Somebody explain to me what these assault weapons are for. If they are for sport, wouldn't it be more challenging to shoot a gun with 1 bullet? Is it a power trip to own one of these? Do you own one because you are frightened of your surroundings? Someone explain to me why anyone would want a human killing assault weapon. Do you feel any guilt that your "hobby" is indirectly killing people? Please explain.
16
guns and mental illness
4
So you don't blame the murderer. You don't blame the ideology that spawned him. You don't blame the foreign and/or immigration policies that support these actions. You don't blame the fatuous effete excuse of a president who either ignores or supports them. No, you blame over 5 million of the country's most upstanding law abiding citizens. This is why your opinion is no longer relevant. It is dishonest.
28
There was a time when Americans came together after such a tragedy. Yet the Times has decided to attack five million of their fellow citizens (more if you count members of other gun rights groups) and accuse them of being complicit in terrorism.
This is truly sick. It is truly evil. And it is profoundly destructive to national unity.
There is not one example on record, not one, where any of the legislation being proposed in the wake of Orlando would have stopped a terrorist.
Not even the fabled "assault weapon ban" would do a thing. VA Tech proved that a madman with two pistols can be quite deadly. 32 killed.
The Happyland Disco proved one man with a gallon of gas and a match can be quite deadly. 87 killed. Bath School. Oklahoma City. 9/11. Waco (where the Federal government's actions, ironically while they were enforcing gun control laws, led to the death of 86 people.)
In a close quarters situation, pistols are quite deadly. Especially when the shooter has 3 hours to do his evil. (How many victims bled out and died in that time? Hopefully the Times will be all over that.) This is why many actual "assault weapons," (not the mythical "assault weapon" invented by the media) such as the MP5 are chambered in pistol calibers.
And you wonder why gun rights advocates refuse to have a "conversation" with you.
This is truly sick. It is truly evil. And it is profoundly destructive to national unity.
There is not one example on record, not one, where any of the legislation being proposed in the wake of Orlando would have stopped a terrorist.
Not even the fabled "assault weapon ban" would do a thing. VA Tech proved that a madman with two pistols can be quite deadly. 32 killed.
The Happyland Disco proved one man with a gallon of gas and a match can be quite deadly. 87 killed. Bath School. Oklahoma City. 9/11. Waco (where the Federal government's actions, ironically while they were enforcing gun control laws, led to the death of 86 people.)
In a close quarters situation, pistols are quite deadly. Especially when the shooter has 3 hours to do his evil. (How many victims bled out and died in that time? Hopefully the Times will be all over that.) This is why many actual "assault weapons," (not the mythical "assault weapon" invented by the media) such as the MP5 are chambered in pistol calibers.
And you wonder why gun rights advocates refuse to have a "conversation" with you.
9
Not Quite Accurate, But Still A Good Point*
Overheard at Walmart ...
Customer: I'd like a couple of packages of Sudafed.
Clerk: Oh I'm sorry, but the Patriot Act restricts the purchase of Sudafed to one box per day and three boxes per month.
Customer: Okay, then I'll take a box of Sudafed and two Bushmaster AR-15s.
Clerk: Yes sir ... that will be $1,408.79.
* Because of public pressure brought to bear on the company, Walmart ceased selling AR-15s in 2015.
Overheard at Walmart ...
Customer: I'd like a couple of packages of Sudafed.
Clerk: Oh I'm sorry, but the Patriot Act restricts the purchase of Sudafed to one box per day and three boxes per month.
Customer: Okay, then I'll take a box of Sudafed and two Bushmaster AR-15s.
Clerk: Yes sir ... that will be $1,408.79.
* Because of public pressure brought to bear on the company, Walmart ceased selling AR-15s in 2015.
14
So let me get this straight. Feinstein's bill ignores due process and puts the burden of proof on the individual to prove they are innocent whereas Cornyn's bill upholds the 5th amendment (albeit it should give the FBI more than 3 days, I mean come on, they are on the terror watch list there should be some leeway) and requires the government prove that you should be on the list but the Feinstein bill is the right one even though it violates the 5th amendment. If these people are legitimately so bad that they shouldn't be allowed a gun, shouldn't it a) be easy to prove this to a judge and b) shouldn't we be charging them with something at that point?
And even though most people support universal background checks, they do not support the registry that would be required to support it. Besides, or NICS system is lacking information, and the money promised to states to improve their record keeping and submissions to the NICs system never materialized and that hasn't been due to the NRA or the republicans. Both actually asked for that.
Just my two cents.
And even though most people support universal background checks, they do not support the registry that would be required to support it. Besides, or NICS system is lacking information, and the money promised to states to improve their record keeping and submissions to the NICs system never materialized and that hasn't been due to the NRA or the republicans. Both actually asked for that.
Just my two cents.
4
Congratulations to the New York Times for having the courage to write this editorial.
9
The NRA has on the order of 5 million members. So I guess we are collectively responsible, while Islamic terrorists hold no collective responsibility?
4
One has only to look to events in France in 2015 to refute the premise of this piece. That country, with its very restrictive firearms laws suffered two very serious terrorist incidents in which so called assault rifles were used to kill dozens of people in public places. Terrorists will arm themselves regardless of firearms laws. Perhaps we need more urgent action on the part of law enforcement to proactively take these terrorists out of the population.
8
The big killings have been by law abiding citizens not criminals. If only criminals had guns,there would have been far fewer killings Would the era allow police to have weapons, just not as powerful as era sponsored arms?
2
Will there be a follow-up editorial entitled "The Islamic Fanatics' Complicity in Terrorism"??? For balance, maybe.
8
According to the second amendment, the right to keep and bear arms is based on an idea of a well-regulated militia that can secure the nation's freedom. I would submit that the carnage we now see on a regular basis erodes this freedom, and that individual gun-ownership is not well-regulated when it impinges on the rights of other Americans. Let's stay true to the spirit of the second amendment by allowing regulations that will balance gun ownership with the right of Americans to life, liberty and happiness.
9
If there are no facts to support your political arguments, simply make up your own version of the truth. This common philosophy is shared by the NRA, right-wing extremists and the most breathless gun zealots. A single person was able to kill or wound one hundred people in a few moments, while holding off an armed police officer at the same time. Gun zealots are all over the Internet and on tv, explaining how most people are just plain ignorant about the AR-15. How it's really a low powered weapon, only made for small game hunting and sport shooting at the range. Others admit that it's for defending themselves from any future government they disagree with. The rapid firing is needed to keep a mob from invading their personal space. People are actually saying these things, lots of them. Then they go to the NRA/Trump argument about how obvious it is that the more guns society owns, the safer we all become. Three hundred million guns is just not enough to keep us secure. We have allowed the most intellectually dishonest, paranoid and unstable among us to control elections. We have also allowed the most fanatical and paranoid among them to legally accumulate personal arsenals. We are a country literally brimming with Bundy family clones. The firearms industry makes a fortune selling these expensive, ammo eating killing machines by the tens of thousands each month. If a several thousand innocent people need to die each year to keep the gravy train going, so be it.
12
The highly charged gun debate makes for a lot of nonsense arguments on both sides. Here, the Times is engaging in such nonsense. It argues that the NRA's position on guns constitutes complicity in terrorism. Of course, reasonable people know that the NRA isn't pro-terrorist. Moreover, Trump argues that Democrat support of the Muslim presence in the U.S. is likewise complicity in terrorism. The two arguments are similar and equally nonsensical. I suggest that Democrats not assume that their spokespeople are right. In this case, the Times is as bad as Trump.
5
We will never be able to stop all gun violence but Australia shows that reasonable policies can stop mass shootings from happening. Since gun rights are protected at the federal level they need to be managed at the federal level. Allowing individual States to set their own policies isn't working as some are more LAX than others.
Committing a crime using a gun should be a federal crime. We need mandatory sentencing in place for gun crimes with time served in a federal prison. The second amendment gives us the right to bear arms not the right to commit a crime using arms.
Congress needs to have a reasoned discussion about the types of guns that should and shouldn't be in the hands of the general public. Law enforcement at all levels should be involved in the discussion because unlike the NRA they actually deal with the consequences of gun violence. Congress needs to pass strong federal gun laws to end this madness.
Discussing the issue and lamenting the dead is no longer enough. We should honor the victims by taking action so that mass shootings stop being a yearly event.
Committing a crime using a gun should be a federal crime. We need mandatory sentencing in place for gun crimes with time served in a federal prison. The second amendment gives us the right to bear arms not the right to commit a crime using arms.
Congress needs to have a reasoned discussion about the types of guns that should and shouldn't be in the hands of the general public. Law enforcement at all levels should be involved in the discussion because unlike the NRA they actually deal with the consequences of gun violence. Congress needs to pass strong federal gun laws to end this madness.
Discussing the issue and lamenting the dead is no longer enough. We should honor the victims by taking action so that mass shootings stop being a yearly event.
9
No other industry has control of so many small-minded Americans. The only organization that comes close is the GOP who has taken lessons from the NRA on how to use fear and cowardice to create market demand.
19
Actually, the solution is simple. Vote out all politicians supported by the NRA. Make a positive rating by the NRA a curse rather than something the pols brag about.
18
Totally support the use of the "moment of silence" by our politicians ... What better metaphor for their inaction following the
BANG
Next gun-related death of the day, one of the 91 that happens every day of every year. What better way to hear it than in the cold irony of that silence?
BANG
Next gun-related death of the day, one of the 91 that happens every day of every year. What better way to hear it than in the cold irony of that silence?
5
The problem is the writers of this piece and the readers in the NY Times amen corner do not have the capability of imagining a time where our government declares martial law due to a "national emergency" and habeas corpus is suspended, free speech is too dangerous and must be approved by government officials and all weapons must be confiscated. The US is not guaranteed a better outcome over the long term than any other country that has fallen in past. The same people here advocating for more restrictions on personal weaponry are the same who will be declared enemies of the state in the right circumstances.
4
Finally, we are recognizing the threat to American national security posed by the National Rifle Association and the (largely Republican) politicians it owns. How many more home-grown terrorist attacks and massacres will have to occur before we put these jerks out of business through utter shaming and calling them for the terror enablers they are?
7
There won't be any change that makes a difference. If congress wouldn't do anything when children were killed don't try and kid yourself that they'll do anything when a lot of gays get murdered. Quite a few people have been saying that Mateen was doing God's will.
4
NRA = terrorism profiteer
13
The Times is in rare form regarding today's edition.
Blame the NRA, blame Trump, even blame Christianity for recent terrorist attacks...
Has this Editorial Board EVER written a piece stating that the Muslim community needs to take a hard look at what they are doing/tolerating?
I'm waiting...
Keep sticking your heads in the sand and keep ignoring the real issue.
Blame the NRA, blame Trump, even blame Christianity for recent terrorist attacks...
Has this Editorial Board EVER written a piece stating that the Muslim community needs to take a hard look at what they are doing/tolerating?
I'm waiting...
Keep sticking your heads in the sand and keep ignoring the real issue.
6
I can understand how maddening it is because your misdirected anger at your own countrymen is the work of a madman or more correctly madmen, since this heroic editorial is unsigned by any individual with the courage of his or her convictions. The extremists who have hijacked the editorial pages of the NYT will attempt any political lynching they and their vile syncopants can try to brazenly foist on the public they knowingly mislead every day. The people have elected their Congress and despite your vicious attempts to drag those of different( thank God) political beliefs through your manufactured mud they remain worthy of the respect and veneration of a free people. The actual villians go unpunished to kill again while the NYT unabashedly urges the country to continue chasing its' tail. This gruesome attempt to misdirect the righteous anger of the public for supposed political gain is a gross dereliction of journalistic duty and will be paid for dearly when this mess is dealt with by the American people, no matter their political persuasion.
3
Others have suggested NRA members resign if they support reasonable gun safety laws. That would be a good start, but until there is an alternative organization of reasonable, responsible gun owners aggressively pursuing legislation as a foil to the NRA, the NRA will continue to dominate the debate. This is not a short term answer, but we have been debating gun regulations since Charles Whitman took to the clock tower at TU to no significant avail. Its time to try a new tack, one that welcomes and rewards responsible gun use and ownership.
1
Most Americans believe people have the right to own a gun for protection and a hunting rifle. Assault weapons were exclusively manufactured to be used by the Armed Forces to defend our country, period.
We have the power to stop people from buying assault weapons. All we have to do is use the upcoming elections to vote outing corrupted politicians in the ballot that are supporting the NRA. Once we do that, the remaining politicians in office will be getting the message. Only then, we would be able to have a gun control law prohibiting people with a criminal background or who are mentally incompetent from buying a gun. It’s that simple.
We have the power to stop people from buying assault weapons. All we have to do is use the upcoming elections to vote outing corrupted politicians in the ballot that are supporting the NRA. Once we do that, the remaining politicians in office will be getting the message. Only then, we would be able to have a gun control law prohibiting people with a criminal background or who are mentally incompetent from buying a gun. It’s that simple.
4
"Mr. Mateen was able to kill 49 people largely because the assault rifle he was using could fire 30-round clips as fast as he could pull the trigger. No civilian anywhere should be allowed to have that ability."
I inherited a deer rifle, made in the 50s, that could do the same with a larger custom magazine.
I inherited a deer rifle, made in the 50s, that could do the same with a larger custom magazine.
5
Sad to say, but it seems like the people that want guns most also seem to live in the reddest of red states
Those states are also climate change deniers, choice deniers, deniers , deniers and deniers.
Maybe it's time for a "Brexit" of our own here.
Our states are not so united because one group wants to live in the 1950s and the other group is already moving forward
California was almost bankrupt under successive Republican cutters/ deniers administrations. Now , after 2 terms of liberal yet conservative Governor Brown administrations, the state is booming
Into 2 terms of Gov Brownback in Kansas, the state is reeling and out of money
North Carolina is at war with itself on discrimitory laws and policies and is costing the state millions and millions in lost business.
Sensible gun policies are a no brainier.
Forgetting about climate change for a moment, How can any body be pro pollution? pollution affects kids of the reddest of the red the same as the blue kids
On and on and on. They obstruct. They fight. They shoot. They pollute. They deny facts. They deny science. They these other people so much that they'd rather drown themselves in dumbness than get along and progress forward
Maybe it's time they go have their own dirty polluted dangerous intolerant dumb country.
Seriously. Either work with us and proven FACTS or go live in your own walled in fantasy land.
Your leader could get us to pay for the wall!!!!!!!!!!
Those states are also climate change deniers, choice deniers, deniers , deniers and deniers.
Maybe it's time for a "Brexit" of our own here.
Our states are not so united because one group wants to live in the 1950s and the other group is already moving forward
California was almost bankrupt under successive Republican cutters/ deniers administrations. Now , after 2 terms of liberal yet conservative Governor Brown administrations, the state is booming
Into 2 terms of Gov Brownback in Kansas, the state is reeling and out of money
North Carolina is at war with itself on discrimitory laws and policies and is costing the state millions and millions in lost business.
Sensible gun policies are a no brainier.
Forgetting about climate change for a moment, How can any body be pro pollution? pollution affects kids of the reddest of the red the same as the blue kids
On and on and on. They obstruct. They fight. They shoot. They pollute. They deny facts. They deny science. They these other people so much that they'd rather drown themselves in dumbness than get along and progress forward
Maybe it's time they go have their own dirty polluted dangerous intolerant dumb country.
Seriously. Either work with us and proven FACTS or go live in your own walled in fantasy land.
Your leader could get us to pay for the wall!!!!!!!!!!
22
Five of the most recent mass killings were done by perpetrators using an AR-15 assault weapon that was legally purchased. The Philadelphia Inquirer did a story yesterday in which one of their reporters walked in to a gun shop and after producing a couple of pieces of identification, walked out of the store with an AR-15. Total amount of time for the transaction? SEVEN MINUTES.
The home grown terrorists are just salivating at this stupidity.
The home grown terrorists are just salivating at this stupidity.
22
This is like saying because Obama pulled out of Iraq which lead directly to a complete destabilization of Anbar and the rise and spread of "JV" ISIS, he's complicit in their terror attacks. Oh wait...
7
I'm picturing a truth-in-advertising campaign for the current NRA (which destroyed and replaced the gun-safety-focused one decades ago).
Hey! Life a little rough and want a chance for impulsively ending it all?
We've got your back.
Trouble at work or at home and just can't let "them" get away with it any more?
Don't try counseling, we've got your back.
Thinking that the Western civilization is the problem with the world?
We've got your back.
Todays N*R*A* Helping you succeed in tragedy through our No*Regulation* Acceptable* policy.
I think it's time that the many, many responsible gun owners started leaving the NRA.
Hey! Life a little rough and want a chance for impulsively ending it all?
We've got your back.
Trouble at work or at home and just can't let "them" get away with it any more?
Don't try counseling, we've got your back.
Thinking that the Western civilization is the problem with the world?
We've got your back.
Todays N*R*A* Helping you succeed in tragedy through our No*Regulation* Acceptable* policy.
I think it's time that the many, many responsible gun owners started leaving the NRA.
8
The New York Times hates gun owners and the second amendment; doesn't know anything about guns or gun owners; doesn't want to know anything. You disgust me, and I'm not alone.
8
This article is brought to you by the same people who say "Just legalize all drugs because people are going to use them anyway."
All the gun laws in the world are not going to deter a person bent on mayhem from getting a gun.
If one REALLY cared about the most prevalent gun crime, the guns thugs use primarily against other thugs, then the argument is really about gun offenders serving real prison time.
So far in 2016, Chicago has recorded nearly 300 murders. I'll guarantee that nearly every trigger puller had a very long rap sheet that included multiple violent crimes with guns already.
The Chicago police are the first to say that arresting people is a joke. They arrest the same ones over and over and our "justice" system refuses to hold any of them. Prisons basically have revolving doors.
The NYT readership is bending over backward to convince us that the Orlando shooter was not a terrorist but a guy "who just snapped" and that guns are the real problem, leave poor little Omar Mateen alone.
The NRA is pro-gun and anti-criminal.
It appears that there are many who are anti-gun because they are pro-criminal.
Had Mateen lived, heck, he might have gotten his own glamorous Rolling Stones cover like the Boston Marathon shooter.
All the gun laws in the world are not going to deter a person bent on mayhem from getting a gun.
If one REALLY cared about the most prevalent gun crime, the guns thugs use primarily against other thugs, then the argument is really about gun offenders serving real prison time.
So far in 2016, Chicago has recorded nearly 300 murders. I'll guarantee that nearly every trigger puller had a very long rap sheet that included multiple violent crimes with guns already.
The Chicago police are the first to say that arresting people is a joke. They arrest the same ones over and over and our "justice" system refuses to hold any of them. Prisons basically have revolving doors.
The NYT readership is bending over backward to convince us that the Orlando shooter was not a terrorist but a guy "who just snapped" and that guns are the real problem, leave poor little Omar Mateen alone.
The NRA is pro-gun and anti-criminal.
It appears that there are many who are anti-gun because they are pro-criminal.
Had Mateen lived, heck, he might have gotten his own glamorous Rolling Stones cover like the Boston Marathon shooter.
7
To say the NRA is complicit in terrorism is the same as saying that NARAL is complicit in mass murder.
It's funny how you perceive the argument when a right you believe in is threatened.
It's funny how you perceive the argument when a right you believe in is threatened.
7
The irony is that the NRA uses the same fantastical thinking that groups like ISIS use to recruit their members and bind their allegiance:
The world is a scary place and you may have justifiable fears that no one will protect you, in fact there are organized groups whose aim is to hurt you specifically, and they will not stop till they get you.
Organized governments are corrupt or dysfunctional, and you can not rely on them for protection.
You can even the odds by having a big gun, and then standing up for your rights.
When you see injustice being done, you can be the "good guy with the gun".
Worked for Mr. Mateen. Seems to work for the NRA, but not for Mr. LaPierre who sits in a gun-free zone in his office.
The world is a scary place and you may have justifiable fears that no one will protect you, in fact there are organized groups whose aim is to hurt you specifically, and they will not stop till they get you.
Organized governments are corrupt or dysfunctional, and you can not rely on them for protection.
You can even the odds by having a big gun, and then standing up for your rights.
When you see injustice being done, you can be the "good guy with the gun".
Worked for Mr. Mateen. Seems to work for the NRA, but not for Mr. LaPierre who sits in a gun-free zone in his office.
8
The editorial must be repudiated. What the Times and its acolytes SIMPLY FAIL TO UNDERSTAND is that it is the ideology that has been baked-in between the ears of terrorists such as Mr. Mateen AND NOT THE GUN that is at the heart of this matter.
In simple English, had Mr. Mateen been denied access to guns, he would have used the lethal weapons available to him. These lethal weapons would include, but not be limited to, sufficient fertilizer and oil to create a truck bomb (a la Oklahoma City), a homicide/suicide belt, etc.
If the type of gun control being postured in the US Senate is to have any relevance, then a key question that needs to be answered is: "Why has this general approach not worked in ending the on-going carnage in Chicago?"
The point of the terminology Radical Islamic Terrorism is that it appears to be a tiny fraction of Muslims who are inspired to act by clerics (who seem to encourage "killing the Infidels").
The fact that some of those killed in Orlando may have at one time or another been "engaged in perverse acts", may have driven Mr. Mateen beyond the breaking point. Whether we like it or not, homophobia is alive and well in the Caliphate.
The over-arching point is that an apparent racist like Dylann Roof also did the unthinkable at the Mother Emanuel Church in Charles, SC. Yet, I cannot imagine Mr. Roof strapping on a homicide/suicide belt. There is no leap of faith in imagining Mr. Mateen strapping on a homicide/suicide belt to do the deed.
In simple English, had Mr. Mateen been denied access to guns, he would have used the lethal weapons available to him. These lethal weapons would include, but not be limited to, sufficient fertilizer and oil to create a truck bomb (a la Oklahoma City), a homicide/suicide belt, etc.
If the type of gun control being postured in the US Senate is to have any relevance, then a key question that needs to be answered is: "Why has this general approach not worked in ending the on-going carnage in Chicago?"
The point of the terminology Radical Islamic Terrorism is that it appears to be a tiny fraction of Muslims who are inspired to act by clerics (who seem to encourage "killing the Infidels").
The fact that some of those killed in Orlando may have at one time or another been "engaged in perverse acts", may have driven Mr. Mateen beyond the breaking point. Whether we like it or not, homophobia is alive and well in the Caliphate.
The over-arching point is that an apparent racist like Dylann Roof also did the unthinkable at the Mother Emanuel Church in Charles, SC. Yet, I cannot imagine Mr. Roof strapping on a homicide/suicide belt. There is no leap of faith in imagining Mr. Mateen strapping on a homicide/suicide belt to do the deed.
6
Fertilizer is highly regulated.
4
Bad guys in Chicago can get their guns in, say, Kentucky. There is not convincing evidence of your point there.
1
Somehow I don't remember the gun fetishists being so concerned about "due process" when they pushed through Stand Your Ground laws, glorified George Zimmerman, and vilified the late Trayvon Martin.
15
Not a gun owner - never have been. The organization we know as the NRA never fires a weapon, though most of its members do. Blaming weapons - guns, knives, clubs, poison, etc. for what the people do is not a solution. Never has been, never will be. Timothy McVeigh understood that. Banning guns would be even less successful than banning alcohol as we tried once before - there would still be millions of them available for use - more than 300 MILLION at last estimate. Alcohol was in wider use when Prohibition was in force. We will have to find better answers.......
6
Rep Israel of NY said yesterday during the filibuster that the GOP in doing nothing is equivalent to criminal negligence. Nancy Pelosi said the GOP is a wholly owned subsidiary of the NRA, how true, and proven in the fact that Donald Trump is heading to the NRA to discuss "policy".
The NRA long ago stopped being a gun safety group and is now a domestic terrorist group. Every GOP Representative who took money over the years from the NRA should be paying for 49 funerals in Orlando.
The NRA long ago stopped being a gun safety group and is now a domestic terrorist group. Every GOP Representative who took money over the years from the NRA should be paying for 49 funerals in Orlando.
12
To paraphrase a popular slogan of the 60s: HEY HEY NRA: HOW MANY KIDS DID YOU KILL TODAY! Has a familiar ring, doesn't it. When the NRA held their convention in Denver just after Columbine I drove up there with a number of signs saying this and handed them out to protesters. They just loved them.
No the NRA isn't pulling the triggers. But they are definitely facilitating the crazies who do. It is est
No the NRA isn't pulling the triggers. But they are definitely facilitating the crazies who do. It is est
7
I don't have a weapon of any kind, that is my personal choice.
Many year ago I stood behind a guy and watched him shoot his brother, two men high on testosterone fighting over a woman attending a party we were all at.
Ban automatic assault weapons yes, but I grew up hunting with parents and do not understand why some feel they need automatic assault weapons for hunting? Is your sportsmanship skill set that low that you need multiple bullets to bring down the animal your hunting?
We were taught how to use and to respect the gun we were firing, the term 'weapons' were not part of the language back then.
The NRA is not responsible for shootings in the USA, they do however need to man up to the fact that automatic assault guns are WEAPONS not recreational HUNTING or SPORTS guns!
By the way - I'm a Democrat - not all of us hate guns when they are used in a responsible way.
Many year ago I stood behind a guy and watched him shoot his brother, two men high on testosterone fighting over a woman attending a party we were all at.
Ban automatic assault weapons yes, but I grew up hunting with parents and do not understand why some feel they need automatic assault weapons for hunting? Is your sportsmanship skill set that low that you need multiple bullets to bring down the animal your hunting?
We were taught how to use and to respect the gun we were firing, the term 'weapons' were not part of the language back then.
The NRA is not responsible for shootings in the USA, they do however need to man up to the fact that automatic assault guns are WEAPONS not recreational HUNTING or SPORTS guns!
By the way - I'm a Democrat - not all of us hate guns when they are used in a responsible way.
7
Dear NYT Editorial board,
While you point out the obvious regarding the NRA's complicity in the horrible massacres that are happening, you fail to also lay responsibility on the cowardly lawmakers in congress, and yourselves.
Where is the voice of the "free press" in exposing the republican senators and congressmen who refuse to responsibly end access to assault weapons.
Yes, the NRA is culpable, and so are YOU!
While you point out the obvious regarding the NRA's complicity in the horrible massacres that are happening, you fail to also lay responsibility on the cowardly lawmakers in congress, and yourselves.
Where is the voice of the "free press" in exposing the republican senators and congressmen who refuse to responsibly end access to assault weapons.
Yes, the NRA is culpable, and so are YOU!
5
The NYTimes somehow does not understand that this is not a one dimensional problem. It is multidimensional- Jihadisim ginned up by ISIS and their safe havens and access to social media; the funders of ISIS/Jihadism (states and people), the root of Jihadist culture- Saudi Wahhabism and Saudi funded Wahhabist inspired Mosques and Immams; easy immigration/ lax vetting of immigrants, and laws in the US and other western countries that allow known potential threats to still buy guns. A semi automatic pistol can hold nine bullets; an 1850's revolver has six. With some practice and ammo clips each one of these can be reloaded in about 5 seconds. Where is the real problems here?
3
An AR-15 with a 30 round magazine would require 6 reloads which take time.
1
While we're at it, let's ban alcohol and prostitution. Oh wait, didn't we try that awhile back? How did it work out?
7
Banning pot worked quiet well. It put a lot of blacks in jail. If we ban assault weapons, we can put a lot of crazy conservatives in jail too. Sure, banning works well.
4
The NRA is not beyond reason, they are simply evil.
12
The NRA defends the 2nd Amendment because it is the cornerstone of the political power given to the People of the United States. It ensures that the powerful central government will honor its obligations to civil rights, the democratic process and the rule of law. The 2nd Amendment gives truth to the 1st Amendment and all the Bill of Rights. Without it, the Bill of Rights are merely a statement of ideals.
The NRA is demonized constantly by many Americans, yet their advocacy of the 2nd Amendment protects the very rights that these people take for granted under the 1st, 4th, and 5th Amendments.
The ACLU fights tooth and nail for the 1st Amendment and even if I don't agree with them always, I would never demonize them. I am grateful for the efforts. The NRA is the oldest civil rights organization in America. You should say thanks....
The NRA is demonized constantly by many Americans, yet their advocacy of the 2nd Amendment protects the very rights that these people take for granted under the 1st, 4th, and 5th Amendments.
The ACLU fights tooth and nail for the 1st Amendment and even if I don't agree with them always, I would never demonize them. I am grateful for the efforts. The NRA is the oldest civil rights organization in America. You should say thanks....
1
I would like to point out the New York Times complicity, in league with Barack Obama, in creating the monstrous terror organization known as ISIL or ISIS. Obama's policy of abandonment in Iraq, territory which was won and then pacified with American blood even as we deposed the man responsible for the deaths of more Muslims than any man who ever lived, was pathetically short-sighted and has strengthened ISIL's reach, wealth and prestige enormously. It gives haters like the terrorist in Orlando something to emulate as they go and shoot up what appears to them to be a decadent and godless society. The New York Times was complicit by supporting Obama's policy of withdrawal and we are now losing the war on terror for the simple reason that if you are not winning the war, you are losing it against such a loathsome and murderous foe.
So man up, NYT. The problem is not lone gunmen. It's the fact that the heart of the beast is still beating because of Obama's--- and your--- feckless indifference which arises out of some kind of quasi-pacifism and disdain for America's presence in the world.
So man up, NYT. The problem is not lone gunmen. It's the fact that the heart of the beast is still beating because of Obama's--- and your--- feckless indifference which arises out of some kind of quasi-pacifism and disdain for America's presence in the world.
5
I think the media is to blame for the continuation of all these murderous rampages. We read about them, we see the faces of the victims healthy and in happier times, and the perpetrator. But really the stories are sanitized of the absolute horror of the incident. Yes, we heard about all those school children killed, but for some, they really needed to see the the carnage, the blood and the lifeless bodies.
It's a lot like the war mongers who are filled with patriotism but never see the grunts shattered bodies doing the fighting. Those people standing on their second amendment gun rights have a hollow argument against a photograph showing the real cost of their right to own a machine gun.
It's a lot like the war mongers who are filled with patriotism but never see the grunts shattered bodies doing the fighting. Those people standing on their second amendment gun rights have a hollow argument against a photograph showing the real cost of their right to own a machine gun.
9
This should be simple.
Through the purchase of Members of Congress, the NRA facilitates the purchase of weapons of mass destruction by terrorists.
Name the NRA as a terrorist organization.
Through the purchase of Members of Congress, the NRA facilitates the purchase of weapons of mass destruction by terrorists.
Name the NRA as a terrorist organization.
15
"A heavily armed populace is the best way to keep America safe and make money for the NRA
1
You do know the NRA is a non-profit organization
2
And provide a wedge issue to divide people for the left. You know like getting folks to hate their political opponents, politically correct identity politics with fear as the motivation? Study Stalin and Hitler. When Americans are urged to fight each other they're weaker for politically subversive programming to divide them even further. A disarmed populace at each others throats is the ultimate aim.
There have been a few deadly terrorist attacks since 9/11. Changing our gun laws is sensible, but not to limit a crime that barely exists. Barring 500,000 "possible terrorists' from owning guns is an unfair stigmatizing of Muslims, which is why the proposal has been challenged in two class actions. Terrorist attacks are like billion dollar Ponzi schemes. They almost never happen, but they always make the news,. In the case of terrorism, the Times wants to restrict all kinds of individual rights. There was a time when it was Republicans who violated rights in the name of law and order. Democrats used to be more reasonable.
3
He was a registered Democrat so don't forget the Democratic Party's obvious complicity in instilling hate towards Americans in this disturbed man.
7
When the NRA is successfully penalized in court, then they may change their attitude.
Does Mary L. Bonauto want to branch out in a new direction?
Does Mary L. Bonauto want to branch out in a new direction?
Here's an idea I think everybody could get behind:
How about making semi-automatic rifles with detachable magazines subject to the same background checks, ATF interviews, and other restrictions as fully automatic firearms? That way, they're not banned, but they are much, much harder to get and anybody who does get one will have been fully vetted.
Or, is that idea too practical and not politically driven enough?
How about making semi-automatic rifles with detachable magazines subject to the same background checks, ATF interviews, and other restrictions as fully automatic firearms? That way, they're not banned, but they are much, much harder to get and anybody who does get one will have been fully vetted.
Or, is that idea too practical and not politically driven enough?
7
That way, they're not banned, but they are much, much harder to get and anybody who does get one will have been fully vetted.
==================
The Orlando shooter was a licensed armed security guard. He passed two background checks to get his weapons. He was not on any no-fly or watch list and had passed two FBI investigations.
He was about as vetted as anybody could be.
==================
The Orlando shooter was a licensed armed security guard. He passed two background checks to get his weapons. He was not on any no-fly or watch list and had passed two FBI investigations.
He was about as vetted as anybody could be.
1
I'll bet the old guard Communists wished they had a weapon when Uncle Joe came calling.
One of the NRA arguments goes: "Guns don't kill people; people do." When a child shoots himself or herself or a parent or friend... who is the responsible party? People don't usually think that an evil act has been committed by the child. Yet, hardly anyone seems to think that it is a bad idea to keep guns out of the hands of children. Why can't we think of a sociopathic mass-shooter as irresponsible, at the very least, and keep guns out of their hands, too?
9
Who decides, someone with an agenda? Who watches the watchers? Your ability to take the next free breath was paid for with the blood of thousands of people that stood up and paid the price so you could pretend to be Hamlet.
I suppose the most appropriate choice now is for Trump to name Wayne LaPierre as his VP. Crazy begets insanity. Then everything can be settled with AK-47s. Life would be so much simpler.
7
Maybe Obama could just declare martial law and get rid of all your enemies at once! Then because you'd still be dissatisfied they'd have to come and get you. The feds would have weapons but you won't, just hot air and they'd soon take care of that.
1
In Chicago, Tyquan Lee was only 9 years-old when he was shot dead by gang-bangers. On average, there is a shooting every two (2) hours in the president's home town. The equivalent of a Pulse Nightclub shooting every other day. The Establishment Media refuses to cover the shootings in Chicago because it damages the Progressive Brand. Can't have that!
2
The real terrorists in this discussion are the jack-booted thugs of the NRA, who hold all of America hostage with their disgusting worship of the right to reduce as many human beongs as possible to hamburger in as short a time period as one can. Wake up, folks. Wayne LaPierre and his minions are also the "enemy." Their evil policies have caused the deaths of many more thousands of Americans than so-called "Islamist radicals."
19
At least they'll be some defense against ill educated leftwing nitwits that are responsible for destroying freedom and will be the first ones lined up against the wall by their well armed "comrades" when they give up with a whimper.
1
"Some Extremists Fire Guns and Other Extremists Promote Guns" like the NRA psychopaths, the KKK, and other right-wing gangs. Senator's Murphy's approach is the path to follow in the future to force GOP extremists to act, such as the president's nominee for SCOTUS.
The Orlando massacre finally has become the NRA's Murphys Law.
The Orlando massacre finally has become the NRA's Murphys Law.
7
It's nigh-on impossible to prove complicity or conspiracy. That's why it's so easy to vilify someone with the label 'conspiracy nut'. I haven't heard the label 'complicity nut' bandied about so far, but it seems that is the default category the 'all weapons for all people all the time' crowd would like to assign to observant, conscientious people concerned about the availability of assault weapons. I for one would like my government to have intimate knowledge of any citizen who manufactures, sells, trades, or owns assault weapons. I would like my government to treat assault weapons with the same inspection and tracking that it uses for nitroglycerin, for cyanide, or nerve gas.
4
That silence is also killing America's image to the world as well.
7
If the killer's first ex-wife had reported and pressed charges for his domestic abuse he would have a record that would have prevented him from legally buying a gun. Apparently a significant segment of society thinks we don't have such laws already.
In many of the mass murders close examination of the details show that there were people who knew the killers and could have prevented the massacres if they recognized their responsibility and acted when they should have. This is true of Newtown, Virginia Tech, Aurora, Colorado, Charleston, and Orlando. The immediate reaction and claim that a lack of federal laws is the cause of such incidents relieves people of their individual responsibility to act when they see that something is wrong.
It's not my problem. There's a law for that. Then we need another law, and another.
In many of the mass murders close examination of the details show that there were people who knew the killers and could have prevented the massacres if they recognized their responsibility and acted when they should have. This is true of Newtown, Virginia Tech, Aurora, Colorado, Charleston, and Orlando. The immediate reaction and claim that a lack of federal laws is the cause of such incidents relieves people of their individual responsibility to act when they see that something is wrong.
It's not my problem. There's a law for that. Then we need another law, and another.
This has always been an easy issue. Why would any Americans except criminals be concerned about 1.) prohibiting assault weapons in the country; 2.) universal background checks; and 3.) registration of all guns? We require it for anything else that is so dangerous like cars, drugs, etc. It may be a minor inconvenience, but these measures would not hamper the legal use of weapons for anyone - only terrorists and criminals would be concerned.
The notion that providing easier access to weapons than cough syrup was cogently made by a related Times article that showed how much of an outlier the US is compared to other developed countries. Homicide accounts for a hugely disproportionate number of deaths in this country compared to other countries with easy availability of guns the only difference. Clearly they are related. I would also point out that our enormous homicide rate tells only half the story. Suicide by guns kills more than homicides and is also disproportionate. Finally accidental deaths are much higher due to high gun ownership.
It is time to ask the gun lobby and NRA why any thoughtful person would oppose these simple fixes. NOTE TO THE UNREASONABLE: Nobody is talking about banning handguns or limiting possession by legal users.
The notion that providing easier access to weapons than cough syrup was cogently made by a related Times article that showed how much of an outlier the US is compared to other developed countries. Homicide accounts for a hugely disproportionate number of deaths in this country compared to other countries with easy availability of guns the only difference. Clearly they are related. I would also point out that our enormous homicide rate tells only half the story. Suicide by guns kills more than homicides and is also disproportionate. Finally accidental deaths are much higher due to high gun ownership.
It is time to ask the gun lobby and NRA why any thoughtful person would oppose these simple fixes. NOTE TO THE UNREASONABLE: Nobody is talking about banning handguns or limiting possession by legal users.
1
Even for NYT, well known for its stance against the citizens' right to bear arms, it is gong too far, to attribute to N.R.A. complicity in terrorism. I am neither a member nor supporter of N.R.A., but I do not think that any other solution, except for much stricter controls at the point of sale, would help restrict the availability of firearms to criminals.
5
Anyone with an ounce of perception can see what is at work here. When you begin by damning an organization that has as its members millions of peaceful, law-abiding Americans, it isn't hard to imagine an agenda that includes banning and confiscation of all guns. I laugh like hell whenever I read a liberal response to anything that looks like limiting abortion. Don't people understand that "limiting" constitutional rights in the name of "reasonableness" is the first step on the road to stripping us of those rights?
4
Stop calling the NRA a "gun right's" organization. They are a marketing arm of the guns and ammunition manufacturers, period. They only use "gun rights" arguments because they seem to work.
Their goal is increased or maintained profits for gun and ammunition manufacturers. They have no other goals. Why a quite wealthy American group cannot nullify their political clout by matching all political donations of the NRA to their sensible gun legislation opponents is beyond me.
Their goal is increased or maintained profits for gun and ammunition manufacturers. They have no other goals. Why a quite wealthy American group cannot nullify their political clout by matching all political donations of the NRA to their sensible gun legislation opponents is beyond me.
3
The AR-15 is not technically an "assault" rifle but the damage it can do and has done is huge. I don't understand why anyone would want such a weapon. I also don't know of anyone who hunts with a weapon like an AR-15. So why do they manufacture them? The NRA can back a ban on this type of weapon as well as a limit on magazine capacity. But they are afraid that once such legislation is passed, it will lead to me restrictions, such as no guns at all. We are not Australia and I am tired of hearing about them. Two difference countries with two different pasts.
The NRA is not afraid that hunting rifles or pistols will be banned; the NRA is concerned with the enormous profits engendered from the sale of popular semi-automatic military style weapons. That is why they lobby Congress; that is why they fund campaigns for Congressmen/women who are willing to support the NRA. Background checks will have no effect on those who sell online, or out of their cars. There was a ban on these weapons and it was allowed to sunset. The ban needs to be put back in place. If this Congress will not act to protect the citizens it represents, it acts for a minority of the general public: the gun lobby. I don't accept the random mass murder of innocents; I don't know anyone who does. Who in Congress accepts this? We need to know who they are; we need to know how they vote on assault weapons for sale to the general public.
2
The editors claim that millions of US citizens are complicit in terrorism, largely through the organizations to which they belong and their mindless marching to the tune of entrenched leaders.
Hmm. It seems that fathers, mothers, and children of all stripes and relations are as complicit with terrorism through concerted efforts in ways that look a lot like what we see in members of those things we call terrorist organizations.
Are those who promote the use of guns and gun violence (directly or not) as the preferred way to resolve differences indistinguishable from those criminals that hide behind the Quran and spread not peace, but stir up fear? The NRA does not spread peace. The NRA and its leadership seem to stoke a fear in the American public that is no different from the fear stoked by ISIS.
How again is the NRA different from ISIS? Should I stand my ground as I ask for an answer?
Hmm. It seems that fathers, mothers, and children of all stripes and relations are as complicit with terrorism through concerted efforts in ways that look a lot like what we see in members of those things we call terrorist organizations.
Are those who promote the use of guns and gun violence (directly or not) as the preferred way to resolve differences indistinguishable from those criminals that hide behind the Quran and spread not peace, but stir up fear? The NRA does not spread peace. The NRA and its leadership seem to stoke a fear in the American public that is no different from the fear stoked by ISIS.
How again is the NRA different from ISIS? Should I stand my ground as I ask for an answer?
4
Yes...NRA members aren't committing mass murder. ISIS is. Glad I could help.
2
The NRA places profits before people and uses the big lie of protecting second amendment rights to enlist the support of a gullible and naive set of voters, all the while maintaining a stable of corrupt and immoral congressman and senators on their payroll. Mr Ryan and mr. McConnel should let us know how many additional murders it will take for them to renounce their allegiance to that criminal organization. Isn't over 10,000 avoidable gun deaths a year enough?
2
Please list every GOP Congressman that is against gun control and their contact information. We can let them know what we think of their complicity.
4
Yes, Kristine, then take the next step; vote. Vote against Congressmen who vote against gun control, and gun safety. Most Americans watch Movies. "Runaway Jury", a very effective one from a John Grisham book (originally about tobacco), dramatically portrays an enormous judgement against a Gun Manufacturer. It's still available, and should be shown in Movie Theaters just before the November, 2016 Elections. American voters could pretend they're casting a jury vote, and make fiction a reality
1
The right wing and NRA members beholden to the gun manufacturers and illiterate crazies who harp on mental illness as the problem do not understand that: mental illness is a biological problem and cannot be prevented, or in many cases completely cured, but access and easy availability of high-power guns is a choice that can be and should be revoked. Banning guns is the ONLY solution. Developed countries with NO gun violence are not full of stupid people. The world laughs at our continued stupidity nad how a civilized society can be held hostage by a small right-wing radical faction. Shame on us.
2
I think President Obama should extend a gracious invitation to Wayne LaPierre and key Republicans to join him on one of his visits to console the families of the dead.
6
Everyone blames the legislators for not passing gun control legislation and rightly so, but the main responsibility still resides with the voters of America who do not insist that their representatives ignore the gun lobby and do the right thing.
6
The corporations that make big bucks from making killing machines of course want no constraints on their profits. Neither do the oil corporations want constraints on their profiting from poisoning the earth beyond repair. Their lackeys in Congress, the state legislatures and in the executive branches are also complicit. We need to build mass movements to throw those bums out and replace them with humans who are not greedy.
2
What about NYT's own complicity in terrorism?
It is no accident that the shooters re-enact the same exact scenario every time - lone shooter, gun-free zone, going for maximum body count, no clear demand, committing suicide, even using the same brands of guns (AR15s, Glocks).
There is no way crazy people from all sorts of different groups and backgrounds, with different motives, all magically decide to do the same "active shooter" scenario on their own.
It's because TV pushes this scenario to them 24/7. Monkey see/monkey do, this effect is well-established in research, and this is why e.g. news coverage of suicides is traditionally discouraged.
There is no point going after the tools, if you don't fix the root cause of the disease. Even if we manage to remove every last gun in-country (which is absolutely impossible), mass media will simply switch to covering mass poisonings, or blowing up propane tankers in tunnels, or dropping power lines into pools, what have you.
If we fix the mass media, we'll do away with killing sprees. Probably have a whole lot less terrorism, as well - after all, what's the point of terrorist plots if they no longer cause month-long worldwide panic? If ISIS is no longer a celebrity pushed off of every TV screen, where will they get new recruits?
Dixi.
It is no accident that the shooters re-enact the same exact scenario every time - lone shooter, gun-free zone, going for maximum body count, no clear demand, committing suicide, even using the same brands of guns (AR15s, Glocks).
There is no way crazy people from all sorts of different groups and backgrounds, with different motives, all magically decide to do the same "active shooter" scenario on their own.
It's because TV pushes this scenario to them 24/7. Monkey see/monkey do, this effect is well-established in research, and this is why e.g. news coverage of suicides is traditionally discouraged.
There is no point going after the tools, if you don't fix the root cause of the disease. Even if we manage to remove every last gun in-country (which is absolutely impossible), mass media will simply switch to covering mass poisonings, or blowing up propane tankers in tunnels, or dropping power lines into pools, what have you.
If we fix the mass media, we'll do away with killing sprees. Probably have a whole lot less terrorism, as well - after all, what's the point of terrorist plots if they no longer cause month-long worldwide panic? If ISIS is no longer a celebrity pushed off of every TV screen, where will they get new recruits?
Dixi.
7
According to some estimates, we already have at least one gun for every man, woman, and child in this country.
With so many guns, if it really were true that it takes a good guy with a gun to stop a bad guy with a gun, wouldn't we have already seen ample proof of that? In the NRA's opinion, how many more guns will we need for that nostrum to actually work? Two per person? Ten? And just how many more Orlandos must we suffer through in the meantime before that "solution" takes effect?
Some of us are not really willing to wait.
With so many guns, if it really were true that it takes a good guy with a gun to stop a bad guy with a gun, wouldn't we have already seen ample proof of that? In the NRA's opinion, how many more guns will we need for that nostrum to actually work? Two per person? Ten? And just how many more Orlandos must we suffer through in the meantime before that "solution" takes effect?
Some of us are not really willing to wait.
8
16% of mass shootings are stopped by private citizens, according to FBI study. 28% by police.
The rest end because the shooter is done - then kills himself or leaves.
The "citizen" numbers would be higher if people were not disarmed.
People at Orlando, Sandy Hook, Ft Hood, VT, Columbine, etc. etc. were all disarmed by liberal regulation. Did it help?
The rest end because the shooter is done - then kills himself or leaves.
The "citizen" numbers would be higher if people were not disarmed.
People at Orlando, Sandy Hook, Ft Hood, VT, Columbine, etc. etc. were all disarmed by liberal regulation. Did it help?
4
With so many guns, if it really were true that it takes a good guy with a gun to stop a bad guy with a gun, wouldn't we have already seen ample proof of that?
=====================
Actually we have seen proof of that in that the gun homicide rate has been falling for 20+ years and is half of what it was in 1993.
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/05/07/gun-homicide-rate-down-49-sinc...
Also a CDC study says that defensive gun use is at least as common as criminal use:
Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year, in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008.
http://www.nap.edu/read/18319/chapter/1?page=
=====================
Actually we have seen proof of that in that the gun homicide rate has been falling for 20+ years and is half of what it was in 1993.
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/05/07/gun-homicide-rate-down-49-sinc...
Also a CDC study says that defensive gun use is at least as common as criminal use:
Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year, in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008.
http://www.nap.edu/read/18319/chapter/1?page=
1
Too many of our representatives are afraid of or beholded to the NRA to do the right thing here. Too much money from the gun lobby and too many weak representatives. We the voters need to send a strong message each and every time we have the opportunity.
6
This evening, as I do most every Thursday evening, I will be having dinner with my mother in her nursing home dining room, surrounded by perhaps 120 others aged 65 and up. I know full well that it is only a matter of time before some individual exercises his NRA supported right to mow down a room full of the elderly. Perhaps tonight it will be my turn.
The fatality rate will be very high, as the elderly with their walkers, wheel chairs, and oxygen tanks while be unable to outrun the shooter. Many of the wounded will die of complications. A few will die of heart attacks.
Paul Ryan will offer a moment of silence before depositing his next check from the NRA. Voters will go to the polls and reelect over 95% of the incumbents who did nothing after Sandy Hook, the Pulse, and every mass shooting before and after. The stock prices of arms manufactures will jump 5% in anticipation of the wave of new gun and ammo purchases that result. The CDC will still be banned from any study of anything gun related. The AMA's statement that gun violence is a major health issue will be ignored. The NRA will insist that if only I or my mother had been armed with a Glock it all would have ended with only the villain dead.
Full disclosure: I have access to and regularly fire semiautomatic weapons, including an AR-15, at an open-air range with my son, a police officer. The only thing a 30 round chip adds to is ammo costs.
Death will go on as usual. American exceptionalism.
The fatality rate will be very high, as the elderly with their walkers, wheel chairs, and oxygen tanks while be unable to outrun the shooter. Many of the wounded will die of complications. A few will die of heart attacks.
Paul Ryan will offer a moment of silence before depositing his next check from the NRA. Voters will go to the polls and reelect over 95% of the incumbents who did nothing after Sandy Hook, the Pulse, and every mass shooting before and after. The stock prices of arms manufactures will jump 5% in anticipation of the wave of new gun and ammo purchases that result. The CDC will still be banned from any study of anything gun related. The AMA's statement that gun violence is a major health issue will be ignored. The NRA will insist that if only I or my mother had been armed with a Glock it all would have ended with only the villain dead.
Full disclosure: I have access to and regularly fire semiautomatic weapons, including an AR-15, at an open-air range with my son, a police officer. The only thing a 30 round chip adds to is ammo costs.
Death will go on as usual. American exceptionalism.
7
Disgusted, angry, frustrated. These words only partially describe how I feel as an American. I am embarrassed and ashamed. How many innocent American citizens have to die from gun violence before our do nothing government does something. The Democratic filibuster was a start which has now been met by do nothing roll over and yes 'play dead' Paul Ryan. The same man who touts pro life apparently is comfortable with the possibility that from the moment of birth that life can be taken away while at school, church, the mall, playing in the front yard, any public arena etc. An unborn child has greater right to life in this country than one who has been born. The Republican refusal to even discuss reasonable gun legislation is disgusting. This November we have not only the opportunity to vote for President but to vote OUT all the do nothing so called representatives.
9
I am embarrassed and ashamed. How many innocent American citizens have to die from gun violence before our do nothing government does something.
================
Let's see, Mateen passed an extensive background check to be a licensed armed guard. The company he worked for is a subcontractor to DHS. He passed two background checks to buy the two weapons he used. The FBI did two separate investigations on his jihadi connections.
I guess that's your do-nothing government at work.
================
Let's see, Mateen passed an extensive background check to be a licensed armed guard. The company he worked for is a subcontractor to DHS. He passed two background checks to buy the two weapons he used. The FBI did two separate investigations on his jihadi connections.
I guess that's your do-nothing government at work.
1
To wit - "While the nation suffered through the shock of another bloody massacre, on Thursday every Senate Republican except Mark Kirk of Illinois voted against legislation to prevent people on the F.B.I.’s consolidated terrorist watchlist from purchasing guns or explosives." NYT, 4Dec2015. I ask the Times to name names along side those murdered until something is done.
1
OK lets get things straight if you have the guts to say that the NRA is complicit with Terrorism, how about the Republican Party? Not only is the Republican Party the main enablers of the NRA & hence the gun manufacturers they are also the main impediment to really cut back on carbon emissions & do anything meaningful to try & stop Climate Change. Weather over the coming decades will continue to get more Wild with bigger Hurricanes, more Tornadoes & Wildfires & the continued rising of sea levels thanks mainly to the ability of the Republicans to block any meaningful steps to be taken.
Failure to act on Climate Change will lead to more deaths not only here in the U.S. but around the World. Failure to act on any meaningful gun legislation will lead to more deaths around OUR Country. Senseless, preventable deaths are the hallmark of Terrorism. Senseless, preventable deaths are the hallmark of the Republican Party!
Failure to act on Climate Change will lead to more deaths not only here in the U.S. but around the World. Failure to act on any meaningful gun legislation will lead to more deaths around OUR Country. Senseless, preventable deaths are the hallmark of Terrorism. Senseless, preventable deaths are the hallmark of the Republican Party!
1
These appeals to reason and common sense are a waste of time. The NRA has even blocked research on gun violence, which is just as well since we all know what the conclusion would be: a bunch of liberals declaring that getting shot is bad for your health. These are the same people who said tobacco was bad for you.
1
This is such nonsense. The Florida killer, a radical muslim, was NOT an NRA Member, WAS a registered Democrat, had PASSED background checks AND was using a legal weapon (not an automatic weapon as some have said). Some simpletons say "smaller magizines" as if using 2 instead of 4 would really matter. Equally absurd is the "let's register bullets" idea.
As noted in the WSJ when the killer earlier went to buy body armor the shop owner was concerned, and maybe that IS the approach we should take. Let the gun shop owners have a hot line to the FBI to report any concerns for fast follow up. Gun shop owners want to stay in business - let them help us.
The Pols are going to make a lot of noise - again. All such nonsense in a country which already has over 300M guns.
Personally I am way more concerned about getting hit by a stray bullett as the drug gangs fight it out in our cities than I am about ISIS. But BLM so we really cannot focus our police on them.
As noted in the WSJ when the killer earlier went to buy body armor the shop owner was concerned, and maybe that IS the approach we should take. Let the gun shop owners have a hot line to the FBI to report any concerns for fast follow up. Gun shop owners want to stay in business - let them help us.
The Pols are going to make a lot of noise - again. All such nonsense in a country which already has over 300M guns.
Personally I am way more concerned about getting hit by a stray bullett as the drug gangs fight it out in our cities than I am about ISIS. But BLM so we really cannot focus our police on them.
6
After writing a comment about the NRA this morning, I found it very disquieting to receive a robo call from the organization urgently calling for me to support Senator John McCain on vetoing legislation that might threaten American's rights to be free of any controls over who buys guns, and what guns they buy.
7
Mr. Mateen was able to kill 49 people largely because the assault rifle he was using could fire 30-round clips as fast as he could pull the trigger. No civilian anywhere should be allowed to have that ability.
===================
Magazine size (sorry, they aren't "clips") was really not much of a factor here as the police left him alone with his victims for three hours.
===================
Magazine size (sorry, they aren't "clips") was really not much of a factor here as the police left him alone with his victims for three hours.
2
The NRA controls the GOP. The GOP controls the Congress. The NRA controls the Congress. The argument by the NRA leadership that ANY gun legislation is a threat to ALL gun ownership is absurd, just as opioid legislation is not a threat to all drugs. There is NO legitimate reason for general access to weapons of war such as the AK-15 whose sole purpose is mass mayhem. Period. The bought-and-paid-for Congressional leadership has the blood of innocent victims on its hands. They need to be held accountable now and in November.
1
They had blood on their hands after Sandy Hook. Congress allowed the ban on military style assault weapons to sunset. They opened the market for these weapons of mass murder. The Republican Party will die the way the Whig Party died. They refuse to bring back a tax Eisenhower put in place; that tax forced corporations to choose between investing in new business and jobs, or pay an almost 90% tax on profits. The country did fine under that tax structure; we grew and prospered. Now? Manufacturing gone; jobs gone; education and infrastructure underfunded; huge corporate profits kept overseas; a plutocracy in charge of Congress via gerrymandered Districts. That is where we are now; and, it is not sustainable. Global markets are saturated with unsold products; banks are sitting on assets and not lending to new businesses; the very rich are buying homes in gated communities, or apartments in skyscrapers. Does that tell us something about the plutocracy who now govern us? We have ignorant Russian oligarchs squatting in New York city high rises. New York city has many poor children and families living in shelters, moving from one to another, unable to provide a stable address for school enrollment. Is that disgusting enough? It ought to be. Just as America's record for the continuing mass murder of its own citizens ought to be disgusting enough.
Nothing will happen. Our lawmakers find it perfectly acceptable for someone to walk into a school and murder first graders. They are cowards, more concerned with an NRA sponsored primary challenge than doing their jobs. Mass shootings are now the norm in our society. That's the way it is.
8
You are suggesting our lawmakers prioritize the fiscal entreaties of self-interested industry lobbyists below the well-being and wishes of their constituencies. Is that actually possible ?
In a striking fit of irony, it is entirely feasible that the public's acceptance of Donald Trump is a protest to accomplish exactly that.
In a striking fit of irony, it is entirely feasible that the public's acceptance of Donald Trump is a protest to accomplish exactly that.
It is unfortunately the case that for far too many Republicans and their voters, not having to wait an extra day or week to get their hands on what is essentially a machine gun, is more important to them than common sense laws that would let law enforcement do their job of stopping terror attacks.
The NRA likes to brag about its membership numbers -- 5 million by its own count. If there is indeed power in these numbers, then the 15 pro-gun-control organizations Wikipedia says there are in the United States should rethink how they can counter this power. They should pool their resources and membership under one group. Only when the anti-gun factions can buy their own Congressmen and women will gun-control legislation have a fighting chance.
Liberals are up in arms when there is a remote suggestion to put 'hurdles' in the path of abortion (which, some people consider, is killing babies unborn) but are gung-ho about restricting what is clearly enumerated as a right in our constitution, the supreme law.
Any restriction that the Congress may pass, which is a big MAY, is going to be challenged all the way up to supreme court, and will not pass muster there.
Unless our second amendment is repealed, your proposal has no prayer in this country.
Any restriction that the Congress may pass, which is a big MAY, is going to be challenged all the way up to supreme court, and will not pass muster there.
Unless our second amendment is repealed, your proposal has no prayer in this country.
3
When will common sense prevail? How many more innocent people have to die? How many more families will suffer unbearable loss? Assault rifles do not belong in the hands of the public. High-capacity magazines do not belong in the hands of the public. Keeping assault weapons and ammunition out of the hands of the general public is not a violation of Second Amendment rights.
Don't you find it fascinating that Donald Trump is going to meet with the NRA and ask its permission to change his stance on gun control? I always thought it would be the NRA asking our elected representatives and presidential candidates to change their position, not the other way around.
3
So you want the F.B.I. to have the ability to deny the 2nd Amendment right to anyone it "judges" to be connected to terrorism, as though police suspicion alone ought to be the legal standard for suspending a person's Constitutional rights.Please let federal judges, not police or the F.B.I., in due process procedure under law, decide whether to suspend an American's Constitutional Rights.
Otherwise your editorial against our 2nd Amendment rights turns the law on its head. And the complicity for lone-wolf terrorist gunmen rests with you, former First Lady Hillary Clinton, President Obama and legislators for enabling police to act as judges of Constitutional protections.
None of the victims, by your logic, of the shooting ought to have had the ability to support a badly outgunned security guard by shooting Mateen. Only the law enforcement, in your view, ought to have had the 12 highly armed responders who outgunned him - even as that rescue needed hours earlier was much too late to save the hundreds wounded, or the 49 casualties.
Don't most of us wish that an armed bystander on the beach at Disney World ought to had a gun to help the parents of a 2-year-old-boy trying in vain to save him from an alligator?
To use a phrase your board may recall from Martin Luther King's Selma March, so-called "outsider agitators" protesting racial oppression, would have had no right to protest once the local police suspected that they expressed opposition to racial injustice.
Otherwise your editorial against our 2nd Amendment rights turns the law on its head. And the complicity for lone-wolf terrorist gunmen rests with you, former First Lady Hillary Clinton, President Obama and legislators for enabling police to act as judges of Constitutional protections.
None of the victims, by your logic, of the shooting ought to have had the ability to support a badly outgunned security guard by shooting Mateen. Only the law enforcement, in your view, ought to have had the 12 highly armed responders who outgunned him - even as that rescue needed hours earlier was much too late to save the hundreds wounded, or the 49 casualties.
Don't most of us wish that an armed bystander on the beach at Disney World ought to had a gun to help the parents of a 2-year-old-boy trying in vain to save him from an alligator?
To use a phrase your board may recall from Martin Luther King's Selma March, so-called "outsider agitators" protesting racial oppression, would have had no right to protest once the local police suspected that they expressed opposition to racial injustice.
2
I just want to be clear here. You think everyone in the Magic Kingdom should be carrying a weapon and ammunition in case of an alligator attack?
Do you realize I can only ask you this anonymously because face-to-face I would feel too threatened to engage you in conversation?
I guess you win then. I can't play poker with someone who holds all the cards. I prefer not to carry a firearm in my everyday life; so I guess essentially my only option is to hope you're nearby and will save me or to lay down and die. My odds aren't looking too good.
Do you realize I can only ask you this anonymously because face-to-face I would feel too threatened to engage you in conversation?
I guess you win then. I can't play poker with someone who holds all the cards. I prefer not to carry a firearm in my everyday life; so I guess essentially my only option is to hope you're nearby and will save me or to lay down and die. My odds aren't looking too good.
It is past time for journalists to inform us about the gun industry. We should know who manufactured each weapon of terror. Our scorn is directed to the NRA, but the NRA is a shield not a manufacturer. Inform us about the business of making guns - shift the spotlight onto the makers please.
1
The right to bear arms may be needed by police authorities, and by the military. The right to bear arms may be used by families for their protection. The right to bear arms is also used by criminals, the mafia, the Mexican Mafia, drug cartels, drug traffickers, street gangs, the "hell angel's" and other motorcycle gangs, rapists, aryan nation racist groups, skinhead racist groups, KKK, neo nazi groups, and other criminal groups. These criminals will always have weapons legally or illegally.
The 18th amendment to the constitution didn't work as booze was sold illegally and Americans continued drinking booze illegally. So the government made booze legal again. Marijuana (pot) has been illegal, but now the state of Washington made it legal. Perhaps heroin and cocaine are next in line to be made legal. Legalizing homosexuality also legalizes pedophilia. So making guns illegal will work, right?
We can not cover every contingency. A perfect example are terrorists. After 9/11 all airports, passengers, and luggage are searched, the pilots cabin is locked, and Osama Bin Laden is dead. This means no more terrorists attacks, right?
School children could be psychologically tested from grades 1 to 12, but that would violate their constitutional rights.
Lastly, the government and the media needs to stop telling psychiatrists and psychologists what forms of therapy they need to use or not use, and what disorders to remove from the DSM. That nonsense needs to stop.
The 18th amendment to the constitution didn't work as booze was sold illegally and Americans continued drinking booze illegally. So the government made booze legal again. Marijuana (pot) has been illegal, but now the state of Washington made it legal. Perhaps heroin and cocaine are next in line to be made legal. Legalizing homosexuality also legalizes pedophilia. So making guns illegal will work, right?
We can not cover every contingency. A perfect example are terrorists. After 9/11 all airports, passengers, and luggage are searched, the pilots cabin is locked, and Osama Bin Laden is dead. This means no more terrorists attacks, right?
School children could be psychologically tested from grades 1 to 12, but that would violate their constitutional rights.
Lastly, the government and the media needs to stop telling psychiatrists and psychologists what forms of therapy they need to use or not use, and what disorders to remove from the DSM. That nonsense needs to stop.
2
One more attempt by the NYT to change the conversation from Islamic terrorism to gun control. It won't work.
If you include the foiled attempt at the Houston cartoon convention, in 2015 and 2016 almost 40% of attempted mass shootings - and 66% of the casualties - have been from Islamic terrorists. (Per data compiled by Mother Jones magazine.) Now tell me again where the problem lies?
If you want movement on the right, we'll need to see some movement on the left. An acknowledgement of a Second Amendment right to own a gun might get some compromise on background checks. But as long as it appears that the ultimate goal is the effective repeal of the Second Amendment, I doubt there will be any compromise.
If you include the foiled attempt at the Houston cartoon convention, in 2015 and 2016 almost 40% of attempted mass shootings - and 66% of the casualties - have been from Islamic terrorists. (Per data compiled by Mother Jones magazine.) Now tell me again where the problem lies?
If you want movement on the right, we'll need to see some movement on the left. An acknowledgement of a Second Amendment right to own a gun might get some compromise on background checks. But as long as it appears that the ultimate goal is the effective repeal of the Second Amendment, I doubt there will be any compromise.
5
Look here, not THERE says the NYT, no intellectual honesty on display just simply not letting a tragedy go to waste to advance the gun control agenda. We have had radical Islamic attacks on US soil in Boston (remember that people they used a pressure cooker) and the Russians (the Russians!) told us they were bad, nothing happened we embraced them with every manner of state financial support. San Bernadino - the Obama administration told DHS they could not view the social media channels of those wishing to come into the US and if they were allowed to they would have seen what radical jihadists they were. Orlando - multiple FBI inquiries, passed many background checks, worked for a defense contractor. Charlie Hebdo, Paris theater, extremely tight gun control in France did nothing to prevent it. Terrorism is illegal, murder is illegal. All of these were dramatic failures of a government that lies to you, is incompetent and mired in political correctness and then tries to divert your attention to a device that what "leapt into the hands of an innocent, well intended person and just started going off?" You do not and never will be able to legislate criminals and terrorists into proper, legal behavior by deflecting their actions onto the tool they used to commit the actions and then go after the rights of law abiding citizens with more zeal than you did in preventing the terrorist and their actions.
7
It's time to confront the anachronistic nature of the Second 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." Regardless of where you stand on gun ownership, admit it, the notion of "a well regulated Militia" is nonsensical in today's day and age.
Repeal and replace, I say. And while we're at it, let's build in some common sense parameters to stop the carnage and to make this a safer society.
I for one am tired of being held hostage -- almost literally -- by this historical relic.
Repeal and replace, I say. And while we're at it, let's build in some common sense parameters to stop the carnage and to make this a safer society.
I for one am tired of being held hostage -- almost literally -- by this historical relic.
3
Amazingly, the NRA has succeeded in molding American life and policy around the "right" to bear arms. The 2nd amendment garners sacrosanct reverence, on par with freedom of speech and freedom of religion. This interpretation is wrong. There is a right to bear arms in your home. The right to bear arms in general is subject to "reasonable regulation." The first amendment rights may only be infringed for a compelling state interest.
We give the NRA permission to rule America. We elect people who are to cowed to fight them or the law that permits legalized bribery, enunciated by the Supreme Court in "Citizens United."
The NRA uses false, flawed and apocalyptic arguments of the need for guns, which become self fulfilling prophecy's. The NRA not only ignores that free access converts to more deaths, but uses it to argue we need more guns. The result is Orlando. Yes, it's the terrorist's responsibility, but if he didn't have the gun, he couldn't massacre.
Pardon the "Trumpian" expression, but "it time to get tough," and stop the slaughter.
We give the NRA permission to rule America. We elect people who are to cowed to fight them or the law that permits legalized bribery, enunciated by the Supreme Court in "Citizens United."
The NRA uses false, flawed and apocalyptic arguments of the need for guns, which become self fulfilling prophecy's. The NRA not only ignores that free access converts to more deaths, but uses it to argue we need more guns. The result is Orlando. Yes, it's the terrorist's responsibility, but if he didn't have the gun, he couldn't massacre.
Pardon the "Trumpian" expression, but "it time to get tough," and stop the slaughter.
2
Based on the NRA's logic there should be weapons training programs in Detroit and Chicago and Compton and heavy registration drives to arm At Risk young Black Men and teens against the dope dealers and criminals taking out innocent civilians. How 'bout arm the Moms programs? Unfortunately, none of those armed NRA members ever seen to be around to save the day. Why is that? Because when one carries a firearm it is an acknowledgement that you are prepared to kill another human being. Unlike the video games, it's Not Fun. A real Buzz kill on the dance floor or at the PTA or BBQ. Guns aren't going away and they don't wear out. But, we register our vehicles, have to insure and take tests to drive and wouldn't leave our vehicles with the keys in the ignition and running at the Walmart or Whole Foods. How is that infringing on our right to bear arms?
1
The necessity of a Democratic filibuster could not illustrate more starkly that elected republicans sit and vote for benefit of the Gun inductryl, and not for the benefit of thier constituents, I feel however, that "complicit" is too mild of a word, when (so many) murders have occurred. These elected officials knew well what they were doing when they acted on behalf of the NRA, when they were duty bound to act for those indiivials in thier states who voted fro them. This is traitorous, and resulted in deaths of we the people. Many folks feel that the men and women in office who accepted bribes from the arms industry are directly responsible for all the deaths from mass kill devices that they forced upon the public, that they made the decisions that unleashed this death upon us, for money, and thus they deserve prison time. They have bloody hands. This needs to be public discussion. No sane person could possibly argue that the AR-15s ... are in the hands of a "well regulated militia". The only thing well regulated about the arms industry, is how completely they own the soiled soul of the republican party. This needs view point needs LIGHT. They knowingly complicit killers for cash in congress need PRISON. We need to start punishing our monsters.
2
Unless you are suggesting that the NRA is a proxy for the minority opposition to gun control, then they are not really to be consulted on the issue. It is law makers who are holding us hostage on this. It is mind numbing to constantly read about how we have to consult the NRA about gun control. The problems lie with those legislators who support their views, which is largely tied to the cash disbursed to them.
109
Would you support those on these various lists be picked up and thrown into jail without due process? This was the question posed by radio talk show host, Larry O'Connor, this morning on his in DC program. Denying a citizen the constitutional right to buy a firearm should also require due process. We either have a system of laws or we have a system that is capricious and arbitrary.
10
The NRA has already won the “war on guns,” when the New York Times Editorial Board is settling for battle-to-battle combat on “no fly, no buy,” “universal background checks,” “ban on high-capacity magazines,” etc. What happened to the bigger picture? How about reinstating the ban on assault weapons?
The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, which President Clinton signed into law banned military style assault weapons that ordinary Americans have no need for, and which contributed to the single biggest drop in crime in decades!
The NRA has successfully dumbed down the entire argument on these ridiculous weapons of war, so that we are happy to settle for crumbs. Meanwhile the crime rate has started climbing again, homegrown terrorists can easily buy these weapons for mass shootings, and the Second Amendment seems to grow and grow way beyond what the founders intended.
The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, which President Clinton signed into law banned military style assault weapons that ordinary Americans have no need for, and which contributed to the single biggest drop in crime in decades!
The NRA has successfully dumbed down the entire argument on these ridiculous weapons of war, so that we are happy to settle for crumbs. Meanwhile the crime rate has started climbing again, homegrown terrorists can easily buy these weapons for mass shootings, and the Second Amendment seems to grow and grow way beyond what the founders intended.
1
This article is a major reason why an over-whelming majority of American's no longer trust the news media. Liberals refuse to place the blame at the actual source and scapegoat gun-owners while disparaging the Bill of Rights.
Gun control is a dead issue that the American Electorate will not support. Say it: radical islamic terrorists...
Gun control is a dead issue that the American Electorate will not support. Say it: radical islamic terrorists...
6
So if we take away the opportunity to buy dangerous firearms from a few 'innocent' people, what do we stand to lose?!?
And, if we lock up a few innocent people indefinitely for crimes that they haven't been convicted of, what do we stand to lose?
The slope is slippery, my friend.
The slope is slippery, my friend.
2
The NRA has argued that allowing anyone and everyone to own and brandish whatever style of weapon they choose without interference is the key to keeping us safe from "bad guys with guns". They favor open carry laws, a fought against background checks, and want guns in schools, colleges, and churches, all for protection.
And yet, they will not allow anyone with a gun to enter their headquarters.
Irony is certainly not dead. Neither is hypocrisy.
And yet, they will not allow anyone with a gun to enter their headquarters.
Irony is certainly not dead. Neither is hypocrisy.
The NRA fantasy that armed good guys are best defense from armed bad guys revealed in Orlando. My reading of situation notes that there were three police-Mateen gun battles. Only last one finally extinguished the threat. And we still await whether any of the deceased were killed by police bullets. Filling the air with bullets not the answer, though sometimes necessary...
1
The irony is that NRA conventions and the Republican National Convention are all gun-free! Clearly, these terror-enablers are not buying the "good guy with a gun" vibe.
6
Republicans in Congress are corrupt and cowardly gun industry stooges hiding behind transparently ridiculous excuses. The NRA is essentially a domestic terrorist organization that is an unwitting accomplice to foreign terrorist organizations. Both are traitors to their fellow citizens and the national security interests of this country.
2
The NRA has become the political arm of gun manufacturers who are trying to persuade Americans to be ever more frightened, and ever more desperate, to engage in a crazy arms race in personal arms.
There is no other business that has the sales pitch: "you need our product, to protect yourself from the bad guys with our product."
The even more awful thing about the gun business is to look at the numbers. The gun advocates keep saying "America is awash in guns" ... implying that no control is possible. But then how do the gun makers keep selling ever more guns, particularly as the number of families with guns appears to be in decline?
Are the smaller number of families with guns amassing ever-larger arsensals, enough to sop up all the guns manufactured?
No, they aren't. The gun industry depends on the illegal flow of guns from legal owners, to illegal owners ... and then to confiscation or illegal export.
That flow of guns produces the rationale for many legal owners to buy guns, particularly the "hot new gun they want" -- fear of a perp out there with a gun, and then the ugly thing -- in a private sale they may be able to get more for their old gun, no questions asked, than that new gun costs.
We've been in the "Glock wave:" gun-owners buying the newest largest-magazine compact semi-autos ... selling off the old-stuff. Now when the bullets fly, there are about twice what it used to be.
Where does this stop? How about NOW!
There is no other business that has the sales pitch: "you need our product, to protect yourself from the bad guys with our product."
The even more awful thing about the gun business is to look at the numbers. The gun advocates keep saying "America is awash in guns" ... implying that no control is possible. But then how do the gun makers keep selling ever more guns, particularly as the number of families with guns appears to be in decline?
Are the smaller number of families with guns amassing ever-larger arsensals, enough to sop up all the guns manufactured?
No, they aren't. The gun industry depends on the illegal flow of guns from legal owners, to illegal owners ... and then to confiscation or illegal export.
That flow of guns produces the rationale for many legal owners to buy guns, particularly the "hot new gun they want" -- fear of a perp out there with a gun, and then the ugly thing -- in a private sale they may be able to get more for their old gun, no questions asked, than that new gun costs.
We've been in the "Glock wave:" gun-owners buying the newest largest-magazine compact semi-autos ... selling off the old-stuff. Now when the bullets fly, there are about twice what it used to be.
Where does this stop? How about NOW!
1
This headline is bringing the paper to a new low. 20 years ago I bought my first rifle and at the time the NICs check rejected me for a conviction on my record. Now, folks standing with your father in law and getting a rejected NICs check is not something you want to explain. The reviewed matched me with another person who had a conviction. My point is NICs gets is wrong.
I'm surprised by the Times. which supports due process for illegal aliens but denies due process for U.S. citizens if their name appears on a watch list. I think the issue is the NRA wants a due process procedure, so what's wrong with that? Isn't that what the Times always advocates for everyone but of course not for NRA people? Why should we be different.
Papers like the time espouse a fear of islamophobia in our society. Well here's my question what if 90% of the names on the list are Moslem names who now demand their due process?
I'm surprised by the Times. which supports due process for illegal aliens but denies due process for U.S. citizens if their name appears on a watch list. I think the issue is the NRA wants a due process procedure, so what's wrong with that? Isn't that what the Times always advocates for everyone but of course not for NRA people? Why should we be different.
Papers like the time espouse a fear of islamophobia in our society. Well here's my question what if 90% of the names on the list are Moslem names who now demand their due process?
4
The NRA and the Supreme Court apparently believe that the shooter-terrorists are part of our well regulated militia as long as they meet current legal standards.
3
Let's never forget the words of Jeb Bush after another mass shooting: "Stuff happens." In the majority of these cases "stuff" doesn't have to happen and could be prevented... but "stuff" will continue to happen as long as the GOP prefers being the NRA's lap cat rather than showing real leadership. Because "Stuff " means preventable deaths.
3
Where was that "one good guy with a gun" that the NRA would have us believe is the proper deterrent to gun violence?
2
Oh, please. You might as well blame the public school system for not indoctrinating kids with enough morality.
4
The real root of the America's problems with guns is the relatively small group of single-issue voters who care only to protect their possession of highly dangerous weapons. The majority of us oppose them, but the majority of us don't vote.
So if you want to see who allows this to happen, there's a mirror in the bathroom. If you want to do something about it, vote. If you haven't voted, you have no standing, no right, to complain about the consequences.
So if you want to see who allows this to happen, there's a mirror in the bathroom. If you want to do something about it, vote. If you haven't voted, you have no standing, no right, to complain about the consequences.
1
Every time there's a mass murder like we saw in Orlando, gun sales spike. The tragedies are horrible news to everyone except the gun industry. The NRA and their hired politicians don't want any restrictions on their cash cow, and they don't care how many innocent people get killed.
Follow the money.
Follow the money.
1
If you want to take away a person's rights, then convict them of something. We don't punish people based on suspicion here.
If you want to get rid of particular types of guns, change the law. But, don't include a grandfather clause, as that will render any such restrictions meaningless.
If you want to get rid of guns period, than repeal the Second Amendment.
All of this requires due process and following the Constitution. Anything less is un-American.
If you want to get rid of particular types of guns, change the law. But, don't include a grandfather clause, as that will render any such restrictions meaningless.
If you want to get rid of guns period, than repeal the Second Amendment.
All of this requires due process and following the Constitution. Anything less is un-American.
2
I own guns, and I want an assault-weapon ban:
After the 2012 killings in Sandy Hook, I advocated a ban on assault weapons. Now after the attack in Orlando, and the killing of 49 civilians and the wounding of 53 more, I must reiterate my concern.
I am a Vietnam veteran and legally registered gun owner. I believe in an assault weapon and high-capacity magazine ban. As one who has fired an M-16 and who has been shot at by an AK-47, I believe that assault weapons should only be used by police and military personnel. Now these weapons are being used here, on children and civilians.
It is irrelevant as to why this was done, but if this murderer only had access to a bolt-action rifle or six-shot revolver, I believe the casualty total would have been much lower.
We need to ban them now, along with high-capacity magazines. Yes, mental health is an issue, but if a sick person cannot get a gun, they cannot do as much damage. Have Wayne LaPierre, NRA chief executive, or James W. Porter II, its president, ever served in the military? Have they ever been shot at by these weapons? Have they ever lost a loved one to these weapons?
I understand many NRA members are military veterans and they are entitled to gun ownership. But no one hunts with these guns or a 30-round magazine. Our congressmen have to get off their butts and do something, or it could happen again.
237
"I own guns ..."
What do you own and why?
What do you own and why?
It's not only republicans who are afraid of the NRA. My congressional rep. wrote me years ago that meaningful gun control cannot pass the way things work in Washington. Weren't there recalls of two elected officials in Colorado several years ago because they support tougher gun laws? However, if the press, and enough private citizens, shamed the elected sit-ins for the NRA long and loudly enough, more people might decide to vote against these officials the next time they are up for election. We as voters have forsaken our mandate. The NRA cannot buy the vote of every citizen in this country. Wake up.
1
Given the NRA's absolute position on firearms, citing the Second Amendment as all the justification it needs, maybe it's time to mount a campaign to repeal the Second Amendment? Not saying I want to take away all guns, but if the wording in the amendment makes it impossible to regulate them, then why not stop debating the existing wording and repeal, revise, or rewrite the amendment?
2
"... if the wording in the amendment makes it impossible to regulate them ..."
The "wording" does not "make[] it impossible to regulate them". In particular, fully automatic weapons are illegal.
A web search for "Gun laws in the United States by state" will find more details.
The "wording" does not "make[] it impossible to regulate them". In particular, fully automatic weapons are illegal.
A web search for "Gun laws in the United States by state" will find more details.
Fully automatic weapons are not illegal, though their manufacture and import has been prohibited for those made after 1986.
I, an average, law abiding citizen, could spend $200 and the better part of a year waiting for the papers to buy an automatic weapon. Then, I could go spend the $5k or more, but I'd own it.
I, an average, law abiding citizen, could spend $200 and the better part of a year waiting for the papers to buy an automatic weapon. Then, I could go spend the $5k or more, but I'd own it.
The Editors should be concerned that they are harming their cause. When anti-gun advocates advocate for positions that will have no real impact they feed and justify the perception that anti-gun advocates are really seeking confiscation.
People fault the NRA for being unwilling to compromise, but they won't compromise because they do not trust you. They rationally believe you are liars, who want to incrementally dismantle their rights.
People fault the NRA for being unwilling to compromise, but they won't compromise because they do not trust you. They rationally believe you are liars, who want to incrementally dismantle their rights.
3
The NRA says it's about the right to bear arms but in fact it is manipulating the 2nd amendment as an endorsement for its deadly product guns. Is there any other industry that enjoys such protection in our constitution? It's all about making money and responsible gun owners are complicit when they refuse to acknowledge they are being used by the NRA to keep the assault rifle industry viable.
2
I am often amused and terrified if America were to accept the letter and spirit of NRA's goal to have every citizen to be armed at all times with a gun. Imagine being at any crowded event such as a packed stadium or airport and someone "accidently" shots his/her assault rifle. Overwhelming fear would spread and soon others would fire their guns in response with bullets ricocheting everywhere. In the heat of the moment who really has a clear head?
Maybe the NRA has ties with coffin makers.
Maybe the NRA has ties with coffin makers.
1
I've heard a lot of people ask the question, "Why would someone want an assault rifle?" They typically go on to point out that it's not something that could be used for any acceptable "recreation" unless your idea of fun is killing people. They seldom continue to the next step: Explaining why people actually do buy one.
We had a real demonstration of that in Oregon just a few months ago when armed revolutionaries took over a government facility (the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge) and dared authorities to do anything about it. THIS is why these people want assault weapons: to rebel against the United States.
Many hold up the original rebellion against England as their justifying precedent. But that was then and this is now. The colonies really were ruled by a king. We are not. The actual future of this kind of thinking is not the American Revolution, but rather Columbia -- locked in endless war since 1964, Syria, Sri Lanka, Ukrainia ... REAL revolutions with real destruction of whole countries and unlimited death.
The NRA and the gun manufacturers are just garden variety greedy. The people who support them are a deadly form of political insanity.
We had a real demonstration of that in Oregon just a few months ago when armed revolutionaries took over a government facility (the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge) and dared authorities to do anything about it. THIS is why these people want assault weapons: to rebel against the United States.
Many hold up the original rebellion against England as their justifying precedent. But that was then and this is now. The colonies really were ruled by a king. We are not. The actual future of this kind of thinking is not the American Revolution, but rather Columbia -- locked in endless war since 1964, Syria, Sri Lanka, Ukrainia ... REAL revolutions with real destruction of whole countries and unlimited death.
The NRA and the gun manufacturers are just garden variety greedy. The people who support them are a deadly form of political insanity.
6
"... armed revolutionaries ..."
Who besides you ever used that characterization? Please cite a newspaper or other news report.
Who besides you ever used that characterization? Please cite a newspaper or other news report.
1
NRA has the clout to prevent an increase in staffing at the Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) agency. This is the very small agency tasked with responsibility to investigate church burning as well as firearms use in crimes. This is a detail usually forgotten as we seek to understand gun violence--the pros have no time to do their jobs.
4
Here's an idea. Create shooting ranges with semi automatic weapons - and only those place can have them - and charge the Rambo wannabees to act out their childish fantasies at these places. The ranges can be heavily controlled by a government agency. Have people submit the weapons they already have and the money they paid for them goes toward credit on these ranges, until they have used it up, then charge them. Call them Rambo Ranges, and let the arrested adolescents shoot to their hears content and thus act out their fantasies.
1
The NRA is essentially a right-wing paramilitary organization. It is dominated by a political ideology and dogma, and only secondarily a "political lobbying" organization.
Historically, what such organizations want above all else is crisis. A permanent "security crisis." Its leadership and members and political allies feel psychologically and militarily prepared for crisis. They anticipate it and enable it.
Historically, what such organizations want above all else is crisis. A permanent "security crisis." Its leadership and members and political allies feel psychologically and militarily prepared for crisis. They anticipate it and enable it.
1
'The silence is killing us' is apt in so many areas and aspects. And the word 'complicity' must be used as well. The NRA and Trump are meeting; this is a congregation of bullies seeing nothing but their own selfish desires. Good luck to such a marriage.
As many readers say, in a democracy, we define who we are, primarily through our laws, politics and actions, or inaction, by our government. We are most certainly complicit in promoting or not fighting hard enough against the proliferation of assault rifles. Being from the south, I know that guns will always be around for hunting. I accept that. That is not a major problem here. We need to focus on types of guns and I am so proud that Democrats are filibustering for some type of action on gun-control. I am so proud many people are really standing up today to confront hate and marginalization and demonization of gay human beings. It is beyond sad that tragedy makes us act, but regardless, we are acting now and must move towards a more sane and loving planet and country. WE the PEOPLE can do this; and only WE can.
As many readers say, in a democracy, we define who we are, primarily through our laws, politics and actions, or inaction, by our government. We are most certainly complicit in promoting or not fighting hard enough against the proliferation of assault rifles. Being from the south, I know that guns will always be around for hunting. I accept that. That is not a major problem here. We need to focus on types of guns and I am so proud that Democrats are filibustering for some type of action on gun-control. I am so proud many people are really standing up today to confront hate and marginalization and demonization of gay human beings. It is beyond sad that tragedy makes us act, but regardless, we are acting now and must move towards a more sane and loving planet and country. WE the PEOPLE can do this; and only WE can.
This editorial seems to suggest that the NRA holds a "position", as though their difference was a reasoned alternative to limiting guns. It is unimaginable to me that such is the case. The NRA is simply posturing to aid gun manufacturers, and the NRA "position" is no more than that of pandering at the behest of special interests. Such things cannot be changed by logic and argument, but by scandal unveiling the motives of the NRA.
2
The naivety about gun control in the United States still fills the pages of the NYT. Shouldn't U.S. politicians take more bolder steps that would prevent the calamity that unfolded before the world's eyes in Orlando? I find the argument that background checks should be applied only to those whose names are on the "No fly" list weak and inadequate.
So what do you suggest? Please be specific.
I miss my Dad's NRA. They took every fifth grade class to the range and taught us one day of gun safety. They could provide patient, experienced role models to help with at the BB gun range at Cub Scout Daycamp. For goodness sake, their latest commercial was nothing more than fear-mongering and did not even mention guns.
2
"... taught us one day of gun safety."
OK, but what did they teach you about the law on liability and self-defense?
OK, but what did they teach you about the law on liability and self-defense?
President Obama had a majority in the congress and senate for two years. They could have passed a law concerning AR's. They didn't, The presidents failure and lack of leadership becomes more evident the longer he holds office. The Democrats failed to pass meaningful laws to regulate semi-automatic sporting rifles or even to ban them.
3
Such horrors will never end until the American populace can no longer be armed with automatic weapons and the US citizenry and it leaders take the responsibility for ending gun violence. To stop the gun terror that distinguishes our society, we must recognize that the NRA is politically an organization whose polices lead to the gun violence and the American brand of terrorism that defines our culture. The question is do Americans have the courage to end this terrorism or not. Our history says not and that our society is too weak and violence prone to control guns.
1
we can blame the NRA for pumping millions of dollars into the political arena to support or oppose candidates of a certain persuasion. But we can't blame them for guns, violence or the corrupt political system that gives them such power.
as with all national problems, the fix is public campaign financing. Then our legislators will be working only for the public.
we can fix every issue independently when the whole system is corrupt.
as with all national problems, the fix is public campaign financing. Then our legislators will be working only for the public.
we can fix every issue independently when the whole system is corrupt.
The gun industry's continued opposition to tighter controls on who can buy a gun and what kinds of guns can be purchased has nothing to do with freedom. It has everything to do with making lots and lots of money regardless of the consequences.
137
I find it baffling that the NRA itself doesn't come forward and make proposals to keep guns out of the hands of terrorists and keep military weapons off the streets. I thought they are supposed to be a gun lobbying organisation.
1
I would love to see the leadership of the NRA step out of their one-track minds and step forward to take the lead in efforts to reshape the terrorist watch list into something more useful and evidence-based. They could partner with the ACLU (wouldn't THAT be amazing?) Sadly, I don’t think this will happen. Instead, the NRA leadership will go around yelling, “Slippery slope, slippery SLOPE. They want our guns!!” and somehow manage to keep the world safe for identified potential terrorists to buy guns and explosives.
http://c-dawson.blogspot.com/2009/06/have-gun-cant-travel.html
http://c-dawson.blogspot.com/2009/06/have-gun-cant-travel.html
Complicit:
1. We, the people for not standing up, and for not voting the bums out.
2. The NRA is clearly a terrorist organization in their own right, complicit.
3. Our legislatures that refuse to pass any meaningful gun control laws.
Solutions:
1. Vote your values, throw the bums out!
2. Stay engaged, keep up the pressure.
3. Reinstate the ban on assault weapons.
4. Permit the legal system to sue all who profit, manufacturers, gun sellers.
1. We, the people for not standing up, and for not voting the bums out.
2. The NRA is clearly a terrorist organization in their own right, complicit.
3. Our legislatures that refuse to pass any meaningful gun control laws.
Solutions:
1. Vote your values, throw the bums out!
2. Stay engaged, keep up the pressure.
3. Reinstate the ban on assault weapons.
4. Permit the legal system to sue all who profit, manufacturers, gun sellers.
agree on every count. i would like to add the following - when will the new york times take the next step? in addition to honoring the fallen in orlando, which has been sensitively, thoughtfully and powerfully acconplished, with pictures and profiles, use the same method and picture each and every politician who has voted against progressive gun laws. let the public know exactly who the NRA has in their back pocket. these politicians are indeed complicit and their identities, which are already public, should be presented for all to see. enough is enough.
Why didn't we hear what happened to that armed security guard (one report said it was an off-duty police officer). Did he die in the incident? Run out of ammunition? It seems to me that the counter to the NRA argument about an armed populace is that it fails. If I recall correctly, after the shooting of Rep. Giffords there was a legally armed citizen who almost shot someone who had tackled the shooter, and was stopped only by a third, unarmed party. Police officers undergo many hours of training to identify when is the right time to use lethal force. The average gun owner does not.
One might argue that these incidents of mass murders with sophisticated military-type assault weapons, capable of extreme rapid firing with deadly results, are now being incorporated into the NRA's marketing strategy to increase their manufacturers' and sellers' sales and profits.
One might argue that these incidents of mass murders with sophisticated military-type assault weapons, capable of extreme rapid firing with deadly results,
=============
They are not "military type" as they do not have automatic or burst fire. They don't have "extreme rapid firing" as it is one shot with one pull of the trigger, just like with a revolver
=============
They are not "military type" as they do not have automatic or burst fire. They don't have "extreme rapid firing" as it is one shot with one pull of the trigger, just like with a revolver
President Obama has done everything possible under his constitutional powers to help solve this problem. As Obama himself has said, it's up to Congress now.
Hillary is a good bet to dominate the fall election now since even people with willful ignorance about Trump are having their eyes pried open by his daily acts of outrageous irrationality. But Congress is still in the hands of right-wing zealots elected in 2014. Even when we elect Hillary in the fall, nothing will change until Congress changes.
Hillary is a good bet to dominate the fall election now since even people with willful ignorance about Trump are having their eyes pried open by his daily acts of outrageous irrationality. But Congress is still in the hands of right-wing zealots elected in 2014. Even when we elect Hillary in the fall, nothing will change until Congress changes.
For any politician or public servant, ensuring public safety should be the highest calling. Unfortunately our country continues to be rocked by massacres directly attributable to the easier purchase of military assault grade firearms. I'm a veteran who grew up in a rural environment, so I'm quite familiar with guns and understand their place in society for self-defense and hunting. There's ample grey area to craft sensible, bi-partisan legislature to ensure background checks and sufficient firearm training are in place prior to a firearm purchase, Sadly, the NRA and other lobbyists own large swaths our legislative branch, who routinely (and lamely) trot out the same tired rationale time and time again to justify their inaction. The American people deserve better than a bunch of weak-kneed congressmen afraid of losing their campaign war chests to challenge the NRA / gun manufacturer hegemony.
For any politician or public servant, ensuring public safety should be the highest calling.
=================
Well in this case it's obvious President Obama and the FBI failed pretty miserably
=================
Well in this case it's obvious President Obama and the FBI failed pretty miserably
1
“A competing bill introduced by Senator John Cornyn, a Republican, would give authorities only three days to prove that a suspect is about to commit an act of terrorism — a nearly impossible standard to meet.”
It is bad enough the standard of “innocent until proven guilty” is being discarded but calling for an open-ended timeline for denying a constitutional right is hopefully a level of cowardly depravity too low for even the sickest gunophobic.
It is bad enough the standard of “innocent until proven guilty” is being discarded but calling for an open-ended timeline for denying a constitutional right is hopefully a level of cowardly depravity too low for even the sickest gunophobic.
I'll skip the usual defense of gun rights as it relates to defense against tyranny, the existence of the second amendment, the huge number of weapons and law-abiding owners in the country, etc.
I'd like to point out that the Editorial board doesn't know about basic gun terminology. He used a 30 round magazine, not a clip. A clip hold rounds and is used to insert them into a magazine.
For an institution that publishes entire articles on (wrongfully) lower-casing "internet", one would think there may be a knowledge of firearms compnonents somewhere in the building when asking we change the Constitution.
I'd like to point out that the Editorial board doesn't know about basic gun terminology. He used a 30 round magazine, not a clip. A clip hold rounds and is used to insert them into a magazine.
For an institution that publishes entire articles on (wrongfully) lower-casing "internet", one would think there may be a knowledge of firearms compnonents somewhere in the building when asking we change the Constitution.
I'd like you to have the same likelihood of buying a firearm, as I have getting an abortion in Texas.
Republicans lined up to sign that idiotic pledge to "never ever raise taxes."
How about if they line up to sign a sensible pledge: "I favor banning assault weapons, requiring background checks for all gun purchases, prohibiting anyone on the terrorist watch list from buying or owning a weapon, and requiring that all modern firearms be licensed and insured."
The NRA's sophistry notwithstanding, the Second Amendment is all about a well-regulated militia, not about some purported right of totally unregulated, unhinged individuals to stockpile guns and ammo and terrorize the nation.
How about if they line up to sign a sensible pledge: "I favor banning assault weapons, requiring background checks for all gun purchases, prohibiting anyone on the terrorist watch list from buying or owning a weapon, and requiring that all modern firearms be licensed and insured."
The NRA's sophistry notwithstanding, the Second Amendment is all about a well-regulated militia, not about some purported right of totally unregulated, unhinged individuals to stockpile guns and ammo and terrorize the nation.
I agree with this editorial. It is high time we call out the NRA and its Republican cronies for contributing to gun violence in this country. It isn't just the NRA -- it is a culture that celebrates violence through entertainment and media that is complicit as well.The rest of the civilized world shakes its head in wonder at America's gun-loving culture. Other countries with sensible restrictions on guns have nowhere near the number of fatalities that we do.
There are a few issues with this editorial. Number one, the Feinstein bill you are talking about is based on the No Fly List, not the Terror Watch List. These are two different things. The concern is that the No Fly List is famously flawed. Even Ted Kennedy was/is on it. Once on it there is no way to get off of it, which violates the sixth amendment. Second, there already are universal background checks. Everyone goes through one before purchasing a firearm no matter where you are purchasing them from. Third, high capacity magazines are banned in a majority of states already. Fourth, your focus on guns is endangering the very Americans who are trying to protect themselves from these terrorists. Fifth, World Trade Center involved a plane. Boston was a bomb. Terrorists don't need guns to kill people.
The N.R.A. is a hypocritical group. What message are they sending out when they hold their annual meetings and remind their members that "no guns are allowed"? Even in Trump's mansion in Florida the requirements echo the identical sentiment.
It's not rocket science to expand background checks including people with a questionable behavior history. Additionally, make background checks nationwide so there won't be any discrepancy between state lines.
It's time we wake up and put legislation as well as the gun lobby in its place.
It's not rocket science to expand background checks including people with a questionable behavior history. Additionally, make background checks nationwide so there won't be any discrepancy between state lines.
It's time we wake up and put legislation as well as the gun lobby in its place.
1
The Second Amendment calls for a "well regulated militia." Why are we calling for gun control? That's not the way to go. We should be going for gun regulation; that's what the Constitution say we should do: Regulate the civilian militia.
Let's limit them to the weapons available in 1791, when the Second Amendment was approved: Muzzle-loaders.
Let's limit them to the weapons available in 1791, when the Second Amendment was approved: Muzzle-loaders.
1
The well-regulated militia is the rationale for the prohibition against the federal government infringing the peoples' right to bear arms. The rationale may be outdated, but the teeth of the Second is the prohibition.
Besides, what 21st century well-regulated militia, or "national guard" if you like, would limit itself to muzzle-loaders if they are called upon to fight ISIS or the Taliban? I get the humor of your proposal, but the difficulty is the operative language of the Second.
This is the whole problem. The Second needs to be updated to the 21st Century. Nobody believes that this can happen in today's polarized political environment.
Besides, what 21st century well-regulated militia, or "national guard" if you like, would limit itself to muzzle-loaders if they are called upon to fight ISIS or the Taliban? I get the humor of your proposal, but the difficulty is the operative language of the Second.
This is the whole problem. The Second needs to be updated to the 21st Century. Nobody believes that this can happen in today's polarized political environment.
As a life member of the NRA, I have for some time been torn between the need for a robust defense of all ten amendments contained in the Bill of Rights and the clear need to do something more to prevent mass shootings (and the other kind, too). However, my less than absolutist view of the Second Amendment is tempered by the certain knowledge that the focus on the AR-15 is indeed, the camel's nose under the tent.
The true intent of the New York Times editorial board is contained in the following two sentences: "Mr. Mateen was able to kill 49 people largely because the assault rifle he was using could fire 30-round clips as fast as he could pull the trigger. No civilian anywhere should be allowed to have that ability."
I disagree.
You have described the operation of a semi-automatic firearm, and there are literally hundreds of different kinds of firearms designed around semi-automatic actions. I can take a semi-automatic pistol, such as the Browning Hi-Power, and outfit it with magazines (not "clips") containing up to 5, 10, or 13 rounds. Similarly, I can take an AR-15 and insert 10, 20, or 30 round magazines, or, if I don't mind looking like an idiot at the rifle range, get a jam-o-magic drum magazine containing up to 100 rounds. But, since I use my AR-15 for high power rifle competition, I use 5 round magazines.
See my point? It's not the name of the firearm, or the type of action it uses, or the capacity of the magazine -- it's the nut attached to the trigger.
The true intent of the New York Times editorial board is contained in the following two sentences: "Mr. Mateen was able to kill 49 people largely because the assault rifle he was using could fire 30-round clips as fast as he could pull the trigger. No civilian anywhere should be allowed to have that ability."
I disagree.
You have described the operation of a semi-automatic firearm, and there are literally hundreds of different kinds of firearms designed around semi-automatic actions. I can take a semi-automatic pistol, such as the Browning Hi-Power, and outfit it with magazines (not "clips") containing up to 5, 10, or 13 rounds. Similarly, I can take an AR-15 and insert 10, 20, or 30 round magazines, or, if I don't mind looking like an idiot at the rifle range, get a jam-o-magic drum magazine containing up to 100 rounds. But, since I use my AR-15 for high power rifle competition, I use 5 round magazines.
See my point? It's not the name of the firearm, or the type of action it uses, or the capacity of the magazine -- it's the nut attached to the trigger.
2
No it's the magazine capacity. Nuts can't choose 30 or 100-round magazines if they're not available. Better yet, no detachable magazines.
I would like to suggest amending the National Firearms Act of 1934 to include all firearms except muzzle-loading flintlocks.
4
The NRA is nothing more than a front for the gun manufacturers. Since the passage of the "Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act" (what a euphemism!) during W's admnistration, which absolves gun manufacturers from virtually all liability in connection with unlawful use of guns, these manufacturers have little or no incentive to eliminate the deadly use of firearms. Repeal this statute and impose significant strict liability on these manufacturers when their products are used to take lives, particularly in the case of military-style weaponry which serve no useful purpose other than as a killing machine. Hit the manufacturers where it counts, in their pocketbooks.
2
Since the passage of the "Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act" (what a euphemism!) during W's admnistration, which absolves gun manufacturers from virtually all liability in connection with unlawful use of guns, these manufacturers have little or no incentive to eliminate the deadly use of firearms.
==================
So you believe hammer manufacturers should face strict liability for the unlawful use of hammers?
==================
So you believe hammer manufacturers should face strict liability for the unlawful use of hammers?
Here's the thing - most of us know this - all of what Mr Kristof writes here. It comes down to a very simple equation - if most people in the nation care enough about ending gun-related tragedies, it will happen. But "caring enough" means action - it means doing a lot more than coming together and grieving. It means more than prayer - prayers never moved a bill through Congress. It means taking our representatives to task... constituency by constituency, district by district. This is the heavy lifting of Democracy and it needs doing. The NRA and associated gun nuts will have no power if we want to take it away from them. But we need to put in that effort. If we don't, nothing is going to change. We're going to continue as the only developed nation where toddlers shoot their parents, preteens shoot their schoolmates and wannabe extremists massacre scores of innocent civilians. Is that what we want?
In a civil society, civilians don't need to own guns. They should not be able to buy them or keep them at home. Hunters can store their weapons at the local police station and go collect them when they head to hunt... then return them for safekeeping. That way the authorities can track every weapon.
Any argument that civilians can handle guns has already failed the real world test. If civilians want guns easily available - they will have to understand that everyone will have access - including the bad guys. And innocent lives will continue to be lost. It's that simple.
In a civil society, civilians don't need to own guns. They should not be able to buy them or keep them at home. Hunters can store their weapons at the local police station and go collect them when they head to hunt... then return them for safekeeping. That way the authorities can track every weapon.
Any argument that civilians can handle guns has already failed the real world test. If civilians want guns easily available - they will have to understand that everyone will have access - including the bad guys. And innocent lives will continue to be lost. It's that simple.
Interesting that the Republicans have passed dozens of bills to repeal the Affordable Care Act, legislation that has made it possible for 15 million people to improve their lives by obtaining health insurance for the first time. However, those same Republicans refuse to pass gun-safety legislation to protect the general population because they don't want to inconvenience a handful of gun purchase applicants who might mistakenly be on a government list of suspected terrorist. I don't get it. Who are these people?
2
I read where, in the 1930s, to stem the flow of machine guns to organized crime, Congress essentially just taxed the sale of such weapons so much that they became unaffordable.
I recommend that instead of vainly attempting to pass gun control legislation, that the Federal government simply tax the hell out of assault weapons. It may drive much of the weapons sales underground, but then you can at least put shady gunshops out of business for not paying taxes. Oh, and the taxes they raise should go to a fund dedicated to paying the families of victims of mass shootings. More deaths = more taxes.
I recommend that instead of vainly attempting to pass gun control legislation, that the Federal government simply tax the hell out of assault weapons. It may drive much of the weapons sales underground, but then you can at least put shady gunshops out of business for not paying taxes. Oh, and the taxes they raise should go to a fund dedicated to paying the families of victims of mass shootings. More deaths = more taxes.
1
"... in the 1930s, ... just taxed the sale of such weapons ..."
Bonnie and Clyde didn't pay taxes, because they used stolen guns. See:
"Guns of Outlaws: Weapons of the American Bad Man"
By Gerry Souter, Janet Souter
Bonnie and Clyde didn't pay taxes, because they used stolen guns. See:
"Guns of Outlaws: Weapons of the American Bad Man"
By Gerry Souter, Janet Souter
“Few places on earth make it easier than the United States for a terrorist to buy assault weapons to mow down scores of people in a matter of minutes.”
Unfortunately too many places in the United States make it possible for terrorist to murder our citizens with impunity relegating them to nothing but unarmed helpless victims, these areas are known as “gun free zones.”
“There is a word for their role in this form of terrorism: complicity.”
There is a word for any government that forces by law its citizens into the role of defenseless victim: “complicity”
Unfortunately too many places in the United States make it possible for terrorist to murder our citizens with impunity relegating them to nothing but unarmed helpless victims, these areas are known as “gun free zones.”
“There is a word for their role in this form of terrorism: complicity.”
There is a word for any government that forces by law its citizens into the role of defenseless victim: “complicity”
Hey did you know that Japan is an entire gun free nation?
Now, using your childish NRA logic there should be scores of mass shootings all over Japan.
But guess what?
Mass shootings do not happen at all in Japan.
We adults call that a contradiction.
What do you gun fetishists call it?
Now, using your childish NRA logic there should be scores of mass shootings all over Japan.
But guess what?
Mass shootings do not happen at all in Japan.
We adults call that a contradiction.
What do you gun fetishists call it?
2
The NRA is a lobby for a relatively small industry, civilian arms, compared with energy, food, transportation. The industry is not manufacturing in all the states where the lobby is able to buy politicians. In practical terms, even given that our system allows elected representatives to be bought without sanctions, how is it that the NRA has so much clout and is immune from prosecution as seditious?
It's pretty clear that if America can't deal with this particular special interest lobby, we surely are not dealing with larger ones, whose influence does not make for headline news.
The disease is tolerance for political corruption, subversion of what's great about our society, and the cure is political.
The clumsy details of guns and their issues, or coal, or even international trade are just details, impossible to address piecemeal, but addressable if only we clean our political house. Sure, the NRA is complicit in terrorism, and they can't do any differently, but we, the people are complicit in letting them rule.
It's pretty clear that if America can't deal with this particular special interest lobby, we surely are not dealing with larger ones, whose influence does not make for headline news.
The disease is tolerance for political corruption, subversion of what's great about our society, and the cure is political.
The clumsy details of guns and their issues, or coal, or even international trade are just details, impossible to address piecemeal, but addressable if only we clean our political house. Sure, the NRA is complicit in terrorism, and they can't do any differently, but we, the people are complicit in letting them rule.
To me, gun control makes sense. No individual has ANY business owning a weapon that will shoot 30 round clips. Those weapons are designed for one thing and one thing only - killing people as fast as possible.
I personally have no desire to have a weapon. But I understand that some people may have a need to own one, especially those who hunt for food or who have livestock to protect. No issues with that.
My proposal is this:
1) ALL gun and ammo purchasers must must have national background checks. Those on no-fly or terrorist lists do not qualify for purchase.
2) All guns MUST be nationally registered. No exceptions
3) No one outside of military or law enforcement may own or purchase a weapon that can shoot more than 6 rounds without reloading. No weapons with clips or modifications for clips may be sold to civilians. No weapons may be modified for clips.
4) No ammo for weapons that do not meet the criteria may be sold. Only 100 rounds of ammo may be sold per day to anyone.
5) A national gun buy back program should be implemented for existing weapons that do not meet these qualifications.
I've heard it said - and from family members that I love and hold dear - that these controls would not work, that there are too many weapons out there. This is a fallacy. It may not make an immediate difference, just as changes for climate control do not make an immediate difference. But long term, it will make an enormous impact on ALL our lives.
I personally have no desire to have a weapon. But I understand that some people may have a need to own one, especially those who hunt for food or who have livestock to protect. No issues with that.
My proposal is this:
1) ALL gun and ammo purchasers must must have national background checks. Those on no-fly or terrorist lists do not qualify for purchase.
2) All guns MUST be nationally registered. No exceptions
3) No one outside of military or law enforcement may own or purchase a weapon that can shoot more than 6 rounds without reloading. No weapons with clips or modifications for clips may be sold to civilians. No weapons may be modified for clips.
4) No ammo for weapons that do not meet the criteria may be sold. Only 100 rounds of ammo may be sold per day to anyone.
5) A national gun buy back program should be implemented for existing weapons that do not meet these qualifications.
I've heard it said - and from family members that I love and hold dear - that these controls would not work, that there are too many weapons out there. This is a fallacy. It may not make an immediate difference, just as changes for climate control do not make an immediate difference. But long term, it will make an enormous impact on ALL our lives.
A great peace activist once stated "that to be quiet in the face of oppression is to join the oppressors". The best that our lawmakers (i.e. Republican lawmakers) have been able to do is to take a moment of silence for the victims of our frequent mass killings and offer them "our thoughts and prayers". I suspect that God shudders at such a hypocritical show of piety and these "moments of silence". The silence of many in our nation, from Republican lawmakers down through the ranks of the NRA makes them, in the words of our peace activist, oppressors of the victims of gun violence. In my philosophy of life, God is the God of common sense as well as love and justice. I hope Republicans soon can find the courage to act with common sense about America's gun laws. then maybe, their pious moments of silence might be of value in God's eyes.
1
What we who support stricter gun laws must do is to remain cool calm and collected, cut down on escalating the rhetoric, and try to reason, not with politicians, definitely not the NRA, but with actual gun owners, the 99% who abide by the law. We need to convince them that we are not some wild-eyed liberals attempting to take away their rights and their guns.
We must recognize our history is much different than Europe and other nations. We have to deal the legendary status firearms have had in our country especially out in sparsely populated regions out West, where they are regarded as a useful tool.
We liberals should be educated. We should know that the NRA was founded a century ago in NYC, its purpose a far cry from what it has become over the past decades. The first strict gun laws were instituted not here in the East but out West, in places like Oklahoma and states where guns were profligate where people were being killed at the slightest provocation. The NRA has morphed into a lobbying arm of gun makers interested in selling more guns with safety secondary, irregardless of the consequences.
We must eliminate the middle man, the NRA, Right Wing talk radio, whose purpose is to keep the Hatfields feuding with the McCoys, for they fear that if we and gun owners can sit down and peacefully discuss the issues we may be able to find some common ground and common sense solutions to these problems. We need to convince gun owners we come in peace.
DD
Manhattan
We must recognize our history is much different than Europe and other nations. We have to deal the legendary status firearms have had in our country especially out in sparsely populated regions out West, where they are regarded as a useful tool.
We liberals should be educated. We should know that the NRA was founded a century ago in NYC, its purpose a far cry from what it has become over the past decades. The first strict gun laws were instituted not here in the East but out West, in places like Oklahoma and states where guns were profligate where people were being killed at the slightest provocation. The NRA has morphed into a lobbying arm of gun makers interested in selling more guns with safety secondary, irregardless of the consequences.
We must eliminate the middle man, the NRA, Right Wing talk radio, whose purpose is to keep the Hatfields feuding with the McCoys, for they fear that if we and gun owners can sit down and peacefully discuss the issues we may be able to find some common ground and common sense solutions to these problems. We need to convince gun owners we come in peace.
DD
Manhattan
The assault rifle is a NAZI technology. The Wehrmacht designed the assault rifle for the singular purpose of killing large amounts of people in close quarters, in extremely inhospitable conditions, for as cheap as possible. No other army had dreamed of such a weapon, which is a personal arsenal for each soldier, acting as a weapon of mass destruction. The chancellor of Germany (Adolf Hitler) called this weapon, "Sturmgewehr", or Storm (Assault) Rifle. This was a perfect weapon for the horrors of the Eastern Front of World War II, which pitched massive armies into a cauldron of personal vitriol, and a reign of terror on the unfortunate civilians caught in the middle.
Now, the N.R.A. wants Americans to have the choice to purchase these NAZI weapons of mass destruction for civilian use. They teach purchasers how to get around the laws of automatic weapons use, such as the Tommy Gun, famously used by 1920s alcohol prohibition gangsters. They show others how to get around the laws by saying that assault weapons are "semi"- auto rifles only, which can easily be turned into full auto, with a little tinkering.
Because of the N.R.A., every American has the choice to bring home a little of the horrors of the Eastern Front, for a fraction of the money. Is this what the 2nd Amendment of the US Constitution intended? Is an individual Constitutional right more important than the lives of the many?
Now, the N.R.A. wants Americans to have the choice to purchase these NAZI weapons of mass destruction for civilian use. They teach purchasers how to get around the laws of automatic weapons use, such as the Tommy Gun, famously used by 1920s alcohol prohibition gangsters. They show others how to get around the laws by saying that assault weapons are "semi"- auto rifles only, which can easily be turned into full auto, with a little tinkering.
Because of the N.R.A., every American has the choice to bring home a little of the horrors of the Eastern Front, for a fraction of the money. Is this what the 2nd Amendment of the US Constitution intended? Is an individual Constitutional right more important than the lives of the many?
1
An irresponsible organization - the NRA - buys Republican congressmen/women - equally irresponsible - and demand fealty to them.
Unreasonable is a kind word for these people. Infantile is more accurate but real accuracy cannot be printed.
The Republican party is complicit. There is no doubt.
But their posturing and beliefs prevent them being capable of reason.
For instance, they profess to be the party of Christianity in the USA, yet demonize healthcare, are pro-death penalty, refuse to see climate change as an issue, are adherents to Creationism (has nothing to do with the message of Jesus), act like capitalism is Biblical prophecy, are proponents for massive military expenditures, destroy the social contract by eradicating taxes on the wealthy, demonize the poor and vulnerable, those that are different, believe in erecting a wall on the border.
What in God's name is Christian about this party and those who belong to it.
Yes, the gun issue is way up there as a moral problem but the Republican Party and their fealty to the NRA are amoral symptoms of their immense vat of hypocrisy and, actually, very anti-Christian views.
Unreasonable is a kind word for these people. Infantile is more accurate but real accuracy cannot be printed.
The Republican party is complicit. There is no doubt.
But their posturing and beliefs prevent them being capable of reason.
For instance, they profess to be the party of Christianity in the USA, yet demonize healthcare, are pro-death penalty, refuse to see climate change as an issue, are adherents to Creationism (has nothing to do with the message of Jesus), act like capitalism is Biblical prophecy, are proponents for massive military expenditures, destroy the social contract by eradicating taxes on the wealthy, demonize the poor and vulnerable, those that are different, believe in erecting a wall on the border.
What in God's name is Christian about this party and those who belong to it.
Yes, the gun issue is way up there as a moral problem but the Republican Party and their fealty to the NRA are amoral symptoms of their immense vat of hypocrisy and, actually, very anti-Christian views.
Wouldn't it be so much better if the NRA could be confined to actual rifle enthusiasts? There could be a separate National Handgun Association, and a National Assault Weapons Association. The handling of these weapons is not the same, and they serve different purposes. Rifles are good for hunting, handguns for personal protection and criminal activities, and assault weapons for mowing down crowds. Possibly the people using them also have different goals.
I understand the fear that appears to assail weapons enthusiasts (or more likely their industries) at the thought of any restrictions - the fear that they will completely have to surrender their weapons. My equivalent fear is that next they'll believe that the constitution extends their right to rocket launchers on their vehicles. That would be the step up in destructive fire power that is not yet legal. Whatever enemies the US may have in other countries can rejoice in the fact that Americans are doing a superb job of killing each other. The means are available. All it takes is a little extra drop of hate in one of the many who feel their entitlements have not been met - a perfectly destructive chemistry.
I understand the fear that appears to assail weapons enthusiasts (or more likely their industries) at the thought of any restrictions - the fear that they will completely have to surrender their weapons. My equivalent fear is that next they'll believe that the constitution extends their right to rocket launchers on their vehicles. That would be the step up in destructive fire power that is not yet legal. Whatever enemies the US may have in other countries can rejoice in the fact that Americans are doing a superb job of killing each other. The means are available. All it takes is a little extra drop of hate in one of the many who feel their entitlements have not been met - a perfectly destructive chemistry.
According to studies and brain scans, conservatives react to facts that contradict their cherished beliefs by clinging even more profoundly to their mistakes.
So it shouldn't be surprising that all the statistics in the world aren't going to make headway here. There are charts showing the horrendous death rates of Americans from guns, rates which soar far above countries with tight gun control. The FBI published research showing that despite the ever-increasing number of guns in our society, only 3% of shooters are stopped by an armed bystander. Four times as many are stopped by unarmed bystanders, and this usually when the shooter has to reload. But should we limit magazine capacity? Oh, no!
I don't know what in the world the answer is, but certainly neither facts nor bloody deaths of parents, children, partners means anything to conservatives but a need for more guns.
The only answer I can see is to revoke Citizens United, undo gerrymandering, and vote in a Democratic Congress and President.
So it shouldn't be surprising that all the statistics in the world aren't going to make headway here. There are charts showing the horrendous death rates of Americans from guns, rates which soar far above countries with tight gun control. The FBI published research showing that despite the ever-increasing number of guns in our society, only 3% of shooters are stopped by an armed bystander. Four times as many are stopped by unarmed bystanders, and this usually when the shooter has to reload. But should we limit magazine capacity? Oh, no!
I don't know what in the world the answer is, but certainly neither facts nor bloody deaths of parents, children, partners means anything to conservatives but a need for more guns.
The only answer I can see is to revoke Citizens United, undo gerrymandering, and vote in a Democratic Congress and President.
1
There are good reasons why the NRA and citizens resist gun control.
Attempts to legislate changes in gun laws are one-sided. Sponsors seek to limit types of guns, how they can be bought, and who can buy them. Unfortunately, there is little support for expanding right to own guns by the Feds. They allow cities and states to ban or overly restrict gun ownership by law-abiding citizens.
More consensus could be built with respect to control if Congress and the Executive Branch demonstrated their support of the 2nd Amendment for all law abiding citizens, with no exception for locale.
Further, there are advocates who propose banning guns altogether, in every locale. Others make misleading statements about the capabilities of weapons (Alan Grayson, in the wake of this tragedy made ridiculous claims). The obvious response is to resist giving ground to such people.
The New York Times would have us believe that sick people like Omar Mateen would not attempt to kill if denied access to semi automatic long guns, that he and other terrorists would simply walk away from such action.
Attempts to legislate changes in gun laws are one-sided. Sponsors seek to limit types of guns, how they can be bought, and who can buy them. Unfortunately, there is little support for expanding right to own guns by the Feds. They allow cities and states to ban or overly restrict gun ownership by law-abiding citizens.
More consensus could be built with respect to control if Congress and the Executive Branch demonstrated their support of the 2nd Amendment for all law abiding citizens, with no exception for locale.
Further, there are advocates who propose banning guns altogether, in every locale. Others make misleading statements about the capabilities of weapons (Alan Grayson, in the wake of this tragedy made ridiculous claims). The obvious response is to resist giving ground to such people.
The New York Times would have us believe that sick people like Omar Mateen would not attempt to kill if denied access to semi automatic long guns, that he and other terrorists would simply walk away from such action.
I hesitate to wade into this highly emotion-charged morass of an issue. But while there are a lot of assertions made about the need for meaningful change in our gun ownership laws with which I am wholly empathetic, one thing stands out:
Until this nation revises the Constitution by changing or repealing the Second Amendment, nothing meaningful on the subject of gun control will ever happen at the federal level. As much as people like to try and maneuver around that single sentence, constructed of a dependent clause which provides a rationale for the operative, independent clause, the Second Amendment is clear and unequivocal - the federal government shall not infringe the people's firearms ownership.
We can argue that the rationale is antiquated, and I would agree. We can argue that times are different; I agree. We can argue that firearms themselves are different, and I would say, yes. We can point out tactical contradictions in Supreme Court cases on how to interpret the Second Amendment, and I would say, yes, those are out there. But until we as a People of the United States of America determine to change our foundational legal document, nothing strategic can change on this issue.
And I am not personally convinced that 2/3 of the Congress, and 3/4 of the states, are inclined to do this at this time.
Until this nation revises the Constitution by changing or repealing the Second Amendment, nothing meaningful on the subject of gun control will ever happen at the federal level. As much as people like to try and maneuver around that single sentence, constructed of a dependent clause which provides a rationale for the operative, independent clause, the Second Amendment is clear and unequivocal - the federal government shall not infringe the people's firearms ownership.
We can argue that the rationale is antiquated, and I would agree. We can argue that times are different; I agree. We can argue that firearms themselves are different, and I would say, yes. We can point out tactical contradictions in Supreme Court cases on how to interpret the Second Amendment, and I would say, yes, those are out there. But until we as a People of the United States of America determine to change our foundational legal document, nothing strategic can change on this issue.
And I am not personally convinced that 2/3 of the Congress, and 3/4 of the states, are inclined to do this at this time.
Immediately ban the sale of all semi-automatic weapons – pistols, rifles and shotguns.
Initiate a three-year buy back program for all of the 150-million semi-automatic weapons currently in the hands of Americans. During the first two years of the program the government would buy back those weapons at twice the purchase price paid by the owner. During the third year, the government would only pay the original price for the weapon. For people who did not have receipts for those weapons, the government would give the owner of said weapon the benefit of the doubt in reimbursement.
This could be done immediately through Executive Action by the president. It would not violate the 2nd Amendment in any way, shape or form. Americans with clean backgrounds would still be able to purchase the following firearms: revolvers with a 6-shot cylinder with a barrel length of at least 6-inches; bolt-action rifles with a 5-round maximum capacity; double-barreled shotguns, either over-and-under, or side-by-side.
Those people who do not comply and sell their semi-automatic weapons back to the government during the well-publicized 3-year campaign would be very well aware of the fact that they would be liable for a felony weapons charge if found to be in possession of a semi-automatic firearm.
The cost of the program would be $200-billion, or the equivalent of six months of combat operations during the Iraq war.
Nobody’s 2nd Amendment rights would be violated.
Enough is enough.
Initiate a three-year buy back program for all of the 150-million semi-automatic weapons currently in the hands of Americans. During the first two years of the program the government would buy back those weapons at twice the purchase price paid by the owner. During the third year, the government would only pay the original price for the weapon. For people who did not have receipts for those weapons, the government would give the owner of said weapon the benefit of the doubt in reimbursement.
This could be done immediately through Executive Action by the president. It would not violate the 2nd Amendment in any way, shape or form. Americans with clean backgrounds would still be able to purchase the following firearms: revolvers with a 6-shot cylinder with a barrel length of at least 6-inches; bolt-action rifles with a 5-round maximum capacity; double-barreled shotguns, either over-and-under, or side-by-side.
Those people who do not comply and sell their semi-automatic weapons back to the government during the well-publicized 3-year campaign would be very well aware of the fact that they would be liable for a felony weapons charge if found to be in possession of a semi-automatic firearm.
The cost of the program would be $200-billion, or the equivalent of six months of combat operations during the Iraq war.
Nobody’s 2nd Amendment rights would be violated.
Enough is enough.
1
It's puzzling that this country permits the NRA, a well organized, well funded anti-personnel company, to lead the debate on what gun restrictions need to be put into place to protect the American public. That's like giving the fox a strong voice on protecting the chicken coop!
The NRA has no interest in the welfare of this country--they are a purely profit driven, destructive, seditious corporation that has to bear much of the responsibility for the mass slaughter of Americans in Newtown, Orlando, and too many other places to name.
There is no good reason for any civilian to own an assault rifle. Uneducated and selfish men don't want their toys of mass destruction taken away--they enjoy playing with flash, bang, bang, boom boom. Tough!
Give it up for the welfare of the country, our children, our friends and our relatives.
The NRA has no interest in the welfare of this country--they are a purely profit driven, destructive, seditious corporation that has to bear much of the responsibility for the mass slaughter of Americans in Newtown, Orlando, and too many other places to name.
There is no good reason for any civilian to own an assault rifle. Uneducated and selfish men don't want their toys of mass destruction taken away--they enjoy playing with flash, bang, bang, boom boom. Tough!
Give it up for the welfare of the country, our children, our friends and our relatives.
1
The NRA says " The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun". Even though any thinking person realizes that this is nonsense, it provides a good sound bite for the NRA to use after a massacre and many of its non-thinking members suck it up. The other theme that the NRA and the American Gun Owners Association use is that Americans need these deadly military type weapons to protect themselves from our own government which they see as the enemy. Many of the uncompromising pro-gun people are probably also members of anti-government militias. I don't know if the NRA and other pro-gun leaders really believe this propaganda or if they are just after money and power and use it to enrage their membership. Probably both. The reality is that our national government was formed to protect our freedom and basic rights and has been pretty much doing that for the last 250 years. Maintaining our freedom and rights requires that we participate in our democracy by voting, petitioning, protesting, debating, and supporting our preferred candidates. Military weapons in the hands of civilians is not necessary and has cost the lives of many innocent people. I fear the anti-government militias much more than our own democratically elected government.
1
The NRA - that cathedral of arch ignorance (if you want to win a lot of bar bets, challenge an NRA member to recite the ENTIRE 2nd amendment) would not exist in a nation that prizes public safety. There are models out there including Japan, a country of 130 million that in 2006 could fit its gun victims in a Smart Car.
As long as we continue to let this tail wag the dog, we reap what we sow. Meanwhile we go through this endless cycle of gun violence directed mainly at the underclass.
As long as we continue to let this tail wag the dog, we reap what we sow. Meanwhile we go through this endless cycle of gun violence directed mainly at the underclass.
1
After Newtown, I decided to make gun control--universal background checks, closing gun show and terrorist watch list loopholes--one of my top two voting issues. After every mass shooting, nothing changes. The GOP in Congress refuse to do the will of the American people. They do not hesitate on the state and national level to enact voter suppression laws, to enact religious bigotry laws, to try to reverse women's rights back to the 29th century and recently to ignore their responsibility to bring a Supreme Court nominee up for score. All of these actions or inactions are against the Constitution.
When did the GOP pledge akjegiancr to the NRA instead of the US Constitution? They have been doing harm to Americans and now are abetting terrorists get guns and bigots like Trump? Strange people with bizarre ideas about good government.
When did the GOP pledge akjegiancr to the NRA instead of the US Constitution? They have been doing harm to Americans and now are abetting terrorists get guns and bigots like Trump? Strange people with bizarre ideas about good government.
I find it ironic that a lot of Republicans are getting themselves in a knot over the rights of people on the "no-fly" list. Why was there no outcry from these same supposed protectors of civil liberties when the no-fly list was put together in the first place? Isn't flying an important right? Not so much, I guess. But propose a gun ban for those on the no-fly list and the right wing suddenly becomes interested in Constitutional protections. Sure shows their true colors.
1
The NRA long ago ceased to be a Second Amendment advocacy group. It is now run by and for the arms-manufacturing industry, and it takes any position that will equate to the most sales of weapons, both here and abroad. It uses the Second Amendment only as a shield, and as a tool to maintain political power by appealing to the fears of the common gun-owner. As an organization it is not only complicit in terrorism, it is complicit in genocide and anti-democratic rule abroad as well.
Wayne LaPierre and his NRA are home grown extremists, whose agenda is not dissimilar from the radical Islamic extremists they enable. Bad guys with bad guns are universally reprehensible.
The Democrats need to start the frame that the NRA aids and abets terrorism. It would be the perfect Rovian example of making someone's strength (their commitment to the second amendment) in to a weakness.
1
The NRA should be judged by an honest assessment of their actions and character instead of the propaganda trash peddled by the New York Times. The NRA champions the rights and freedoms of law abiding Americans in their exercise of the Second Amendment. The NRA neither calls for or profits from the criminal use of guns. When guns are used in criminal or terrorist acts, not only is it not a furtherance of our cherished freedom, it is a serious treat to it. Claiming that the NRA is for anything other than the lawful use of guns is a lie.
As I see it, resistance to gun legislation by the NRA is greed-based. It's about protecting a huge money stream from the sell of guns, ammunition, and gun accessories. It's not about the second amendment. Their focus on that and patriotism and the constitution is an utter joke. Their self-serving money-grabbing selves couldn't care less.
And the most shameful aspect of the NRA controlled bubble is it's many accomplices. Namely, Congressional representatives who are bought and paid for with promises of campaign financial support if they toe the line and threats of being primaried and losing their jobs if they don't. That toxic loop also includes of course exploited fearful consumers manipulated to believe they must arm themselves as protection against their own government that's on the verge of becoming tyrannical and confiscating their guns.
Overall, the NRA bubble, is a tight impenetrable greed motivated controlled godfather-like loop that ignores Orlando and Sandy Hook and us. And until these sick greed-based issues are forced out of the shadows and highlighted over and over again, from the president on down, nothing will change regardless of ever increasing tragedies that have become commonplace or the increasing amount of blood on that lobby's stained hands.
And the most shameful aspect of the NRA controlled bubble is it's many accomplices. Namely, Congressional representatives who are bought and paid for with promises of campaign financial support if they toe the line and threats of being primaried and losing their jobs if they don't. That toxic loop also includes of course exploited fearful consumers manipulated to believe they must arm themselves as protection against their own government that's on the verge of becoming tyrannical and confiscating their guns.
Overall, the NRA bubble, is a tight impenetrable greed motivated controlled godfather-like loop that ignores Orlando and Sandy Hook and us. And until these sick greed-based issues are forced out of the shadows and highlighted over and over again, from the president on down, nothing will change regardless of ever increasing tragedies that have become commonplace or the increasing amount of blood on that lobby's stained hands.
2
"....Senator John Cornyn, a Republican, would give authorities only three days to prove that a suspect is about to commit an act of terrorism — a nearly impossible standard to meet."
Why bother? It is obvious that an "A" rating from the NRA is his top priority.
Why bother? It is obvious that an "A" rating from the NRA is his top priority.
The NRA is a business, and money is their bottom line. Their influence over our lawmakers is wrong. Those lawmakers are supposed to represent us, but instead they represent the big business of the NRA. Those of you who elect these people are selling out your neighbors, your children, your country.
Demand of your lawmakers that assault weapons be banned, their only purpose is to kill people. Handguns need to be banned, their only purpose is to kill people. Keep your hunting rifles, your shotguns, but you do not need automatic weapons, no one does. And please, do not talk about your rights under the second amendment, because until you carry a musket and join a militia, it doesn't apply to you.
Demand of your lawmakers that assault weapons be banned, their only purpose is to kill people. Handguns need to be banned, their only purpose is to kill people. Keep your hunting rifles, your shotguns, but you do not need automatic weapons, no one does. And please, do not talk about your rights under the second amendment, because until you carry a musket and join a militia, it doesn't apply to you.
The Second and Third Amendments to the Constitution are anachronisms and should be repealed. "The right to bear arms" amendment was designed to forestall the establishment of a national standing army by insuring that state governors would be able to call up a large number of armed men on short notice. We have had a "standing army" for two hundred years now. Isn't it time we repealed this noxious provision of the Bill of Rights? The amendment was never intended to allow unrestricted private gun ownership, which, in those days, was not even a matter of discussion. Most Americans did not own firearms in the 1790s. This became clear when Congress called for volunteers to fight the British in 1776. Many, if not most, arrived for service without arms and there was a mad scramble to procure rifles for the Continentals. The Third Amendment said the government cannot quarter troops in private homes. This is obviously a total anachronism and stems from the fact that the British had done just that during their occupation of Boston during the period leading up to the outbreak of the Revolutionary War. Like the provision on arms, the quartering amendment reflects the era in which it was written and reflected a distrust of a strong national government. In a way that same distrust prevents us from taking rational measures to curb gun violence.
You leftists have been seeking the disarmament of Americans for nearly a century. You, in fact, are complicit in the spread of totalitarianism and communism because you are notoriously sympathetic to communism and authoritarianism.
You want a political fight and the butt kicking you took in 1994 and subsequent years wasn't enough for you? Think of how powerful the pro freedom/pro gun lobby is now that women and minorities are fully on board with the right to keep and bear arms.
The ruling oligarchy will never stop trying though. You are as persistent as dysentery or the common cold.
You want a political fight and the butt kicking you took in 1994 and subsequent years wasn't enough for you? Think of how powerful the pro freedom/pro gun lobby is now that women and minorities are fully on board with the right to keep and bear arms.
The ruling oligarchy will never stop trying though. You are as persistent as dysentery or the common cold.
1
While correct in most respects, once again this editorial does serious harm to people suffering from a mental illness. Once again, the Times repeats the shorthand that "the mentally ill" are barred from gun ownership. This is not true. The mentally ill are not barred from gun ownership, nor should they be. Those who suffer from a mental illness that results in possible harm to self or others are not barred from gun ownership. Only one subset are barred from gun ownership: those who did not voluntarily consent to treatment at one point in their lives, no matter how long ago, and had to be involuntarily committed. That includes a lot of people that are far less dangerous now than many people who are legally allowed to own guns.
By perpetuating the myth that there is some talismanic relationship between mental illness and gun violence, the Times does a great disservice. This is sloppy thinking. And it increases the stigma of mental illness, which means more people will not seek treatment, which means that society will be a poorer place.
Please stop, as a matter of editorial policy, connecting all mentally ill with criminals convicted of domestic violence. Please stop referring to a ban on the "mentally ill" owning guns. Please treat those who suffer from these serious illnesses with dignity and respect.
By perpetuating the myth that there is some talismanic relationship between mental illness and gun violence, the Times does a great disservice. This is sloppy thinking. And it increases the stigma of mental illness, which means more people will not seek treatment, which means that society will be a poorer place.
Please stop, as a matter of editorial policy, connecting all mentally ill with criminals convicted of domestic violence. Please stop referring to a ban on the "mentally ill" owning guns. Please treat those who suffer from these serious illnesses with dignity and respect.
To start, we can strongly support the efforts of Chris Murphy and Richard Blumenthal, and the other Democratic Senators who are standing up to the NRA. We can make it clear to the Republican shills that there are consequences for their continued thwarting of the common sense desire of the majority of Americans for common sense controls on dangerous weapons. No one needs an assault weapon. Let's build on the action of the filibuster and turn "theater" into action. It was the "theater" of women's protests that got us the vote--and the "theater" of ACT UP that helped change public awareness of AIDS.
Enough is enough.
Enough is enough.
1
This article left out some of the even more shocking things the NRA has done to support terrorism. For one, they successfully fought against a sales ban of armor-piercing bullets. Who other than a terrorist would have use for these? They also blocked a requirement that taggants be added to explosives during their manufacture, something most modern nations require. Taggants are microscopic plastic particles of many different shapes that can serve to identify who had been handling a explosive substance prior to its being detonated. Who's interest does this serve other than a terrorist ?
6
Whether or not one agrees with the Times' framing of the issue, the measures proposed in the article are on the mark.
Of course there should be universal background checks for purchasing firearms. The primary purpose of a gun is to kill or maim who it is fired upon. It is insane that anyone might be able to purchase such a weapon without a background check. We should increase the resources devoted to them in order to make the system work well, and apply it to all weapons purchases.
It is also intuitively obvious that people who have been placed on no-fly lists or who have been found to be suffering from serious mental health problems, should be initially blocked when attempting to purchase weapons. The appeal process should be made as fair and efficient as possible, but preventing terrorism and other bloodshed are too important to take a second seat to convenience.
While it is true that the aforementioned measures would not prevent someone from obtaining gun illegally, I believe you will find that the shooters in Orlando, San Bernadino, Aurora all purchased their weapons legally, and the shooter in Newtown was given legally purchased guns as gifts.
Of course there should be universal background checks for purchasing firearms. The primary purpose of a gun is to kill or maim who it is fired upon. It is insane that anyone might be able to purchase such a weapon without a background check. We should increase the resources devoted to them in order to make the system work well, and apply it to all weapons purchases.
It is also intuitively obvious that people who have been placed on no-fly lists or who have been found to be suffering from serious mental health problems, should be initially blocked when attempting to purchase weapons. The appeal process should be made as fair and efficient as possible, but preventing terrorism and other bloodshed are too important to take a second seat to convenience.
While it is true that the aforementioned measures would not prevent someone from obtaining gun illegally, I believe you will find that the shooters in Orlando, San Bernadino, Aurora all purchased their weapons legally, and the shooter in Newtown was given legally purchased guns as gifts.
The NRA, the gun industry, via the poorly named Institute for Legislative Action, and even the GOP cannot stand in the way of the vast majority that want to stop worrying every time they send their child to school, every time their kids go out to have fun. My grandmother taught me, 'Where there is a will, there is a way.' Is all this carnage necessary just so a few can shoot holes in old cars on the weekends? Does anyone still remember that the GOP has effectively hobbled the Supreme Court too? Write your Senator and members of Congress and vote, people, vote.
6
Nothing will change, from gun control to unemployment to climate change, while people in the South continue to vote for lunatic Republicans. So just read about the latest massacre and move on.
Since the Orlando terrorist wrote on Facebook, “You kill innocent women and children by doing us airstrikes..now taste the Islamic state vengeance,” shouldn’t we be asking our President, as commander-in-chief, to address the possible connection between acts of terrorism in the U.S. and our bombing campaign in Iraq and Syria? According to airwars.org, 1,312 Iraqi and Syrian civilians have been killed by coalition bombs and missiles in 13,072 airstrikes over 678 days. Along with more gun control perhaps our government needs to practice abroad what it preaches at home - more weapon control.
1
The Muslim registered Democrat son of a Taliban supporter who posted on Facebook his allegiance to ISIS is able to buy a gun and kill 50 homosexuals in a gun free zone after multiple of months of being under investigation by the FBI and the NRA is painted as the enemy? Wow, this is a new low even for the NYT.
2
Yes, because the NRA's puppets in Congress opposed legislation that would prevent such a person from being able to buy a gun legally.
Seems that you didn't understand the article.
Seems that you didn't understand the article.
1
I think what the NRA is really selling (probably not intentionally) is anarchy. The message is: if you own a gun, and lots of other people own guns, then the federal government will be forewarned not to trample on citizens rights. "Don't tread on me" at the personal , and typically self/group interest, level.
The standoff at Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in Oregon, and the Cliven Bundy cattle ranch standoff in Nevada are products of this mentality. The alternative to government is random, intimidating groups of heavily armed people, with random objectives, and contempt for laws they don't like.
A news item about the Malhuer prosecutions mentioned that one of the defendants stated he brought an AR-15 assault rifle and body armor to the site. Now, what was he thinking?
The standoff at Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in Oregon, and the Cliven Bundy cattle ranch standoff in Nevada are products of this mentality. The alternative to government is random, intimidating groups of heavily armed people, with random objectives, and contempt for laws they don't like.
A news item about the Malhuer prosecutions mentioned that one of the defendants stated he brought an AR-15 assault rifle and body armor to the site. Now, what was he thinking?
3
The NRA, like the republican party, is an organization composed of groups with different interests. Just as the republican party was hijacked by evangelicals, the NRA has been hijacked by hardliners unwilling to apply common sense to issues of gun violence.
I am a life NRA member. I do not own an assault rifle; they are designed just for one thing, to kill a lot of people in a short period of time. As another commenter has said, not too hard to fix, stake 10 round magazines in place and ban any large capacity magazines.
As i commented elsewhere, the M1 rifle of WWII fame was a semiauto with a fixed 8 round magazine fed individually or with stripper clips. Never used in a mass shooting.
But it is not just the the NRAs unwillingness to compromise. Gun laws tend to be proposed and written by people who are not firearms experts.
Take NJ for example. A law was put up for a vote that banned any gun of 50 caliber or larger. The fact that no such gun had ever been used in a shooting anywhere it the U.S. ever. If enacted, it would have effectively banned all the flintlocks and percussion guns used in revolutionary and civil war enactments.
Banning the sale or importation of assault rifles (pistol grip and large capacity magazines) is ok by me but it doesn't do anything about the millions of such guns already in the U.S.
The NRA leadership says we should look at the people and not the implements. My feeling is we should look at both.
I am a life NRA member. I do not own an assault rifle; they are designed just for one thing, to kill a lot of people in a short period of time. As another commenter has said, not too hard to fix, stake 10 round magazines in place and ban any large capacity magazines.
As i commented elsewhere, the M1 rifle of WWII fame was a semiauto with a fixed 8 round magazine fed individually or with stripper clips. Never used in a mass shooting.
But it is not just the the NRAs unwillingness to compromise. Gun laws tend to be proposed and written by people who are not firearms experts.
Take NJ for example. A law was put up for a vote that banned any gun of 50 caliber or larger. The fact that no such gun had ever been used in a shooting anywhere it the U.S. ever. If enacted, it would have effectively banned all the flintlocks and percussion guns used in revolutionary and civil war enactments.
Banning the sale or importation of assault rifles (pistol grip and large capacity magazines) is ok by me but it doesn't do anything about the millions of such guns already in the U.S.
The NRA leadership says we should look at the people and not the implements. My feeling is we should look at both.
2
`... from my cold, dead ... blood-stained ... hands '
1
I am bipolar, which is to say mentally ill. I get tired of reading that the mentally ill are barred from gun possession. Those barred are limited to individuals who have been adjudicated incompetent or institutionalized against their will. This is a tiny fraction of the mentally ill. The Times' sloppiness stigmatizes unfairly. It's as if they said all Muslims are barred from possessing guns. The Times would object to that as racial profiling. Apparently, they think that profiling the mentally is o.k.
The NRA: our biggest national security threat.
6
This is an excellent editorial, thank you. I'm fed up with the NRA, and their bought politicians, who are all complicit in domestic terrorism and killing. If I were a billionaire, I would fund a political organization to run the video clip on Trevor Noah's Daily Show after the Orlando massacre, showing the ISIS spokesman explaining it is easy to buy an assault weapon in the US. He implores his listeners, What are you waiting for?
I would run this clip against every politician against gun controls and assault weapon bans up for reelection, with a message, this politician works for ISIS, this politician is complicit in terrorism and killing innocent Americans. Vote of X,Y or Z, to remove ISIS supporters from our Government."
Such an advertisement, repeated over and over, might have a positive effect. We would be borrowing a page from the ruthless swift boat ads against John Kerry, that were essentially lies. Only these heavy handed ads, would be telling the truth, over and over again.
I would run this clip against every politician against gun controls and assault weapon bans up for reelection, with a message, this politician works for ISIS, this politician is complicit in terrorism and killing innocent Americans. Vote of X,Y or Z, to remove ISIS supporters from our Government."
Such an advertisement, repeated over and over, might have a positive effect. We would be borrowing a page from the ruthless swift boat ads against John Kerry, that were essentially lies. Only these heavy handed ads, would be telling the truth, over and over again.
2
The same thing can be done today on social media and through e-mail, Mr. Lindsay. It doesn't take money - just a little of our time. It takes OUR action.
Please, anyone,, provide me with even a single example of an assault-type weapon in private hands preventing, or even curtailing, a terrorist act in the United States.
We already HAVE a heavily-armed populace and it is not stopping these tragic outrages, most of which, like Aurora and Sandy Hook, have nothing whatsoever to do with Moslems or ISIS. The NRA is just a bunch of liars and ignoramuses (and cowards who think they need to hide behind a gun for "self-protection") looking out for the self-interests of weapons manufacturers at the expense of the safety and lives of the American people.
We already HAVE a heavily-armed populace and it is not stopping these tragic outrages, most of which, like Aurora and Sandy Hook, have nothing whatsoever to do with Moslems or ISIS. The NRA is just a bunch of liars and ignoramuses (and cowards who think they need to hide behind a gun for "self-protection") looking out for the self-interests of weapons manufacturers at the expense of the safety and lives of the American people.
2
Check the carry laws doctor. Just because you own a handgun doesn't mean you can carry it with you. Check the club in Orlando. No firearms allowed. You were saying?
Any arguments to the contrary are shattered by the opinion paragraph of this editorial. When Al Queda has practically "endorsed" the NRA, there's really nothing more to be debated.
6
(Corrected version)
Any arguments to the contrary are shattered by the opening paragraph of this editorial. When Al Queda has practically "endorsed" the NRA, there's really nothing more to be debated.
Any arguments to the contrary are shattered by the opening paragraph of this editorial. When Al Queda has practically "endorsed" the NRA, there's really nothing more to be debated.
"Lawmakers have a duty to their constituents", as the fourth estates have a duty. Name these legislators, allow them the public shame and embrace they have worked so hard for.
6
The soccer riots in France recently are deplorable. Now imagine the carnage if France had the same gun laws (or lack thereof) as the United States.
3
How about the Paris terrorist attacks? Not deplorable enough? How did they get their guns?
I am not a gun owner and I have no issue with citizens owning guns. However, I cannot in any way justify the ownership of an assault rifle. The word "assault" is right in the name: the purpose of the weapon is to grant the ability to take down as many targets as possible in the shortest amount of time. Home defense and hunting do not call for assault rifles. If you want to shoot something so powerful, go to a shooting range and take out some cans and paper targets.
Or just do what Chris Rock said years ago and just have the bullets cost $1,000 each. Anything else is safer than the gun access situation we have right now.
Or just do what Chris Rock said years ago and just have the bullets cost $1,000 each. Anything else is safer than the gun access situation we have right now.
123
How about an assault bat, or assault knife, or assault car, or assault fist and/or feet Katie?
How do you feel about banning those, because as you know, many many, many more people are murdered with those 'assault' weapons every year, than those killed with a semi-automatic rifle?!
What percentage crimes involving the use of guns are committed by the law-abiding / gun-owning citizens in this country?
Why is it that we are told not to blame an entire religion for the terroristic attacks of a few, but somehow ALL responsible and law abiding gun-owners are responsible for ALL guns used in crimes?
How do you feel about banning those, because as you know, many many, many more people are murdered with those 'assault' weapons every year, than those killed with a semi-automatic rifle?!
What percentage crimes involving the use of guns are committed by the law-abiding / gun-owning citizens in this country?
Why is it that we are told not to blame an entire religion for the terroristic attacks of a few, but somehow ALL responsible and law abiding gun-owners are responsible for ALL guns used in crimes?
Complicity? Yes. But I would use a different word: accessory.
2
GOP = Guns O'Plenty
Supporter, Aider, Abetter of NRA = Nicely Ruining America.
Supporter, Aider, Abetter of NRA = Nicely Ruining America.
1
What good are more gun laws if the laws that we have on the books already aren't, can't, or won't be enforced.
Should it be made a crime for the officials of our government not to enforce the laws that are on the books?
That's a law I could get behind.
Should it be made a crime for the officials of our government not to enforce the laws that are on the books?
That's a law I could get behind.
3
The NRA is a well run propaganda machine. Unfortunately it has no opposite counterpart. Who will run adds for the average citizen? Who will lobby the halls of congress or state houses for us, rather than them? Who will direct campaign funds to candidates and their PAC's? All we have is one vote. They bring millions to the table for TV, radio and print ads.
The only way to oppose this is with solid reporting and constant exposure through the press so that the one vote we have can be used intelligently. We should know the name of every politician that takes NRA money. We should know how much and how they vote on every gun control issue. We should know who bottles up bills in committee, or switches their vote to appear to support the public, but then simply follows the money. We should know about every gun control bill that's pending so that our voice can be heard before it is voted on.
In other words, we cannot have a democracy without a vigorous, active press, willing to treat the entire process of legislation news, not just the end results. It's not just the NRA that's complicit in this process, it's our media who look the other way while all this influence peddling is going on.
The only way to oppose this is with solid reporting and constant exposure through the press so that the one vote we have can be used intelligently. We should know the name of every politician that takes NRA money. We should know how much and how they vote on every gun control issue. We should know who bottles up bills in committee, or switches their vote to appear to support the public, but then simply follows the money. We should know about every gun control bill that's pending so that our voice can be heard before it is voted on.
In other words, we cannot have a democracy without a vigorous, active press, willing to treat the entire process of legislation news, not just the end results. It's not just the NRA that's complicit in this process, it's our media who look the other way while all this influence peddling is going on.
1. The 2nd Amendment right has been defined by federal courts as a Civil Right. This is not the sort of right that can be stripped by bureaucratic action.
2. An "overwhelming majority" of Americans do not have a degree from a major research university (Carnegie). An "overwhelming majority" of Americans cannot find Kolkata, Mumbai, or Singapore on a map. An "overwhelming majority" of Texas high-schoolers are not Top Ten Percenters. So, who cares what the "overwhelming majority" thinks about guns?
3. What is a "high-capacity magazine"? I imagine "more than one round" is the NYT's definition. We might be able to talk if "standard capacity" (original design) was the basis; that would be 20 rounds for AR-15's, 30 rounds for AK-47's, 17 rounds for Glock Model 17 pistols, 20 rounds for FN FiveSeven pistols, etc. Perhaps that is enough for civilian use.
4. "No civilian anywhere should be allowed" -- There are millions of 30-round magazines (5.56 NATO, 7.62x39) in American civilian hands and only a few are used in crime each year. 30-round magazines are among the safest products in America.
2. An "overwhelming majority" of Americans do not have a degree from a major research university (Carnegie). An "overwhelming majority" of Americans cannot find Kolkata, Mumbai, or Singapore on a map. An "overwhelming majority" of Texas high-schoolers are not Top Ten Percenters. So, who cares what the "overwhelming majority" thinks about guns?
3. What is a "high-capacity magazine"? I imagine "more than one round" is the NYT's definition. We might be able to talk if "standard capacity" (original design) was the basis; that would be 20 rounds for AR-15's, 30 rounds for AK-47's, 17 rounds for Glock Model 17 pistols, 20 rounds for FN FiveSeven pistols, etc. Perhaps that is enough for civilian use.
4. "No civilian anywhere should be allowed" -- There are millions of 30-round magazines (5.56 NATO, 7.62x39) in American civilian hands and only a few are used in crime each year. 30-round magazines are among the safest products in America.
1
Our gun control laws leak like a sieve. Even if we banned gun ownership to those on the watch list, will those at public shows and flee markets be required to check the credentials of everyone? Gun controls need to be strengthened and enforced every where and for everyone. But we can not even pass the most minor general laws for gun control. ISIS just laughs at us and keeps on shooting.
1
The NRA is sickening. It's all about their clout and not the people.
1
“Those same people who we don’t allow to fly can go into a store in the United States and buy a firearm, and there’s nothing that we can do to stop them. That’s a law that needs to be changed,” - Obama
Well, Senator Kennedy was on no-fly list for a while and two Congressmen who made trips to middle East to assess the situation were put on no-fly list. Flying is not a right but ownership of guns is a Constitutionally guaranteed right that cannot be taken away by the government that can arbitrarily put anyone on their 'watch' list. Because the person on no-fly list does not know the evidence used to place their name on the list and to deny their second Amendment right, unless there is a challenge mechanism and the courts are involved in the placement on the list, the lawmakers who opposed Feinstein bill last year were of sound mind and judgment. Democrats are demagoging this issue to divert attention from the sad fact that our commander in chief has turned into mourner in chief on whose watch we have had several successive terrorist strikes on our homeland.
You argue: "If a law like Senator Feinstein’s were in place, authorities would have at least a chance of stopping aspiring terrorists from buying weapons."
You should have added the qualifier LEGALLY. Considering that the country is awash in firearms of all kinds, the prohibition that DiFei wanted would not have stopped anyone from getting lethal weapons ILLEGALLY.
Use your brains to think, not your hearts, people.
Well, Senator Kennedy was on no-fly list for a while and two Congressmen who made trips to middle East to assess the situation were put on no-fly list. Flying is not a right but ownership of guns is a Constitutionally guaranteed right that cannot be taken away by the government that can arbitrarily put anyone on their 'watch' list. Because the person on no-fly list does not know the evidence used to place their name on the list and to deny their second Amendment right, unless there is a challenge mechanism and the courts are involved in the placement on the list, the lawmakers who opposed Feinstein bill last year were of sound mind and judgment. Democrats are demagoging this issue to divert attention from the sad fact that our commander in chief has turned into mourner in chief on whose watch we have had several successive terrorist strikes on our homeland.
You argue: "If a law like Senator Feinstein’s were in place, authorities would have at least a chance of stopping aspiring terrorists from buying weapons."
You should have added the qualifier LEGALLY. Considering that the country is awash in firearms of all kinds, the prohibition that DiFei wanted would not have stopped anyone from getting lethal weapons ILLEGALLY.
Use your brains to think, not your hearts, people.
1
It's not the N.R.A.
It's the N.A.R.A or National "Assault" Rifle Association.
It's the N.A.R.A or National "Assault" Rifle Association.
2
Just another reason to vote ONLY Democrat 2016.
5
Even the gun lobby doesn't believe half the stuff that they say. Good guy with a gun? They know that doesn't work, especially in mass shootings with semi-automatic weapons. But they take advantage of the "Dirty Harry", Charles Bronson, Bruce Willis mentality. Many people can't distinguish between movies and reality.
1
To paraphrase...
It's the bullets, stupid!
Since Oklahoma City, we've limited how much fertilizer we should put into a citizens hands for fear of explosive devices.
Guns are explosive devices.
We don't allow the sale of ammunition for rocket launchers or fragmentation grenades to the public.
They can kill too many people at at a time.
Let's make bullets as hard to get as an abortion.
It's the bullets, stupid!
Since Oklahoma City, we've limited how much fertilizer we should put into a citizens hands for fear of explosive devices.
Guns are explosive devices.
We don't allow the sale of ammunition for rocket launchers or fragmentation grenades to the public.
They can kill too many people at at a time.
Let's make bullets as hard to get as an abortion.
1
The gun industry and its lobbying forces follow the money, not the blood. Groups like the NRA and NSSF have parasitized our legislatures to and beyond the point of dysunction. They have even innoculated the public (host) with grotesque anti-litigation statutes that preclude legal remedies. What to do? Set aside the gun control legislation for now and concentrate on loosening the civil tort restrictions and encourage, subsidize, and welcome the tidal wave of litigation that has the potential to drown the gun advocacy parasites bleeding our nation. Freed of the parasite, the host slowly recovers.
I am a retired LEO, who has a concealed carry permit for my service weapon a handgun. I am NOT a member of the NRA, I do NOT believe the type of military-like designed weapons like the Bushmaster rifles or magazines that can hold 30 or more rounds of ammunition should be legal PERIOD. I am pretty conservative about most things, but the insane ability of people depending on the state you live in to have almost unfettered access to any weapon they want is just plain wrong and it doesn't make any sense. Nobody is saying you can't own a gun in this country. The Supreme Court has upheld that right, but I firmly believe there should be common sense limits on what type and yes who should be able to get them. There are disqualifiers even though there is a basic right to bear arms.
The major problem I see is that seeing as the estimate is there are already over 20 million assault rifles out there already while changing the law might possible limit the ability for someone to get an assault rifle, they will be still plenty out there available through illegal means to get them. Our government can't get rid of 10 million illegal aliens am I to believe they will get all 20 million assault rifles out of the hands of currently law abiding citizens? I don't know what the answer is, but either through federal background checks, not state ones perhaps that might limit some, only some, of those who want to do harm to us. Timothy McVeigh killed 168 people with fertilizer.
The major problem I see is that seeing as the estimate is there are already over 20 million assault rifles out there already while changing the law might possible limit the ability for someone to get an assault rifle, they will be still plenty out there available through illegal means to get them. Our government can't get rid of 10 million illegal aliens am I to believe they will get all 20 million assault rifles out of the hands of currently law abiding citizens? I don't know what the answer is, but either through federal background checks, not state ones perhaps that might limit some, only some, of those who want to do harm to us. Timothy McVeigh killed 168 people with fertilizer.
61
Ronald Reagan opposed funding research on AIDS until someone he knew got AIDS. This same evil man refused to support embryonic stem-cell research until he was diagnosed with Alzheimer's. This shameful fool also opposed gun control legislation until someone shot him.
What do you think would happen if the 49 innocent victims in Orlando were the children of Republican congressmen?
What do you think would happen if the 49 innocent victims in Orlando were the children of Republican congressmen?
11
37,000 deaths and 110,000 shootings in America every single year---for the last 40 years since NRA has become a political menace: ZERO deaths, shootings are related to Second Amendment
Editorial is a "faux fuyant," an effort to distract readers from the real issue, Islamic terrorism and indecisiveness of the WH and its allies in the media to deal straightforwardly and honestly with the problem.. Why is it that France, with its stringent anti gun legislation, has been the scene of 2 mass carnages even more horrific than those of San Bernardino and Orlando?Irresoluteness of the "Maison Blanche," its aversion to defining the problem, has had a trickle down effect, emboldening our enemies in the Caliphate. To the extent that Obama convinces Americans that source of the problem is our lax gun laws, he is off the hook, absolved of any blame.Truthtellers r seldom popular in any society, but the stark truth in France is that the thousands of Mahgrebins flowing into the country daily, not thoroughly vetted, pose a major problem for law enforcement, as the gunning down of 2 police officers this past week has also shown. Its as though the West had given up the fight against militant Islam. Hence, the rise of right wing parties like the FN, and the impact of the Trump candidacy.2,000 new mosques r to be built in France this year. Muslims account for more than 10 percent of the population.In the US, we have a c-in-c who unceasingly extolls the virtues of Islam while exposing his less than favorable view of Christianity. We need stricter anti gun laws, but who realistically doubts that the Orlando shooter would have found his deadly weaponry anyway?
I loved the bit about "2000 mosques r to be built in France this year," as it warned me not to bother reading anything else. It's a shame that I had to go and accidentally notice the vicious little attack on the President, but these things happen.
ROBERT:Check out "le Monde," "Le Figaro " and other reliable French news sources. "Marseilles" has such a high Mahgrebin minority that you would think you were on the other side of the Mediterranean in Algiers, in Bab el Oued.or Clos Salembier. Irony is that ALGERIANS fought long and hard for their independence from France,but, unable to manage a modern economy, and beset by coups d'état and other internal power struggles, " reglements de compte,"forced millions to emigrate to the Metropole, because life in Algeria became "invivable."There is no such thing as a "vicious attack". One is either right or wrong. If you deny the veracity of my criticism of the President, you should offer a rebuttal.Even my wife, originally from GHANA,but who waited her turn in line, thinks that Obama "screwed up."By the way, when is the last time that our c-in-c visited the HOOD?
Most of the people who oppose even anemic gun-control measures will also tell you that they are 'pro-life'!
2
Thanks to the editorial board for this timely comment. This National Insecurity issue has long been clouded by misinformation by the NRA and their Republicon lackeys. I would ask all who care about our country to re-examine the definition of the term 'National Security' and what it really means. Typically referring to international threats I would add there's more domestic problems that are a threat to individuals first , but have become a threat to our nation. The good news is that a solution is only a signature away, if the political will could be summoned.
2
Such things as no fly lists, security clearances and now a no buy list bother me as they are unchallenged extra-judicial stealth findings of guilt or of second-class citizenship. Slippery to pin down, but definitely there's a smell about them, of bill of attainder for the common man. We just don't like you they say, even if we can't pin anything on you.
1
Where is the ACLU? Why isn't LaPierre and representatives of the gun industry brought to court? Their behavior results in deaths of innocents. Isn't that enough?
2
The terror gap isn't really a 2nd amendment issue. It is a 5th amendment issue. The question people have to ask themselves is whether or not their hatred of firearms is sufficient reason to destroy the concept of due process. Some may think it is a worthwhile trade. They are wrong. No matter how much they try to justify the idea as "reasonable" or "common sense".
"No fly, no buy" exists only as the beginning of a slippery slope. What argument can be made against the government suspending 4th, 6th, or 8th amendment rights for terrorists? If they are too dangerous to fly in planes or buy weapons, then the government should have the ability to constantly watch them and have access to their phones, computers, and homes.
If you don't agree, ask yourself a simple question: are you comfortable with giving Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton the ability to label American citizens "dangerous" without any presentation of evidence or legal proceedings?
"No fly, no buy" exists only as the beginning of a slippery slope. What argument can be made against the government suspending 4th, 6th, or 8th amendment rights for terrorists? If they are too dangerous to fly in planes or buy weapons, then the government should have the ability to constantly watch them and have access to their phones, computers, and homes.
If you don't agree, ask yourself a simple question: are you comfortable with giving Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton the ability to label American citizens "dangerous" without any presentation of evidence or legal proceedings?
2
Wikipedia "firearm related death rate by country". We aren't just number one, the US is the outlier among advanced countries. For example the UK - no one is allowed to own assault rifles, no one is allowed to carry a gun for self defense, and background checks are required to own hunting and sporting firearms. The UK's gun death rate is one forty fifth of ours. Not one fourth, one forty fifth. The outlier on the other end is Japan were almost no one owns guns period and their gun death rate is 175th that of the US.
6
Congratulations to the Editorial Board on using an unnamed Al Qaeda spokesman as an authoritative source! It does, however, underscore that it is very easy for criminals of all sorts to get guns. Criminals will always be able to do that. The real problem is what people do with guns, and that is what we need to focus on. Banning guns just does not work. The French learned that on several recent occasions with massive loss of life.
We need to know if people believed to have terrorist inclinations want to buy a gun so that they and their acquaintances can be more closely scrutinized. Denying a gun to terrorists does nothing. They will just switch to a bomb or something else or get a gun unlawfully. It is the close scrutiny that is important. That is what most directly helps prevent terrorism. Unfortunately, once terrorists learn that trying to buy a gun invites scrutiny, they will seek other more clandestine means to commit murder and mayhem. So, this may only be a temporary solution.
If preventing terrorism is the goal, the only effective way to do that would be to prevent terrorists from coming here in the first place and better identifying those that are already here. That is not going to be easy, but it needs to be done.
We need to know if people believed to have terrorist inclinations want to buy a gun so that they and their acquaintances can be more closely scrutinized. Denying a gun to terrorists does nothing. They will just switch to a bomb or something else or get a gun unlawfully. It is the close scrutiny that is important. That is what most directly helps prevent terrorism. Unfortunately, once terrorists learn that trying to buy a gun invites scrutiny, they will seek other more clandestine means to commit murder and mayhem. So, this may only be a temporary solution.
If preventing terrorism is the goal, the only effective way to do that would be to prevent terrorists from coming here in the first place and better identifying those that are already here. That is not going to be easy, but it needs to be done.
1
Need I remind the writer, that the Orlando killer was born and raised in the USA.
Yes, and he was twice investigated by the FBI who missed the warning signs. That is why I said we needed to be better at identifying those terrorists who are already here. One of the San Bernardino terrorists was also already here. We missed that one and also the wife he brought into the US who assisted him. Hassan was already here too and actually a Major in the US Military. We missed him too. As I noted, this is not going to be easy, but it has to be done.
The republicans' concern and respect for the 2nd amendment borders on fetishism. Would they had as much concern and respect for the rest of the Constitution.
7
We sell most weapons in the world. Why does it surprise us that it won't hit our home at some point?
It's the same argument we make against hate crimes, if you hate or incite hate, it will come home one day.
Hate breeds hate, violence breeds violence, weapons breeds damage and NRA is terrorist organization by paper-book definition itself and not a complicit.
Only Love and Empathy can change the course.. it will be hard one but it fits our core principal of Liberty , life and pursuit of happiness with every moral value one can have.
And you have my full support.
It's the same argument we make against hate crimes, if you hate or incite hate, it will come home one day.
Hate breeds hate, violence breeds violence, weapons breeds damage and NRA is terrorist organization by paper-book definition itself and not a complicit.
Only Love and Empathy can change the course.. it will be hard one but it fits our core principal of Liberty , life and pursuit of happiness with every moral value one can have.
And you have my full support.
1
Love + Action to make change, P2. Talking and "support" are not enough. Contact your representatives in Congress today:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nicole-silverberg/guide-elected-representa...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nicole-silverberg/guide-elected-representa...
1
I think the NRA and its leader are evil incarnate. With social media and the internet, a group can form opinion. Right now the WaPo is a prime example of distortion and misrepresentation to elect the corrupt Mrs. Clinton. Mr. Trump is running for President as a Republican but is not a Republican and when elected will do the right things for America. So if there is no Mr. Sanders, I cannot vote for a Democrat Mrs. Clinton. She did a favor for UBS as Secretary of State and the Clintons were paid 1.5 million dollars, personally.
I have been a life member of the NRA since 1979 and pro commonsensical regulation since the Brady bill was introduced. It is time for the NRA to embrace measures that will attempt to keep firearms out of the hands of terrorists, felons and others who shouldn't posses them. Reasonable legislation would be to close the gun show loophole, no-fly no buy rule, and stiffen enforcement of laws that are currently on the books.
The NRA has changed drastically since my father joined and latter myself. In my fathers NRA a current member had to support your application and attest to your character. I needed no such recommendation . Now anyone with the money can join, convicted of a felony who cares we will put you on the board ( Oliver North), admit to sleeping with underage girls and hope for the death of the President ( Ted Nuggent) give you a speaking slot at the convention as well as a seat on the board. I long for the days that men of good character formed an organization that's primary goal was the promotion of firearm safety and marksmanship,not a political arm of the Republican Party.
The NRA has changed drastically since my father joined and latter myself. In my fathers NRA a current member had to support your application and attest to your character. I needed no such recommendation . Now anyone with the money can join, convicted of a felony who cares we will put you on the board ( Oliver North), admit to sleeping with underage girls and hope for the death of the President ( Ted Nuggent) give you a speaking slot at the convention as well as a seat on the board. I long for the days that men of good character formed an organization that's primary goal was the promotion of firearm safety and marksmanship,not a political arm of the Republican Party.
7
Why don't you and others in the NRA try to convince the leadership to support sensible laws? If that's not possible, why not drop out and make a splash while doing so? Perhaps you and hundreds of other disappointed NRA members could get together and take out ads around the country explaining why you left the organization. Or write an op-ed. There's so much you can do from within.
The NY Times is just a complicit in Terrorism as the NRA.
The NY Times constantly runs articles and makes editorials supporting the gutting of the Second Amendment without going through the process of amending the US Constitution. The NY Times could care less about the tyranny of the majority.
It is for this reason that the NY Times does not run any serious articles not outside written editorials on ideas to address the issue at some middle ground. The NRA is an "all or nothing" organization and the NY Times has become an "all or nothing" organization on this issue.
As such, both are adding an abetting the problem. There are thoughtful and rational people out there that have proposed some ideas to address the majority of the issues from both sides on the subject. But both sides have their megaphones drowning out those in the middle demanding and all or nothing so-called solution.
The NY Times constantly runs articles and makes editorials supporting the gutting of the Second Amendment without going through the process of amending the US Constitution. The NY Times could care less about the tyranny of the majority.
It is for this reason that the NY Times does not run any serious articles not outside written editorials on ideas to address the issue at some middle ground. The NRA is an "all or nothing" organization and the NY Times has become an "all or nothing" organization on this issue.
As such, both are adding an abetting the problem. There are thoughtful and rational people out there that have proposed some ideas to address the majority of the issues from both sides on the subject. But both sides have their megaphones drowning out those in the middle demanding and all or nothing so-called solution.
3
Not true. Gun safety/management proponents have been forcefully advocating middle ground positions for years: universal background checks, no guns for domestic abusers, high capacity magazine/rifle bans, etc. That IS the middle ground. The other side has had no middle ground. Not even to the extent of allowing municipalities to regulate firearms within their own jurisdictions. Not even conceding that firearms have no place in bars or schools, or that gun violence research is an appropriate public health issue for the CDC to address.
" Gun safety/management proponents have been forcefully advocating middle ground positions for years: universal background checks, no guns for domestic abusers, high capacity magazine/rifle bans, etc. That IS the middle ground"
I beg to differ. There are proposals that are quite different from those you site that never see the light of day due to the megaphone of the NRA and the NYT.
The fact that the commenter stated what he/she think is the defacto middle ground as apposed to asking who other kinds of middle ground ideas I was alluding to makes the case.
Both sides of this debate, and it is a debate with lots of facets, fail to listen. They only know what they want and neither side actually wants to or is willing to listen to the other.
I beg to differ. There are proposals that are quite different from those you site that never see the light of day due to the megaphone of the NRA and the NYT.
The fact that the commenter stated what he/she think is the defacto middle ground as apposed to asking who other kinds of middle ground ideas I was alluding to makes the case.
Both sides of this debate, and it is a debate with lots of facets, fail to listen. They only know what they want and neither side actually wants to or is willing to listen to the other.
The nra thinks it is their America. The Koch brothers think it is their America. ALEC, the BIG corporate American Legislative Exchange Council, thinks it is their America. Republican operatives for BIG democracy-destroying money in Congress think it is their America. It is time they learned whose America it is - it is OUR America - the 90% that are being ignored on an hourly basis by the elected officials who are supposed to represent us. Kudos to democrats in the Senate for filibustering for a vote on background checks and not allowing people on no-fly lists and terror watch lists to legally buy guns. Unfortunately the bills are attached to the Appropriations Bill, as are a number of amendments by republicans which will surely take away even more from 90% of us.
WE are not asking for enough. WE need to demand a "clean bill" that says:
Bullet-Riddled Bodies Do Not Lie. GUNS KILL. Get them off the streets of America. WE DEMAND that EVERY gun in America be REGISTERED on a national database, state LICENSED and FULLY INSURED FOR LIABILITY.
Right now, while we are outraged at gun violence in our society, WE must all act and hold every lawmakers feet to the fire. The linked article shows how to contact your representatives in Congress. Please contact them right now and as often as possible until they pass meaningful gun control legislation.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nicole-silverberg/guide-elected-representa...
WE are not asking for enough. WE need to demand a "clean bill" that says:
Bullet-Riddled Bodies Do Not Lie. GUNS KILL. Get them off the streets of America. WE DEMAND that EVERY gun in America be REGISTERED on a national database, state LICENSED and FULLY INSURED FOR LIABILITY.
Right now, while we are outraged at gun violence in our society, WE must all act and hold every lawmakers feet to the fire. The linked article shows how to contact your representatives in Congress. Please contact them right now and as often as possible until they pass meaningful gun control legislation.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nicole-silverberg/guide-elected-representa...
3
Liability doesn't cover intentional acts, but I am sure you know such a basic fact about insurance.
I am all for a complete ban on assault rifles, maybe all guns (except for the police and military). Yes, repeal the Second Amendment if necessary.
I am also for increased scrutiny of non-Americans entering this country from Middle East countries, and surveillance of mosques and other areas that are suspected of fostering extremism.
So does that make me a liberal, a fascist or a pragmatists who wants Americans to be safe?
I am also for increased scrutiny of non-Americans entering this country from Middle East countries, and surveillance of mosques and other areas that are suspected of fostering extremism.
So does that make me a liberal, a fascist or a pragmatists who wants Americans to be safe?
50
Surveillance of mosques, and alienating a percentage of the population is fascist and anything but pragmatic.
Steven, go for that repeal of the Second Amendment. I don't think you'll succeed, but at least you're in favor of doing things the right way. NYT and others are not.
It makes you a wide-eyed optimist. Crazy people all already here, and we don't know how to handle them. We can't lock up every nut-job, and we don't know when one is going to go off the rails.
We have four branches of government in our country, the executive, the legislative, the judicial and the NRA. Donald Trump, when he wants to discuss gun policy doesn't go to the legislators, as would seem logical, he goes to our fourth branch, the NRA to kiss the ring of flag draped Wayne LaPierre to judge what's possible in the mind of his eminence.
You can be sure ISIS is watching and would like nothing more than to tilt the US election to Donald Trump our home golden madman who will add fire to fire. Be sure we will see more terror before the November election, it's just good politics folks.
You can be sure ISIS is watching and would like nothing more than to tilt the US election to Donald Trump our home golden madman who will add fire to fire. Be sure we will see more terror before the November election, it's just good politics folks.
This is exactly right. People on the no guns list could appeal in court their denial to purchase a gun. If they truly have nothing to hide they will be able eventually to get their guns. But structuring the legislation this way puts public safety first and questionable individuals second.
Next, the ban on assault weapons and high capacity magazines is a top priority for public safety. There is no single other measure that we can take right now to have an immediate impact on making us safer. If this legislation is opposed by republican (or a couple of democratic) congressman, all names of those congressman need to be published by the Times so that the American people can know who the hypocrites are that criticize the president for not being tough enough on terrorism while refusing to do the one thing they could do today to make the public safer.
The double down argument that only more citizens with guns, that only more guns not less guns, will make us safer is ludicrous on the face of. The republican party will effectively have their right to speak on getting tough on terrorism until the join us in passing this weapons of mass destruction ban. Let's do this now.
Next, the ban on assault weapons and high capacity magazines is a top priority for public safety. There is no single other measure that we can take right now to have an immediate impact on making us safer. If this legislation is opposed by republican (or a couple of democratic) congressman, all names of those congressman need to be published by the Times so that the American people can know who the hypocrites are that criticize the president for not being tough enough on terrorism while refusing to do the one thing they could do today to make the public safer.
The double down argument that only more citizens with guns, that only more guns not less guns, will make us safer is ludicrous on the face of. The republican party will effectively have their right to speak on getting tough on terrorism until the join us in passing this weapons of mass destruction ban. Let's do this now.
3
How many NRA members have been involved in a mass shooting?
How many Chicago gang members are also members of the NRA?
It must be a lot right?
How many Chicago gang members are also members of the NRA?
It must be a lot right?
3
The NRA headquarters should be raided and leaders of the NRA arrested for giving aid to terrorists. Why has this not been done? What prevents law enforcement from doing this? The law is on the books and they are violating it.
The NRA's sole source of power is the myth, presently written into our constitution, that every person has a God-given right to firearms. If the NRA is complicit in terrorism, then the 2nd Amendment makes all US citizens complicit.
The undeniable solution is to repeal the 2nd Amendment, and it is a mystery to me how this escapes the editorial staff of the NYTimes.
Rather than scolding the NRA for espousing what the constitution (arguably) permits, the NYTimes should be shaming each and every member of Congress, and each and every State legislature, for not proposing the repeal of the 2nd Amendment.
Eliminating the 2nd Amendment will permit our lawmakers to fashion firearms laws appropriate for the citizens of the United States in the 21st century.
The undeniable solution is to repeal the 2nd Amendment, and it is a mystery to me how this escapes the editorial staff of the NYTimes.
Rather than scolding the NRA for espousing what the constitution (arguably) permits, the NYTimes should be shaming each and every member of Congress, and each and every State legislature, for not proposing the repeal of the 2nd Amendment.
Eliminating the 2nd Amendment will permit our lawmakers to fashion firearms laws appropriate for the citizens of the United States in the 21st century.
Until Big Money is out of politics, there will be no change.
I've given up on our politicians caring enough to solve this problem. Either they're bought and paid for by the NRA or they love their jobs more than their own country.
It's going to take a hit on the pocketbooks of Big Money before a change.
As in when no one out of fear goes to the movies or the mall or amusement parks or for coffee or does any of the things that keeps corporate America thriving.
I've given up on our politicians caring enough to solve this problem. Either they're bought and paid for by the NRA or they love their jobs more than their own country.
It's going to take a hit on the pocketbooks of Big Money before a change.
As in when no one out of fear goes to the movies or the mall or amusement parks or for coffee or does any of the things that keeps corporate America thriving.
2
The right wing, particularly the NRA, now has a delema.
Support restrictions on the sale of these weapons, (especially at loose-rules gun shows), and extensively monitored lists of "no buy" persons…
or,
face the prospect that the terrorists will hijack and completely define the gun control debate in the U.S. with every incident like Orlando.
In other words, it's mostly on the NRA now to assist the effort to keep these weapons away from certain dangerous people (through means they don't support) or else the public backlash will bite them big.
The terrorists and their access to guns are now the biggest challenge for the NRA. It's on them now to justify their positions and avoid a public demanded crackdown.
Support restrictions on the sale of these weapons, (especially at loose-rules gun shows), and extensively monitored lists of "no buy" persons…
or,
face the prospect that the terrorists will hijack and completely define the gun control debate in the U.S. with every incident like Orlando.
In other words, it's mostly on the NRA now to assist the effort to keep these weapons away from certain dangerous people (through means they don't support) or else the public backlash will bite them big.
The terrorists and their access to guns are now the biggest challenge for the NRA. It's on them now to justify their positions and avoid a public demanded crackdown.
I've thought since Sandy Hook that the NRA should be listed as a terrorist organization.
1
I understand the desire to take some sort of action after this act of terrorism. I want action taken as well. When government fails us, as it has here, the last thing we should do is give them more power. Which is what they always ask for following any tragedy. They don't have enough resources, they tell us. They don't have enough laws. In order for them to protect us we must sacrifice our rights. Heavily guarded politicians tell us this. We must give up our rights as they ride in bulletproof vehicles.
This act of terrorism would not have been changed one bit had the terrorist been armed with handguns only because he was in that club for three hours with his victims before police moved in. The largest mass murder of Americans was done with airplanes. Where everyone was unarmed.
Regarding the NRA, they are not an enemy. They are citizens acting lawfully in pursuit of their own agenda. Like all of us should be. Their success at it is not an indictment of them. Like the ACLU, we need single minded organizations like them to protect our rights from government.
The FBI failed to prevent the Boston Marathon bombing despite warnings and plenty of reason to take action against at least the non citizen brother. They failed to prevent this disaster despite numerous interviews with the terrorist. That is where our focus should be.
This act of terrorism would not have been changed one bit had the terrorist been armed with handguns only because he was in that club for three hours with his victims before police moved in. The largest mass murder of Americans was done with airplanes. Where everyone was unarmed.
Regarding the NRA, they are not an enemy. They are citizens acting lawfully in pursuit of their own agenda. Like all of us should be. Their success at it is not an indictment of them. Like the ACLU, we need single minded organizations like them to protect our rights from government.
The FBI failed to prevent the Boston Marathon bombing despite warnings and plenty of reason to take action against at least the non citizen brother. They failed to prevent this disaster despite numerous interviews with the terrorist. That is where our focus should be.
Ordinary citizens shouldn't have more fire power than police. (Weapons hunters don't need and use, but legal for sale.)That is such basic common sense. No one with a police record for physical abuse should be allowed to buy a weapon, either.
5
Can anyone tell me why the NRA has called a 78 year old single woman I know twice in the last month for the purpose of soliciting a donation? There are lots of older women out there living alone, some of them with considerable savings left for their care. Does the NRA stoop so low now that it wants to scare these little old ladies out of that money?
And can anyone tell me why we've quit hearing any mention of the KKK? Have they really gone away, or have they and other white supremacist groups gotten themselves a new name, one that starts with N? I'm just curious. I grew up in a whole family of hunters, gun owners. They are horrified by the violence they see in us these days. It is so very difficult to understand why congress won't act, why John Cornyn won't support waiting more than 72 hours for a person to clear their name before a gun can be issued to them. These days I feel like I've followed Alice down the Rabbit Hole.
And can anyone tell me why we've quit hearing any mention of the KKK? Have they really gone away, or have they and other white supremacist groups gotten themselves a new name, one that starts with N? I'm just curious. I grew up in a whole family of hunters, gun owners. They are horrified by the violence they see in us these days. It is so very difficult to understand why congress won't act, why John Cornyn won't support waiting more than 72 hours for a person to clear their name before a gun can be issued to them. These days I feel like I've followed Alice down the Rabbit Hole.
1
"Complicity" is the exact word for the actions of too many of our legislators. Bravo to the editors for their clear-mindedness and courage.
The way we fund elections creates that complicity. We need election finance reform, and education, education, education so that we can thoroughly assess our candidates for office before we vote.
The way we fund elections creates that complicity. We need election finance reform, and education, education, education so that we can thoroughly assess our candidates for office before we vote.
3
Oh We're Not All Bad
But let's face it, the "United" States is a very violent society in which we extol the virtues of and practice actual and feigned hatred with reckless abandon (just watch a few professional football or basketball games, watch some professional wrestling matches, or play a few video "games").
You can count on the fact that nothing of significance will happen in the area of firearm control in this country in response to horrendous murders like the ones in Orlando this week.
To understand, watch these three short videos ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BG59FwzdrpQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOChQhoT538
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWdbqV_AICc
If anything, there will be a bump in the sale of semi-automatic weapons -- which can easily be outfitted with inexpensive devices to make them effectively fully automatic -- lest our President try to confiscate our Second-Amendment-protected firepower.
By the way, if you'd like to understand the firepower of the "rifle" used by murderer Omar Mateen, (it was not technically an AR-15) watch this ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8UWba-k18g
P.S. I think one might gain considerable insight into our culture of violence and weaponry by reading James Webb's book, "Born Fighting: How the Scots-Irish Shaped America."
But let's face it, the "United" States is a very violent society in which we extol the virtues of and practice actual and feigned hatred with reckless abandon (just watch a few professional football or basketball games, watch some professional wrestling matches, or play a few video "games").
You can count on the fact that nothing of significance will happen in the area of firearm control in this country in response to horrendous murders like the ones in Orlando this week.
To understand, watch these three short videos ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BG59FwzdrpQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOChQhoT538
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWdbqV_AICc
If anything, there will be a bump in the sale of semi-automatic weapons -- which can easily be outfitted with inexpensive devices to make them effectively fully automatic -- lest our President try to confiscate our Second-Amendment-protected firepower.
By the way, if you'd like to understand the firepower of the "rifle" used by murderer Omar Mateen, (it was not technically an AR-15) watch this ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8UWba-k18g
P.S. I think one might gain considerable insight into our culture of violence and weaponry by reading James Webb's book, "Born Fighting: How the Scots-Irish Shaped America."
2
To expect anything reasonable or sensible out of this Republican controlled congress is a fantacy. If you don't believe me, please take a look at their candidate for the presidency.
2
The number of gun owners in Ameriva has declined and the NRA has become shrill and irrational resulting increasing the number of gun owners slightly and the number of guns owned significantly. The NRA used to be organization of gun owners but now seems to represent gun manufactures. By relying on NRA the Republican's in Congress are helping gun manufactures sell guns.
1
The only thing the venal gun manufactureres, the NRA and their GOP lackeys care about is $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$. There is a sickness in this nation which has caused them, and all of their "manly" supporters to lose not only their minds, but their souls (if they ever had souls) as well. Indeed they are, each and every one, complicit in countless murders of innocent people all across this land. Shame on them all !
I am not particularly religious, but if there is a hell, there is a special very large area reserved for these cretins and all of the other terrorists who are addicted to guns and death as that appears to be the only way they think they can escape from their miserable little lives and feel like men.
I am not particularly religious, but if there is a hell, there is a special very large area reserved for these cretins and all of the other terrorists who are addicted to guns and death as that appears to be the only way they think they can escape from their miserable little lives and feel like men.
The only way for the NRA to stay in business is to keep scaring there membership into buying more and more guns. Rationality or public safety has never been a concern.
2
Its impossible to shame the gun lobby and their supporters. Sen. Coryn's proposal is more of the same. Shameless evasions. The propaganda work by the NRA has done its damage. Liberty and assault weapons have been linked in the minds of ignorant people who vote. The slippery slope of taking away peoples assault weapons leading to taking away the liberty of people by the gov't is entirely specious.
1
Automobile ownership is a good model. To drive an automobile you need pass a test and get a license. You need insurance. If you cause someone harm, you are liable for the damages. If you are an unsafe driver, your insurance will become prohibitively expensive. You can drive a heavy truck but you need a special license. You can't buy an Abrams Tank.
397
The last time I checked, there is no Constitutionally guaranteed right to drive a vehicle, and the States can regulate all privileges.
Apples and lemons comparison, MD.
Apples and lemons comparison, MD.
Note that all the requirements related to autos only apply if you want to drive on public roads. I've never seen a license plate on an off-road vehicle, tractor, or even a NASCAR vehicle. If you want to carry a gun in public, there are similar requirements - training, testing and licensing.
And from what I read in my local newspaper, there are lots of people out there driving without insurance (and usually without a license either.) I'm sure mandating insurance for gun owners would be equally effective.
And from what I read in my local newspaper, there are lots of people out there driving without insurance (and usually without a license either.) I'm sure mandating insurance for gun owners would be equally effective.
I believe the NRA would defend private US citzens' right to buy a surplus tank, anti-aircraft or ballistic nuclear missile. The fact that the "arms" referred to in the 2nd Amendment were muzzle-loading single shot weapons is lost on them.
Is it not insane that the NRA shilling for the gun industry has a lock on the majority of our elected representatives and their unwillingness to support reasonable gun legislation?
Please publish the list of those voting against the gun amendments if they actually make it to a vote. "Believe people when they tell you who they are."
KA
Please publish the list of those voting against the gun amendments if they actually make it to a vote. "Believe people when they tell you who they are."
KA
2
Universal background checks are a good idea.
There are those in politics and law enforcement we have seen will abuse that. They will require a background check from themselves, and then refuse ever to provide it. It is a back door way to ban guns. It is dishonest. That is the core of the "shall issue" debate, where the discretion not to issue was abused to become a ban.
There is vast distrust on both sides. It is fully earned distrust on both sides. Politicians and media fan the distrust, instead of promoting real solutions. Then they blame the other side, and demand "vote for me or our guys."
It is manipulation for ulterior motives by both sides, instead of good faith efforts to solve the problem by either side.
This editorial is too much like that even as it justly complains of the other side doing the same thing. There is little to choose in good faith between the NRA and the gun ban people.
There are those in politics and law enforcement we have seen will abuse that. They will require a background check from themselves, and then refuse ever to provide it. It is a back door way to ban guns. It is dishonest. That is the core of the "shall issue" debate, where the discretion not to issue was abused to become a ban.
There is vast distrust on both sides. It is fully earned distrust on both sides. Politicians and media fan the distrust, instead of promoting real solutions. Then they blame the other side, and demand "vote for me or our guys."
It is manipulation for ulterior motives by both sides, instead of good faith efforts to solve the problem by either side.
This editorial is too much like that even as it justly complains of the other side doing the same thing. There is little to choose in good faith between the NRA and the gun ban people.
2
The arguments posed by the various accomplices of the Gun Facilitators and their apologists to support their fanatical defense of an overrarmed society hold no water when compared to the Republican peddled limits they put on other issues such as abortion and even airport procedures.
In many states a woman has to go through a maze of delays, regulations, and requirements to terminate a pregnancy under the guise of health concerns. Yet these same states and their mostly GOP legislatures will not even consider minimal regulations on Gun ownership.
The same legislators who decry any attempt to "well-regulate" guns as an attack on the Second Amendment see no wrong in imposing strict regulations on voter registration.
The US Congress and its machina make us take our shoes off and get scanned with X-ray equipment before we can board an airplane in the name of anti-terrorism defenses, yet they see no compelling reason to limit those same terrorists from purchasing overkill devices and munitions.
Yesterday in Florida, state GOP leaders hypocritically decried the call for gun control measures, saying "this is not the time to talk about that, this is the time to mourn and support the families of the dead." But they weren't asked: if not now, when?
It's time we stop thinking we're living in a John Wayne Western where good guys in white hats always have a gun to kill the bad guys before harm ensues. Hey, our well-regulated militia in the 21st century is the US Armed Forces. Not you.
In many states a woman has to go through a maze of delays, regulations, and requirements to terminate a pregnancy under the guise of health concerns. Yet these same states and their mostly GOP legislatures will not even consider minimal regulations on Gun ownership.
The same legislators who decry any attempt to "well-regulate" guns as an attack on the Second Amendment see no wrong in imposing strict regulations on voter registration.
The US Congress and its machina make us take our shoes off and get scanned with X-ray equipment before we can board an airplane in the name of anti-terrorism defenses, yet they see no compelling reason to limit those same terrorists from purchasing overkill devices and munitions.
Yesterday in Florida, state GOP leaders hypocritically decried the call for gun control measures, saying "this is not the time to talk about that, this is the time to mourn and support the families of the dead." But they weren't asked: if not now, when?
It's time we stop thinking we're living in a John Wayne Western where good guys in white hats always have a gun to kill the bad guys before harm ensues. Hey, our well-regulated militia in the 21st century is the US Armed Forces. Not you.
5
REALITY: The gun problem is one of America’s most serious problems.
The high and unacceptable incidence of gun related deaths in the US, including Orlando, Florida, is not only a scourge and cancer in America it is a National Security and National Health risk issue adversely impacting all Americans.
The truth and reality is that all of the discussions on the need to improve controls on guns and gun ownership are debates on the margins. Any new legislation to strengthen gun controls will affect only new purchases of guns. Any such new legislation will leave the remaining guns already owned unaffected, grandfathered by earlier laws. Tinkering on the margins has not and never will work. Most gun related deaths are done with handguns.
The reality is that since 1968 more Americans have died from gunfire than died in all the wars of America’s history. There have been 1,516,863 gun-related deaths since 1968 in contrast to the total of 1,396,733 war deaths since the American Revolution.
There are an estimated 357 million firearms. An estimated 31% of households, or one in three Americans own guns.
Gun deaths and gun ownership are out of control.
The NRA’s only raison d'être is to promote the sale of guns. The NRA is complicit in all these gun deaths. The NRA should not dictate the national policy debate on guns.
America: Demand Congress to repeal the Second Amendment.
The new law should be called: “The Innocents’ Law.”
Bring peace to America.
The high and unacceptable incidence of gun related deaths in the US, including Orlando, Florida, is not only a scourge and cancer in America it is a National Security and National Health risk issue adversely impacting all Americans.
The truth and reality is that all of the discussions on the need to improve controls on guns and gun ownership are debates on the margins. Any new legislation to strengthen gun controls will affect only new purchases of guns. Any such new legislation will leave the remaining guns already owned unaffected, grandfathered by earlier laws. Tinkering on the margins has not and never will work. Most gun related deaths are done with handguns.
The reality is that since 1968 more Americans have died from gunfire than died in all the wars of America’s history. There have been 1,516,863 gun-related deaths since 1968 in contrast to the total of 1,396,733 war deaths since the American Revolution.
There are an estimated 357 million firearms. An estimated 31% of households, or one in three Americans own guns.
Gun deaths and gun ownership are out of control.
The NRA’s only raison d'être is to promote the sale of guns. The NRA is complicit in all these gun deaths. The NRA should not dictate the national policy debate on guns.
America: Demand Congress to repeal the Second Amendment.
The new law should be called: “The Innocents’ Law.”
Bring peace to America.
11
Gun deaths and gun ownership are out of control.
===================
How can gun deaths be "out of control" when they are half of what they were 20 years ago and the rate falls every year?
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/05/07/gun-homicide-rate-down-49-sinc...
===================
How can gun deaths be "out of control" when they are half of what they were 20 years ago and the rate falls every year?
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/05/07/gun-homicide-rate-down-49-sinc...
1
The US lives in a distorted reality bubble where we stop dangerous people from flying but we let them buy assault weapons. We also believe that owning a semi-auto gun with a 50 round clip is a constitutional right but letting two gay people get married in a civil ceremony is wrong. We think that the answer to guns is more guns and scientific research on climate change is invalid because some big corporations bought research saying the scientists were wrong. All these distorted thoughts are causing our country to go down the drain and the best we can do for leadership is a blowhard narcissist and a disliked 90's retread candidate.
7
"First, support reasonable efforts to close the so-called terror gap, which would make it harder for suspected terrorists to get their hands on a gun. Congress considered legislation . . . that would have given the F.B.I. the ability to prevent gun sales to people it had reason to believe might be connected to terrorism. The bill was based on a Bush administration proposal . . . . This would be inexplicable under normal circumstances, but now that the Islamic State has openly called on lone-wolf attackers to take their war to the streets of America, it is a full-blown national-security hazard."
Same rationale that brought us the Patriot Act; look at where we are today.
Before advocating this vast authority perhaps we should discuss the definition of terrorist and terrorism. What actions amount to "reason to believe;" how the list is compiled, maintained; how many suspects make the list where the evidence proves wrong v. accurate, etc.
Sure an innocent person may challenge the government in federal court--but the cost is prohibitive and the ramifications of being on the list are not inconsequential. These should not be discounted so thoughtlessly.
Maybe it is an outright nationwide ban on the sale of high capacity weapons that's the first step. After all, it's not only the mentally ill, domestic abuser, or terrorist who use them to commit these crimes.
Same rationale that brought us the Patriot Act; look at where we are today.
Before advocating this vast authority perhaps we should discuss the definition of terrorist and terrorism. What actions amount to "reason to believe;" how the list is compiled, maintained; how many suspects make the list where the evidence proves wrong v. accurate, etc.
Sure an innocent person may challenge the government in federal court--but the cost is prohibitive and the ramifications of being on the list are not inconsequential. These should not be discounted so thoughtlessly.
Maybe it is an outright nationwide ban on the sale of high capacity weapons that's the first step. After all, it's not only the mentally ill, domestic abuser, or terrorist who use them to commit these crimes.
OK, so the Times has bought in that he was an ISIS terrorist ("Attica!, Attica!") , and will soon be settling for rules to restrict terrorists from buying assault weapons. Who cares. He, like every other recent mass murderer was able to buy a machine gun.
This is the internet age and the drugs age, not sure what they will call it in the future (drugnet?), but this country is turning out incapacitated, social psychopaths by the millions. Next time you go out and walk around a city, or take a train or subway ride, or go to any crowd event, (anywhere, it doesn't have to be the South), take off your earphones for a minute, stop staring at your phone for a few seconds and look around: it's a scene to make a Bruegel painting in comparison seem as relaxing as a still life.
All guns should be illegal. Then you can go back to your Angry Birds without having to worry about being shot.
This is the internet age and the drugs age, not sure what they will call it in the future (drugnet?), but this country is turning out incapacitated, social psychopaths by the millions. Next time you go out and walk around a city, or take a train or subway ride, or go to any crowd event, (anywhere, it doesn't have to be the South), take off your earphones for a minute, stop staring at your phone for a few seconds and look around: it's a scene to make a Bruegel painting in comparison seem as relaxing as a still life.
All guns should be illegal. Then you can go back to your Angry Birds without having to worry about being shot.
3
Dear NRA, gun industry, and Republican Congress, How DO you sleep at night?
13
Like most amoral individuals and entities, I am sure they sleep very well. People do when they don't have a conscience.
1
Wayne La Pierre has a figurative gun to the head of too many Congressional seat-warmers. They fear to lose their no-show, no-produce jobs by falling below the NRA's accepted litmus test of legislating for guns, guns and *more* guns. This will not stop until American voters grow a spine and (a) kill the gerrymandered system of government we now have and (b) support all candidates who have publicly supported either a reapeal of the Second Amendment or a change in the phrasing that has kept open the gates of hell for too many innocent victims of firearms violence.
13
There is something terribly ironic about a group of legislators who present themselves as tough, patriotic hawks, who belong to a party they claim is "better on national security" yet do not have the courage to stand up to the extremists currently running the NRA to support common sense gun legislation.
Instead, to avoid the possibility of taking even one stance that actually enjoys majority support even within their party, as well as gun owners, they are reduced to repeating NRA canards suggesting the possibility of "confiscation", the erasure of the Second Amendment and other absolutist nonsense. It's hard to believe that all but a sprinkling of co-alarmists actually believe that those threats are anything more than propaganda put out by self serving lobbyists.
While some like me might find the NRA's transition from a service organization representing its members with an emphasis on gun safety and training to an absolutist, propaganda machine that primarily serves a flourishing arms industry distressing, it would be hard to argue that it is not within its rights to represent itself in any manner it deems appropriate. The same cannot be said of elected officials in lieu of the fact that poll after poll has shown that the American people are perfectly capable of supporting the Second Amendment as currently interpreted and at the same time sensible gun legislation. There are some things that can't be solved by taking up arms; this problem requires wisdom and courage.
Instead, to avoid the possibility of taking even one stance that actually enjoys majority support even within their party, as well as gun owners, they are reduced to repeating NRA canards suggesting the possibility of "confiscation", the erasure of the Second Amendment and other absolutist nonsense. It's hard to believe that all but a sprinkling of co-alarmists actually believe that those threats are anything more than propaganda put out by self serving lobbyists.
While some like me might find the NRA's transition from a service organization representing its members with an emphasis on gun safety and training to an absolutist, propaganda machine that primarily serves a flourishing arms industry distressing, it would be hard to argue that it is not within its rights to represent itself in any manner it deems appropriate. The same cannot be said of elected officials in lieu of the fact that poll after poll has shown that the American people are perfectly capable of supporting the Second Amendment as currently interpreted and at the same time sensible gun legislation. There are some things that can't be solved by taking up arms; this problem requires wisdom and courage.
6
We have met the enemy and it is us !
6
We are letting ourselves off the hook by blaming the NRA. What the NRA does is disreputable, yes, but what everyday Americans do to vote in lawmakers who enable terrorism is even worse. We say we're opposed, yet we vote the opposite.
One scary factor might be that many Americans don't see a threat to themselves because terrorists hit mostly soft targets, schools, night clubs, movie theaters, etc., where most voters seldom if ever go. Maybe, in the back of our minds, we're willing to compromise our values as long as it's "those people" who suffer.
One scary factor might be that many Americans don't see a threat to themselves because terrorists hit mostly soft targets, schools, night clubs, movie theaters, etc., where most voters seldom if ever go. Maybe, in the back of our minds, we're willing to compromise our values as long as it's "those people" who suffer.
2
Yeah, but I'll bet if that security guard had had a .50 caliber machine gun, a bazooka and a flame thrower things would have turned out differently.
6
Yes they would have turned out differently; we'd have 150, 200 dead people rather than 50. If you do not understand that, then your intelligence is questionable.
Under the leadership of Wayne LaPierre, a man who has himself committed homicide, the NRA is not just complicit in making terroristic mass killings possible, but actively promoting the sport, urging any and all to own all the guns they can afford. Be the hero, the good guy with a gun, the NRA urges. And you can't be one without this dandy little number here.
It is amusing that the trope of being "a good guy with a gun," something that has not yet happened despite literally hundreds of opportunities, is the brainchild of an organization in the hands of paper tiger patriots who never felt it necessary to don a uniform of the armed forces of America.
It is amusing that the trope of being "a good guy with a gun," something that has not yet happened despite literally hundreds of opportunities, is the brainchild of an organization in the hands of paper tiger patriots who never felt it necessary to don a uniform of the armed forces of America.
16
It is amusing that the trope of being "a good guy with a gun," something that has not yet happened despite literally hundreds of opportunities, is the brainchild of an organization in the hands of paper tiger patriots who never felt it necessary to don a uniform of the armed forces of America
=======================
Actually the "good guy with a gun" isn't a trope. According to the Centers for Disease Control it happens every day:
Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year, in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008.
http://www.nap.edu/read/18319/chapter/1?page=
=======================
Actually the "good guy with a gun" isn't a trope. According to the Centers for Disease Control it happens every day:
Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year, in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008.
http://www.nap.edu/read/18319/chapter/1?page=
Help me out here, Campesino. I will admit I took only Statistics 201, and I did get an "A" for the quarter, but something about your numbers is bothersome.
You say that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as the offensive criminal uses, with as many as 500,000 to 3 million defensive uses per year. Then you say firearms were used in violent crimes 300,000 times in 2008. That means as many as 2,700,000 times the guns came on the defensive side when the criminal was unarmed. Someone is stealing your kid's bicycle and this justifies pulling a gun? Perhaps firing it, perhaps not, but still. Those aren't statistics that help this discussion. In this situation, who is the terrorist?
You say that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as the offensive criminal uses, with as many as 500,000 to 3 million defensive uses per year. Then you say firearms were used in violent crimes 300,000 times in 2008. That means as many as 2,700,000 times the guns came on the defensive side when the criminal was unarmed. Someone is stealing your kid's bicycle and this justifies pulling a gun? Perhaps firing it, perhaps not, but still. Those aren't statistics that help this discussion. In this situation, who is the terrorist?
Gun rights activists are adamant about their rights because they equate that with their own safety and defense. What they don't acknowledge is that easily accessible guns also arm the wrong people. And these people are far more lethal than all the law abiding citizens armed to protect themselves. Quite simply, they have the element of surprise on their side.
6
Excellent editorial. I would state more definitively that the Orlando Nightclub Massacre is yet another example of the way America's campaign finance laws undermine the public welfare, allowing corporations and organizations like the NRA (that represents some corporate interests) to put American citizens in harm's way, whether from guns, pollution, or predatory lending.
For now, to support the Senate efforts to restrict terrorists access to guns, it makes sense to concentrate on the shooter's terrorist leanings. But we must also look at the fact that he was an American, another alienated, disturbed young man like other mass killers with automatic rifles, and allegedly a sometime patron of the gay nightclub where he killed 49 people. I don't understand why anyone needs an automatic weapon unless they are so disturbed that it makes them feel good and powerful. You say ban large magazines. I guess that's more realistic but I wish we could take away assault rifles.
And I wish we could spend more of our national resources supporting families and children so fewer of them would turn out like Omar Mateen.
For now, to support the Senate efforts to restrict terrorists access to guns, it makes sense to concentrate on the shooter's terrorist leanings. But we must also look at the fact that he was an American, another alienated, disturbed young man like other mass killers with automatic rifles, and allegedly a sometime patron of the gay nightclub where he killed 49 people. I don't understand why anyone needs an automatic weapon unless they are so disturbed that it makes them feel good and powerful. You say ban large magazines. I guess that's more realistic but I wish we could take away assault rifles.
And I wish we could spend more of our national resources supporting families and children so fewer of them would turn out like Omar Mateen.
16
The only thing that could possibly help is a mandatory registration of all guns. Similar to vehicles, gun owners would have to register all guns and pay a fee, with mandatory registration/fees every two years. We could use the revenue to protect our national parks and hunting areas, both of which are under severe financial strain. Failure to register any weapon would result in mandatory seizure. Additionally, the violator would be denied the right to purchase a gun in the future. This would protect second amendment rights while significantly cutting gun violence. And it is a method with a proven track record.
15
Apply that to the gangs that are regularly shooting up the streets of Chicago then get back to me with the results.
" ...the lawmakers have a duty to respond to their constituents."
Apparently not.
On this and so many other issues, it is clear that Congress and specifically Republican Members have not been working in the public's best interests as moneyed interests and lobbyists insure that the Politicians do whatever they can to benefit them , regardless of what consequences, costs or harm it may do to others.
Apparently not.
On this and so many other issues, it is clear that Congress and specifically Republican Members have not been working in the public's best interests as moneyed interests and lobbyists insure that the Politicians do whatever they can to benefit them , regardless of what consequences, costs or harm it may do to others.
11
For the text of the Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2015 bill go to https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/1076
To see who voted for and against http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm...
Make your voice heard!
To see who voted for and against http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm...
Make your voice heard!
11
Guns like abortion and race are used by the politicians to help us divide ourselves against each other. While they make off with the money.
I own a gun, a .22 Remington semiautomatic, holds 18 rounds. I shoot hollow point long rifle bullets. Used mostly to kill rabid skunks, wild dogs when I lived on the farm. Now that we moved to town is sets in the top of the closet unloaded with a trigger lock in it and I would have to hunt for the key and the ammo.
I own a gun, a .22 Remington semiautomatic, holds 18 rounds. I shoot hollow point long rifle bullets. Used mostly to kill rabid skunks, wild dogs when I lived on the farm. Now that we moved to town is sets in the top of the closet unloaded with a trigger lock in it and I would have to hunt for the key and the ammo.
5
Yet, there are many on these pages who would require you to surrender that gun to have it destroyed.
God help you if an armed burglar enters your home and you don't have enough time to load up.
Can we change the language around this discussion? From "gun-control" to something more accurate like "gun-management"? "Control" is a negative, defining one group as having power and superiority over another. No one wants to be on the weaker end of a controlled situation. "Management" strongly suggests an equally shared discussion to solve a common problem. Which is what we must do. Pass this idea along to everyone you know. Change the discussion. Words are powerful.
2
The NRA and its wholly-owned subsidiary, the current GOP, are nightmares from which America must try to awaken.
7
Your disgusting editorial equating law abiding citizens protecting our Constitutional rights with cold blooded killers makes you more a fringe entity than the NRA will ever be.
2
hank...you are half right....you are wrong because the NRA is part of our cultural abuse gun sickness but so are the liberals and the NY Times for being totally silent on the grat. violent entertainment gun trash coming out of Hollywood.
It takes two to tango Hank....and the left and right do it in this country, thus our cultural abuse gun sickness....why it is so hard to cure...
It takes two to tango Hank....and the left and right do it in this country, thus our cultural abuse gun sickness....why it is so hard to cure...
1
Army Rangers, Green Berets, Marine Force Recon, Navy SEALs and certain special city/state/fed LE special response units are the ONLY people who should have access to AR-15 type assault weapons. NO private citizen should have them for personal use- PERIOD. They are absolutely Not needed for home defense or hunting or target shooting. If you can't take down a home intruder with a small handgun (only owned for home protection), or hunt with a traditional hunting rifle or a bow, then you shouldn't have those weapons either. Assault weapons are NOT part of 2nd ammendment rights (want to debate me- bring it). Take away the gun equation from All these recent incidents, and the tragedies wouldn't have occurred, regardless of mental health, idealogy, discriminatory leanings, or any other contributing factor. No AR15 type weapons no mass deaths in these attacks. Simple, End of story.
2
You do understand that there are major mechanical differences between the civilian and police models of these arms and even more differences between the police and military versions don't you? And, furthermore, they aren't the only models bored for the 5.56 mm round?
From the article: "...[T]he assault rifle ... could fire 30-round clips as fast as he could pull the trigger. No civilian anywhere should be allowed to have that ability. ..." I have several of those. They are like art pieces, rarely out of their cases and when they are used for target shooting, a game of skill. I have had rare occasions when my firearms could have been there for protection, but mostly it is a collection, much like art, of items of historical significance, including these.
Who is it that determines no civilian anywhere should have these? LIkewise, who determines whether a newspaper should express such biased and narrow opinions? I haven't killed anyone nor have the millions of others who own these and enjoy using them. The other support here is for banning 'suspected' terrorists. That's a pretty low bar. I 'suspect' the New York Times editorial board to be complicit with ISIL because they report their rhetoric and for the few horrendous occurrences that the mentally deranged have brought upon us think the solution is mass disarmament thus helping ISIL. Since the media doesn't acknowledge their own complicity their espoused beliefs should be banned because they are engendering others with deranged beliefs and focused unending reporting to copy the acts of the other deranged people. It's only the First Amendment implicated. So what? They can go to federal court and get their ban removed. In this context do you now see the real problem?
Who is it that determines no civilian anywhere should have these? LIkewise, who determines whether a newspaper should express such biased and narrow opinions? I haven't killed anyone nor have the millions of others who own these and enjoy using them. The other support here is for banning 'suspected' terrorists. That's a pretty low bar. I 'suspect' the New York Times editorial board to be complicit with ISIL because they report their rhetoric and for the few horrendous occurrences that the mentally deranged have brought upon us think the solution is mass disarmament thus helping ISIL. Since the media doesn't acknowledge their own complicity their espoused beliefs should be banned because they are engendering others with deranged beliefs and focused unending reporting to copy the acts of the other deranged people. It's only the First Amendment implicated. So what? They can go to federal court and get their ban removed. In this context do you now see the real problem?
1
So you haven't shot anyone. So what. Find another hobby. Find something else to collect.
The NRA is evil, yes, but they are just getting away with what they can, in pursuit of profit. Our legislators are really to blame for the NRA's hijacking of American democracy.
1
One of the reasons the NRA is as powerful as it is, I believe stems from the nebulous nature of the 2nd Amendment. The wording, the punctuation, the very nature of this somewhat convoluted compound sentence turns interpretation into a veritable Rorschach Test. Where even numerous Supreme Courts can't agree on the meaning.
Would it be possible to craft an Amendment to the Constitution that clearly and unambiguously states that any resident of America, with no limitations, i.e. criminal record, mental illness, blindness, citizenship status could possess any weapon in any amount, including ammo. The kicker would be, and this is tricky, if this amendment fails to garner the requisite 75% of state house passage, or Congress not passing this then the current Second Amendment becomes null and void.
Would the population when confronted with this choice finally, clearly make their sentiments felt in our various legislatures and hold their politicians accountable. If the stupid Amendment did pass at least we would know what America holds dear and it should neuter the NRA, it would then have no reason or purpose to exist. Once vanquished, future generations could attempt to undo this 28th Amendment with no interference from this has been group. The template is the 21st Amendment, by the early 30's, the Carrie Nation's of the country were powerless.
Would it be possible to craft an Amendment to the Constitution that clearly and unambiguously states that any resident of America, with no limitations, i.e. criminal record, mental illness, blindness, citizenship status could possess any weapon in any amount, including ammo. The kicker would be, and this is tricky, if this amendment fails to garner the requisite 75% of state house passage, or Congress not passing this then the current Second Amendment becomes null and void.
Would the population when confronted with this choice finally, clearly make their sentiments felt in our various legislatures and hold their politicians accountable. If the stupid Amendment did pass at least we would know what America holds dear and it should neuter the NRA, it would then have no reason or purpose to exist. Once vanquished, future generations could attempt to undo this 28th Amendment with no interference from this has been group. The template is the 21st Amendment, by the early 30's, the Carrie Nation's of the country were powerless.
1
They advance an apples to oranges argument about gun control. People do use guns to kill but it's the gun that kills. A weapon kills and the more dangerous the weapon, the more likely death will occur.
1
The only thing that can really be done is for the Democrats to take back the House, the Senate, and the Presidency, and pass laws that have the result in restricting guns to a reasonable formula: you can have a pistol for home defense, you need to register it, to demonstrate proficiency with it, and to get and renew your license to own it. You need to bring it to an inspection station once a year. You need to carry insurance.
The weapon must meet standards of safety.
In short, everyone has the right to own and drive a car, he or she just needs to follow all of the reasonable rules that are established for that. Same thing for guns.
The weapon must meet standards of safety.
In short, everyone has the right to own and drive a car, he or she just needs to follow all of the reasonable rules that are established for that. Same thing for guns.
2
It is remarkable how little $ the NRA contributes to the politicians it supports - as little as a few thousand dollars, I think.
1
It doesn't need to make big contributions because politicians know that the NRA is popular.
To every US Senator and Congressman to the NRA: "Just Say No."
5
I'll say it: the NRA is aiding and abetting terrorism. It is thereby complicit in these mass murders. As an organization it should be banned.
The NRA profits from terrorist acts. And it actively fosters them: Through its never-ending, twisted logic for the buying and possessing of weapons designed to kill.
Civil society is poisoned by NRA propaganda. It is endangered by the ease with which any terrorist or mentally deranged individual can purchase a killing-macihine and its lethal ammunition. This outrageous!
Terrorists have now perfected a method which appears to do more damage than a suicide bomber, wired to explode. Given a small room with a large number of people, the element of surprise, and 1 or 2 individuals armed with the type of weaponry used by soldiers, especially in a darkened room, terrorists can easily mow down dozens and scores of unsuspecting, peaceful citizens. Horrifying!
We know tobacco can kill. But it took years to fight tobacco companies. The banning of assault weapons is similar. Except that people can choose tobacco. But they don't get a choice about being mowed down without warning.
Ban the NRA, any propaganda that fosters assault weaponry, and ban these diabolical assault weapons and their magazines.
We all get upset when an alligator kills one child. Well, everyone killed by assault weapons either was a child at the time or was once a child.
It is insane for a civil society if we fail to act to stop the madness.
The NRA profits from terrorist acts. And it actively fosters them: Through its never-ending, twisted logic for the buying and possessing of weapons designed to kill.
Civil society is poisoned by NRA propaganda. It is endangered by the ease with which any terrorist or mentally deranged individual can purchase a killing-macihine and its lethal ammunition. This outrageous!
Terrorists have now perfected a method which appears to do more damage than a suicide bomber, wired to explode. Given a small room with a large number of people, the element of surprise, and 1 or 2 individuals armed with the type of weaponry used by soldiers, especially in a darkened room, terrorists can easily mow down dozens and scores of unsuspecting, peaceful citizens. Horrifying!
We know tobacco can kill. But it took years to fight tobacco companies. The banning of assault weapons is similar. Except that people can choose tobacco. But they don't get a choice about being mowed down without warning.
Ban the NRA, any propaganda that fosters assault weaponry, and ban these diabolical assault weapons and their magazines.
We all get upset when an alligator kills one child. Well, everyone killed by assault weapons either was a child at the time or was once a child.
It is insane for a civil society if we fail to act to stop the madness.
1
Follow the money.
This is not about safety.
Or the 2nd Amendment.
Or hunting.
Or protection.
This is about the NRA's power to support the money making machine that is the gun industry. All the rest is smoke and mirrors.
This is not about safety.
Or the 2nd Amendment.
Or hunting.
Or protection.
This is about the NRA's power to support the money making machine that is the gun industry. All the rest is smoke and mirrors.
5
This is about the NRA's power to support the money making machine that is the gun industry. All the rest is smoke and mirrors.
==================
Just one more myth.
The plain truth is most of the NRAs funding comes from membership dues. It's evident in tax filings with the IRS
https://www.quora.com/Where-does-funding-for-the-National-Rifle-Associat...
==================
Just one more myth.
The plain truth is most of the NRAs funding comes from membership dues. It's evident in tax filings with the IRS
https://www.quora.com/Where-does-funding-for-the-National-Rifle-Associat...
True, but how bout the NY Times supporting the entertainment wing of the NRA, Hollywood with ads and reviews of the grat. violent gun media trash coming out of Hollywood targeting our young Americans.
Liberals love to bash the NRA...they are only half the problem.
Liberals love to bash the NRA...they are only half the problem.
1
The argument should change to, why are Republicans FOR terrorism.
2
I propose coming at this from a different angle. The gun industry should be responsible for the cost of caring for all of the injuries and deaths associated with gun violence. We all know the cost of general surgical procedures can be daunting. Now, think about the cost of these trauma surgical procedures, from the surgeons to nursing support to clinical laboratory support (Crossmatches and blood products are not free). Then add in the cost of convalescence and rehabilitation. Is the medical delivery system just supposed to absorb these costs? Would we allow any other manufacturer to cost shift their societal costs to the general public? The answer is no. Just check with BP and Volkswagen. It is time for the American Hospital Association and American Medical Association to take a stand and require reimbursement for the cost of caring for all these victims I guarantee this would have an impact on gun sales in America
1
Since we are getting nowhere with national gun control legislation, it is time to hit the states who refuse to rein in guns in the pocketbook. Just like the boycotts against North Carolina over their anti-LGBT laws, it is time to stay away from places like Florida where pretty much anyone can buy an assault weapon and high capacity magazine clip.
Performers who favor sensible gun control should cancel concerts and vacationers skip the trip to the theme parks. Florida needs tourism to survive. If enough people stay away, maybe their legislature will come to its senses.
Performers who favor sensible gun control should cancel concerts and vacationers skip the trip to the theme parks. Florida needs tourism to survive. If enough people stay away, maybe their legislature will come to its senses.
3
Since we are getting nowhere with national gun control legislation, it is time to hit the states who refuse to rein in guns in the pocketbook.
====================
That's actually most of the rest of the country. I'm not sure they'd miss you
====================
That's actually most of the rest of the country. I'm not sure they'd miss you
I would never vote for a congressional candidate who is a member of the NRA, an organization basically indifferent to human life and whose only purpose is to disseminate highly efficient kill tools throughout the country. Of course, money is behind it, and add to that the basic disregard for humanity. NRA - that Grim Reaper - seems to be the real legislative body here, not Congress.
7
This has to be a new low for the NYT: arguing that people "suspected" of a crime should be denied Constitutional rights. Does it not occur to anyone that most people on the no-fly list have Muslim names? Why do Democrats hate Muslims so much?
If people suspected of terrorist involvement are such threats to us, we certainly don't want them voting in our elections, either. Let's create a No-Fly, No-Buy, No-Vote list and see how far that advances among the Democrat representatives.
If people suspected of terrorist involvement are such threats to us, we certainly don't want them voting in our elections, either. Let's create a No-Fly, No-Buy, No-Vote list and see how far that advances among the Democrat representatives.
3
This has to be a new low for the NYT: arguing that people "suspected" of a crime should be denied Constitutional rights.
================
Frankly, since Hillary Clinton is under criminal investigation by the FBI, she shouldn't be allowed to run for office. She's on the "list"
================
Frankly, since Hillary Clinton is under criminal investigation by the FBI, she shouldn't be allowed to run for office. She's on the "list"
This is the kind of headline that will make the NRA leadership radioactive - keep it up!
5
This is the kind of headline that will make the NRA leadership radioactive - keep it up!
====================
Good luck with that!
The NRA has a higher favorability rating (58%) than Obama. Or Hillary.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/186284/despite-criticism-nra-enjoys-majority-...
====================
Good luck with that!
The NRA has a higher favorability rating (58%) than Obama. Or Hillary.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/186284/despite-criticism-nra-enjoys-majority-...
As a public school teacher, I took part in special training after Columbine; however, I "knew" that it was something that would never happen again in my career.
Oh, how heartbreakingly wrong I was.
Now our children practice "Lock and Hide."
And the Military Industrial Complex --with great support from the NRA and gun manufacturers--continues to make fearful the glad time of childhood.
Oh, how heartbreakingly wrong I was.
Now our children practice "Lock and Hide."
And the Military Industrial Complex --with great support from the NRA and gun manufacturers--continues to make fearful the glad time of childhood.
239
My employer, a Fortune 500, just added a Run, Hide, Fight program about active shooter situations which says the fight mode is only acceptable as a last resort and when no other options exist. They even advocate leaving frozen or injured persons behind. Why isn't fight the first option? Why is it official policy to allow oneself to be slaughtered like sheep?
You youngsters forget we were taught duck and cover in school due to the possible threat of a nuclear attack. Learning that the world can be a dangerous place is part of growing up.
This reminds me of my childhood during the Cold War: duck and cover drills to protect us against a nuclear attack by the Soviet Union. That attack never materialized, but a more pernicious threat has: deadly firearm and bombing attacks from jihad sympathizers or mentally deranged individuals.
In the case of the Cold War our solution was to deescalate tensions and reduce the number of weapons. Today part of our solution must be to reduce access to weapons that make attacks like this possible.
In the case of the Cold War our solution was to deescalate tensions and reduce the number of weapons. Today part of our solution must be to reduce access to weapons that make attacks like this possible.
NRA knows that Democrats are skeptical of Second Amendment.
They also know that if they concede ANYTHING that will not satisfy Democrats.
Therefore, they concede nothing.
They also know that if they concede ANYTHING that will not satisfy Democrats.
Therefore, they concede nothing.
27
Therefore laws must be enacted that they won't concede to. So what?
I tire of draft-dodgers (Wayne and Ted) selling paranoia, and the sad fact that guns mostly seem to be about losers needing something to feel powerful and self-important. The self-aggrandizement of all of this "patriotism" and "freedom" they claim.
About 30 years ago a guy I knew sort-of shot his wife, shot the dog, and shot himself. And the bottom to this ridiculous tragedy is that one of my friends asked "why did he have to shoot the dog?"
We are so inured to the murder and suicide with guns that the only thing he was wondering about it ... was that.
I tire of draft-dodgers (Wayne and Ted) selling paranoia, and the sad fact that guns mostly seem to be about losers needing something to feel powerful and self-important. The self-aggrandizement of all of this "patriotism" and "freedom" they claim.
About 30 years ago a guy I knew sort-of shot his wife, shot the dog, and shot himself. And the bottom to this ridiculous tragedy is that one of my friends asked "why did he have to shoot the dog?"
We are so inured to the murder and suicide with guns that the only thing he was wondering about it ... was that.
1
Yes, which is why the NRA is no different than the KKK or any other extremist group that promotes violence.
Which is why they need to be marginalized and ignored. They're a lobbying group, promoting industry profiteering while burdening the taxpayer with the societal costs. A niche group costing every taxpayer approx $500 a year.
Which is why they need to be marginalized and ignored. They're a lobbying group, promoting industry profiteering while burdening the taxpayer with the societal costs. A niche group costing every taxpayer approx $500 a year.
I'd ask if "NRA knows," this because their cat, or their toaster, or their pet fern, told them.
But just to fill you in, us Demned Dems aren't skeptical about the Second Amendment. We just like to notice all of it, and take Antonin Scalia's comments that there is no auch thing as an unlimited right to bear arms seriously.
But just to fill you in, us Demned Dems aren't skeptical about the Second Amendment. We just like to notice all of it, and take Antonin Scalia's comments that there is no auch thing as an unlimited right to bear arms seriously.
The N.R.A. (National Rifle Association) is an interest group that claims to protect the rights of gun owners. The N.E.A. (National Education Association – national teacher’s union) is an interest group that claims to protect the economic interests of primarily public school teachers. The N.R.A., in addition to protecting legitimate Second Amendment rights, may also be flogging the economic interests of gun makers to the damage of regular Americans. The N.E.A., in addition to fighting for fair working conditions and competitive compensations for teachers, also may be facilitating the retention of incompetent teachers because they just happen to be union members.
To me, it’s a toss-up as to which organization has the more pernicious mix of legitimate and highly questionable charges. But, certainly, in terms of real impact, a case can be made that it’s the N.E.A.
The problem with the editors may be that they’re only SELECTIVELY cynical.
To me, it’s a toss-up as to which organization has the more pernicious mix of legitimate and highly questionable charges. But, certainly, in terms of real impact, a case can be made that it’s the N.E.A.
The problem with the editors may be that they’re only SELECTIVELY cynical.
Or, that they a) know what the NEA actually does, b) that one group's supported lavishly by gun corporations around the world, and c) generally speaking, it's the NRA that has stood up for arming lunatics, potential terrorists, and guys who beat thir wives with assault weapons.
1
I don't own a gun, have never touched one, and never aspire to. I wish our country had far stricter gun control. And I lean strongly Democratic (or you could say, strongly away from the current Republican party).
However, the Democrats, and the NYTimes by extension, overplay this issue just as much as the GOP overplays the threat of Islam. Our gun laws make America a "favorite of terrorists"? Really? This horrific attack in Orlando, worst in our history, resulted in 49 deaths. Three times as many died in the attacks in Paris last year, in a country with far more controls on ownership of firearms.
The root of the situation we face with regard to terrorism (and urban violence, for that matter) is far more complicated than "too many guns" or "radical Islam" unfortunately, and solutions are not as easy as tightening gun laws or shipping off Muslims to Trump's internment camps.
However, the Democrats, and the NYTimes by extension, overplay this issue just as much as the GOP overplays the threat of Islam. Our gun laws make America a "favorite of terrorists"? Really? This horrific attack in Orlando, worst in our history, resulted in 49 deaths. Three times as many died in the attacks in Paris last year, in a country with far more controls on ownership of firearms.
The root of the situation we face with regard to terrorism (and urban violence, for that matter) is far more complicated than "too many guns" or "radical Islam" unfortunately, and solutions are not as easy as tightening gun laws or shipping off Muslims to Trump's internment camps.
1
This evil person left his home that night intending to commit perhaps hundreds of felonies. A few more laws would not have stopped him.
Our elected officials must shake off the strangle hold on them from the NRA and allow common sense to rule. On a terror watch list, can't fly ,cant buy gun. What is so hard about this? Put the NRA executives on the terror watch list as they continue to support the slaughter of our fellow citizens . That goes without saying elected officials as well. The Boston Globe got it 100% right. It must stop!
don't forget about the ammo too. there should be restrictions on the amount and the power of ammo sold.
1
It does no good to accuse Congress of pledging allegiance to the gun lobby and assert that the rest of the world is better than us. The real problem is that a large number of Americans, especially those in the rural Midwest and South and in the West, like guns, own a lot of guns for reasons that they consider legitimate, and don't want restrictions on what they consider their rights. People who live in large cities tend to think differently. Like it or not, the NRA is an association of just such people, who want access to guns. Many in Congress represent such people.
The NYTimes' expressions of moral outrage and obvious sense of moral superiority, and the opinions of the rest of the world carry no weight with large numbers of Americans and with their representatives. Would better gun control be a good thing? Yes, but what we need is reasoned dialogue, not the kind of accusatory rhetoric that the NYTimes loves to use. This editorial speaks persuasively only to the people who agree with the NYTimes. The "gun lobby" is a bogeyman and an easy target. Try the harder task of writing one designed to change the minds of people who disagree with you, your fellow citizens. They are the ones that Congress really fears.
The NYTimes' expressions of moral outrage and obvious sense of moral superiority, and the opinions of the rest of the world carry no weight with large numbers of Americans and with their representatives. Would better gun control be a good thing? Yes, but what we need is reasoned dialogue, not the kind of accusatory rhetoric that the NYTimes loves to use. This editorial speaks persuasively only to the people who agree with the NYTimes. The "gun lobby" is a bogeyman and an easy target. Try the harder task of writing one designed to change the minds of people who disagree with you, your fellow citizens. They are the ones that Congress really fears.
1
The NRA's answer to mass shootings has been more guns for all citizens; that well-armed Americans will take down a "bad guy" and avoid catastrophe. What we have seen instead over the years, as the NRA unwinds sensible gun laws across the States, is larger mass shootings leading up to Orlando. I ask the NRA directly: How has your solution been working out? And what do you plan to do differently? (Your answer should not involve advocating for more guns to one and all since that obviously has not worked out so well. That would be insane: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.)
2
And of course, should any of these measure pass, as now seems slightly more possible after yesterday's senate filibuster, Donald Trump will proudly take credit for "protecting us from terrorists" and "making a deal with the NRA".
1
Two terrorists are talking about their next plot to enter the U.S. and shoot up a bunch of Americans. The first terrorist says, that's a great idea, Allah will be pleased but how are you going to do that with no guns? The second terrorist responds, "Not a problem, I'll just buy them when I get there." Thank you NRA.
1
NRA - Nothing Reasonable Allowed
1
Like it or not, Trump is the right person to bring about progress on gun control. He is actually willing to TALK to NRA, something which Obama has never done.
Also, Trump defends the second amendment so that he can be trusted by the NRA.
Many Americans believe that the Democrats want to take away ALL guns, and a ban on assault weapons is only the thin end of the wedge. Many posters right here have said, "Take away all guns!"
But as soon as "take away all guns" is in the background, a ban on assault weapons is going to be a non-starter.
But Trump can be trusted by the NRA, because he is NOT saying, "take away all guns!" Any law that he backs will be of limited application.
I am not sure, of course, but my guess is that Trump will walk away from the NRA with what he calls a "deal." The Republicans will back this deal and then Democrats will be put in the uncomfortable position of either going along with what Trump brought back, or blocking it so that Republicans can say, "See, Democrats are not serious about gun control!"
Also, Trump defends the second amendment so that he can be trusted by the NRA.
Many Americans believe that the Democrats want to take away ALL guns, and a ban on assault weapons is only the thin end of the wedge. Many posters right here have said, "Take away all guns!"
But as soon as "take away all guns" is in the background, a ban on assault weapons is going to be a non-starter.
But Trump can be trusted by the NRA, because he is NOT saying, "take away all guns!" Any law that he backs will be of limited application.
I am not sure, of course, but my guess is that Trump will walk away from the NRA with what he calls a "deal." The Republicans will back this deal and then Democrats will be put in the uncomfortable position of either going along with what Trump brought back, or blocking it so that Republicans can say, "See, Democrats are not serious about gun control!"
2
Just for the record, Trump used to be a strong advocate of gun control. Then when he began his Presidential bid, he reversed course and began demogoging his new-found position opposing gun control laws. When he meets with the lunatics who run the NRA, no telling what Trump will say. It will be incoherence meeting with insanity. What I mess, I tell you. It's terrible; just terrible what they are doing.
Follow?
Follow?
First of all claiming that the NRA is complicit with terrorism is alarming. Second of all the shooter was interviewed by the FBI and removed from the watch list, the NRA didn't do that. So even if these changes had been in place the FBI after interviewing the shooter didn't see him as a threat so his carry permit was still active allowing him to purchase the firearms legally. Does this make the FBI complicit? I don't think so but if you follow the logic displayed in this article that could be a possibility. Sensationalizing things after a tragedy for political expediency is a shameful way to make an argument for gun control.
25
Sensationalizing? Political expediency?
If the FBI were certain putting someone on a watch list, and keeping that person on it, would effectively keep excessively lethal weapons out of hands it considered a risk, perhaps Mateen would still be on the list and MIGHT not have been as capable of inflicting such carnage. The editorial's suggested appeal process would mean that person's rights would be respected, subject to a review. What do you have against that exactly? Yes what exactly? The onus is on YOU to explain yourself.
What is shameful is the abject reasoning gun control opponents use to defend putting excessively lethal weapons in the hands of literally just anyone who wants one. Shameful, and complicit.
If the FBI were certain putting someone on a watch list, and keeping that person on it, would effectively keep excessively lethal weapons out of hands it considered a risk, perhaps Mateen would still be on the list and MIGHT not have been as capable of inflicting such carnage. The editorial's suggested appeal process would mean that person's rights would be respected, subject to a review. What do you have against that exactly? Yes what exactly? The onus is on YOU to explain yourself.
What is shameful is the abject reasoning gun control opponents use to defend putting excessively lethal weapons in the hands of literally just anyone who wants one. Shameful, and complicit.
2
The NRA strongly advocates for abusers to retain their guns during domestic conflicts.
The NRA strongly advocates for NO background checks. For silencers, for military-type weaponry, for anyone to obtain any gun for any reason with ZERO oversight.
So, yes, the NRA is complicit with terrorism and their members as well.
The NRA promotes hate, fear and violence, as their Board Members have repeatedly threatened public officials (Ted Nugent, a Board Member) over the years.
The NRA is nothing but an industry lobbying group, merely using their members as astroturf--nothing more.
The NRA strongly advocates for NO background checks. For silencers, for military-type weaponry, for anyone to obtain any gun for any reason with ZERO oversight.
So, yes, the NRA is complicit with terrorism and their members as well.
The NRA promotes hate, fear and violence, as their Board Members have repeatedly threatened public officials (Ted Nugent, a Board Member) over the years.
The NRA is nothing but an industry lobbying group, merely using their members as astroturf--nothing more.
1
The complicity, sir, is not in opposing the use of terrorist watch lists or advocating for the use records of mental illness (a favorite NRA red herring), or for failing to spot a terrorist in the making, but rather for allowing our country to be absolutely deluged in weaponry of obscene killing power that no sane citizen would consider appropriate for sport or protection. And the problem is not the sane citizen, of course, but the unbalanced, the crazed, diagnosed or not, who have only to dip into our limitless supply of instant death-toys to bring their latest fantasies or social grievances into bloody reality.
1
The NRA may have its rank and file but they are really an arms dealer PAC and just like the NRA, arms dealers have no moral compass. It's all about making money. Making money off the fears of the rank and file.
5
Legit editorial but when are you gonna write one re Hollywood's production of grat. gun violence media of all sorts that young people today eat up especially minority kids.
You are much more likely to see a minority kid have a gangsta rap or Scarface T Shirt that one of MLK or Lincoln.
Hollywood is the de facto entertainment wing of the NRA.... Everybody's dirty little secret, left and right.
If the Board wants to help end our cultural abuse gun sickness this is one way to go.
Oh wait a minute, the NY Times receives millions of dollars a year promoting and reviewing this trash.
You are much more likely to see a minority kid have a gangsta rap or Scarface T Shirt that one of MLK or Lincoln.
Hollywood is the de facto entertainment wing of the NRA.... Everybody's dirty little secret, left and right.
If the Board wants to help end our cultural abuse gun sickness this is one way to go.
Oh wait a minute, the NY Times receives millions of dollars a year promoting and reviewing this trash.
1
Whenever will we use the correct word regarding so-called donations to politicians. The word is bribe. Some of the weakest, amoral people in America, congressmen and senators, support themselves and family accepting bribes. NRA is merely one of the most egregious... Have a nice day.
2
The NRA is not merely complicit with the ambitions of terrorist groups, it is a terrorist organization unto itself, using the same tactics of fear, misinformation and intimidation to recruit and launch its strikes for which all terrorists are infamous.
2
And people entertain themselves by watching people shoot each other on television, in movies and video games. Society is saturated with violence.
2
Last year I went to a friend's ranch near Van Horn, Texas with two buddies and another guy I hadn't met before. We were shooting targets with 12 gauges and handguns when the gentleman I didn't know pulled out an AR-15. I grew up in Texas but not around guns and hadn't shot a semi auto rifle before. I couldn't believe how small/light it was. He put in a 30 round clip and I started firing, slowly at first, before realizing how quickly I could get the next round off. After emptying the clip in what seemed like no time at all I felt exhilarated. Then, as the gun smoke dissipated I thought about the carnage that could have wrought in a classroom or movie theater and adrenaline gave way to nausea.
I asked him why he owned such a gun and he said, "for fun, my wife doesn't even know I have it." Later he told me he absolutely thinks a gun like that should require a psych test.
I'm not sure how many current NRA members would pass that test. There is a paranoia there that seems truly effortless.
I asked him why he owned such a gun and he said, "for fun, my wife doesn't even know I have it." Later he told me he absolutely thinks a gun like that should require a psych test.
I'm not sure how many current NRA members would pass that test. There is a paranoia there that seems truly effortless.
470
Finally someone told the truth about owning/firing an assault rifle: "I felt exhilarated." That is where arguments for being able to buy the gun originate: in the primitive pre-conscious part of the (male?) brain, untempered by rational thought or morality. For many, serving the exhilaration Trumps anything happening in the frontal cortex.
3
For once, a thoughtful and subtle commentary on one's view of semiautomatic rifles (my preferred tag as it is both descriptive and politically neutral). And I was completely with you until your closing two lines and the gratuitous shot at "NRA members." I don't have any sense of the characteristics of individual members of this or any group and I think it is counterproductive to stereotype them.
Clearly these are not hunting weapons. They are testosterone boosters.
3
The big problem here is Gun Free Zones. Almost every mass murder happens in one. These zones are like hanging out a sign that says KILL HERE! It guarantees radical Muslim jerks can kill large numbers of Americans with no threat of self defense. It makes gays, straights, men and women, Christians and Jews like sheep parading to slaughter rather than like Americans standing up for their own defense.
1
Gun free zones? Really.
The big problem her is the abject reasoning gun control opponents use to defend putting excessively lethal weapons in the hands of literally just anyone who wants one. Shameful and complicit.
The big problem her is the abject reasoning gun control opponents use to defend putting excessively lethal weapons in the hands of literally just anyone who wants one. Shameful and complicit.
1
The NRA is an American not-for-profit organization dedicated to upholding the US Constitution, and specifically the Second Amendment. It is, as it was founded to be six years after the Civil War, a civil rights organization.
Al Quada, ISIS/ISIL, and Islamic Jihad, to name just a few, are international organizations dedicated to destroying all democratic rule of law, and replacing democracy with a religious dogma based on 7th Century mores. including, but not limited to, the death penalty for homosexuality. And to do so by any means necessary, including the subordination of democratic principles by democratic means.
What the nazis, among others, referred to as proving that democracy is always, and eventually, a suicide pact.
Do we hear anyone demanding that all avowed terrorist means of communication should be shut down. Internet, e-mail, telephony, what have you? A no fly list for all communications between all terrorist groups, including home grown Tim McVeigh sympathizers? First Amendment freedom of speech, religious freedom. Can't do it.
First, before destroying the First Amendment, in the name of safety and security, the Second Amendment must be taken down. And some liberals have already begun by declaring that any private citizen who wants to own a gun, or any group that wishes to support Constitutional rights, is complicit in terrorism.
Beware the slippery slope, there is no end to it. Confabulating the NRA with terrorists is, by definition, self-defeating.
Al Quada, ISIS/ISIL, and Islamic Jihad, to name just a few, are international organizations dedicated to destroying all democratic rule of law, and replacing democracy with a religious dogma based on 7th Century mores. including, but not limited to, the death penalty for homosexuality. And to do so by any means necessary, including the subordination of democratic principles by democratic means.
What the nazis, among others, referred to as proving that democracy is always, and eventually, a suicide pact.
Do we hear anyone demanding that all avowed terrorist means of communication should be shut down. Internet, e-mail, telephony, what have you? A no fly list for all communications between all terrorist groups, including home grown Tim McVeigh sympathizers? First Amendment freedom of speech, religious freedom. Can't do it.
First, before destroying the First Amendment, in the name of safety and security, the Second Amendment must be taken down. And some liberals have already begun by declaring that any private citizen who wants to own a gun, or any group that wishes to support Constitutional rights, is complicit in terrorism.
Beware the slippery slope, there is no end to it. Confabulating the NRA with terrorists is, by definition, self-defeating.
1
The NRA and those in Congress who will not support background checks for gun purchases are complicite in the mass killing of innocent people.
279
The NRA has blood on its hands. Your editorial should have gone one step further and declared the NRA a terrorist organization.
2
Who has the NRA killed? How have they comitted a crime. How have they helped a terrorist?
The NRA is a domestic, terrorist organization, and the TP/GOP and a few Democratic Congressional members allegiance to them is treasonous. Gun violence in America is a public health epidemic. It's time for brave Congressional members to call them out and start a campaign to de-legitimize them. I know their sychophants will scream 'bloody murder', but their heinous influence on lawmakers has to be stopped. Now!
7
The NRA has become a terrorist organization and should be monitored as such. They are not just aiding and abetting foreign terrorists. They are also assisting fueling domestic terror, and domestic abuse and murder and crime.
5
In the three most horrific mass murders in recent years--Sandy Hook, San Bernardino, and now Orlando, the only common denominator was the weapon used--the military-style automatic weapon. There is no good reason why anyone should own such a weapon of mass destruction. Anything short of banning their sale, even to "responsible gun owners," (defined as....?) is a band aid on a gaping wound. We need to elect to office men and women who will stand up to the gun lobby and say "no more."
3
NYT should be ashamed. Rifles of all kinds account for less than 2% of guns used in crimes. Less than 2%!!! So called assault rifles are NOT the problem. Reporting like this is disingenuous and leads people to believe that these types of guns are causing the majority of gun deaths. Nothing could be further from the truth. Engaging in this kind of media driven agenda is almost criminal.
3
Your comment completely disregards the MAGNITUDE of the crimes in which such rifles are used. In other words, when a rifle IS used in an illegal shooting, the death toll is high enough to justify special treatment of that class of military-style weapon.
Almost all of the gun safety proposals pertain to all firearms: background checks, insurance, safe storage laws, etc.
Deaths by semi-automatic rifle far exceed death by international terrorists, yet we have chosen to do nothing to stop the former.
Your 2% statistic is misleading. Two percent doesn't mean low; it's simply an indication that OTHER firearms deaths are exceptionally high.
Deaths by semi-automatic rifle far exceed death by international terrorists, yet we have chosen to do nothing to stop the former.
Your 2% statistic is misleading. Two percent doesn't mean low; it's simply an indication that OTHER firearms deaths are exceptionally high.
Has anyone considered whether the NRA might actually be funded by terorrist organizations?
2
I think there should be mandatory liability insurance if you want to own an assault rifle, and owners should be reported and tracked, as certain POTUS candidates would have us do for Muslims. Can't hurt.
8
Thanks NYT. The story of the NRA's complicity needs to be told. But it goes beyond complicity.
The NRA is not just an association and lobbying arm of the gun industry. It is the industry's principal marketing arm. And it is free marketing. The NRA members pay for it. Make no mistake about it: terrorist groups are a target market for gun companies and the revenue forecast are baked into their business plans.
The NRA has bought and paid for Ryan, Mitchell, Gohmert and Tillis and many other completely compromised, scared and amoral Republicans.They are all complicit in aiding and abetting acts of terror in our country. They all have blood on their hands that they will never be able to wash it off.
The NRA is not just an association and lobbying arm of the gun industry. It is the industry's principal marketing arm. And it is free marketing. The NRA members pay for it. Make no mistake about it: terrorist groups are a target market for gun companies and the revenue forecast are baked into their business plans.
The NRA has bought and paid for Ryan, Mitchell, Gohmert and Tillis and many other completely compromised, scared and amoral Republicans.They are all complicit in aiding and abetting acts of terror in our country. They all have blood on their hands that they will never be able to wash it off.
15
The Supreme Court, in Heller v Washington DC, gave us the legal logic to ban assault weapons. They ruled that there is a traditional right to gun ownership, but there is no traditional USE of assault weapons. They are weapons of war, and they are used only to kill other human beings. In their fear of the NRA, our state, local, and federal lawmakers are directly responsible for the mass murders that have happened and will continue to happen.
302
There is a huge difference between the rifles the military uses and what is sold to civilians. The use of the term Assault Rifle was introduced in1988 by the gun control lobby to confuse people who are not familiar with firearms. The AR15 civilian version rifle and the M16 military version have a similar appearance but are completely different in how they function and their capabilities. The AR15 civilian version rifle has been sold since 1963 and was called a rifle before 1988. The only thing that changed in 1988 was giving it a name that made it sound like it was different than it was. If you asked those who served in combat if they would want to be issued the civilian version to go into battle you would find them opposing that that idea.
Semi-auto rifles are used to hunt invasive hogs, as the herds scatter very quickly after the first shot. They are not used solely to kill humans, as you claim.
Our legislators don't fear the NRA, they simply enjoy its patronage.
1
How can it be that a gun lobby has more power than our federal government? Even Trump is saying he's going to go talk to them about moderating their views. Shouldn't it be the other way around, that Congress sees their duty and makes laws that protect the people? Instead, people are having to beg the NRA to stop their policies that are causing so many deaths, so Congress can then make a change? Is this really the way the United States works????
10
Dear America,
I know you can do it. We did. It works. We had a terrible massacre and did something about it. You can do it too. Please ...
Your friend,
Australia
Australia
I know you can do it. We did. It works. We had a terrible massacre and did something about it. You can do it too. Please ...
Your friend,
Australia
Australia
546
Yes Peter, but your country does not suffer from an engrained cultural abuse gun sickness that our country suffers from both left and right.
That is why it is so hard to cure in this country...
You saw the sickness coming and immediately took measures that worked in your country.
Don't get me wrong. Americans don't want to see this carnage any more than your people it is just that our cultural abuse gun sickness is more important..
That is why it is so hard to cure in this country...
You saw the sickness coming and immediately took measures that worked in your country.
Don't get me wrong. Americans don't want to see this carnage any more than your people it is just that our cultural abuse gun sickness is more important..
2
Hey Peter, Australia does not have a Constitution, let alone a constitutionally guaranteed to right to bear arms. Apples and oranges, man. Welcome to New York.
Murders in Australia dropped 56% after their gun ban.
Over the same time period, murders in US dropped by 50%, with worse economy, repealed gun laws, and huge increase in number of people carrying guns.
Conclusion: Argument that Australia's gun ban is the cause of their drop in crime rate (which happened everywhere in the world over the same period) is intentionally misleading.
Over the same time period, murders in US dropped by 50%, with worse economy, repealed gun laws, and huge increase in number of people carrying guns.
Conclusion: Argument that Australia's gun ban is the cause of their drop in crime rate (which happened everywhere in the world over the same period) is intentionally misleading.
Remember, behind the NRA is a 'legalized' bribery system that normalizes the purchase of United States Congressmen and Senators via the Citizens Corrupted decision and other laws that facilitate 0.1% and corporate hijacking of public policy.
The NRA-GOP-Merchant of Death industrial complex is an official state sponsor of domestic terrorism.
Normally, America punishes state sponsors of terrorism and freezes their assets.
But that would upset the inalienable American right to have an AR-15 semi-automatic rifle under every pillow.
America: The Land of "Free-Dumb" and the Scared To Death
The NRA-GOP-Merchant of Death industrial complex is an official state sponsor of domestic terrorism.
Normally, America punishes state sponsors of terrorism and freezes their assets.
But that would upset the inalienable American right to have an AR-15 semi-automatic rifle under every pillow.
America: The Land of "Free-Dumb" and the Scared To Death
98
*Gasp* politicians are often heavily influenced by the people and entities from whom they receive large donations? For a while I thought that line of reasoning was out of style.
The President is even more complicit in terrorism with his premature withdrawal from Iraq, muddled Syrian policy and the chaos he created (at Hillary Clinton's urging) in Libya against all military advice. Our war president has given us eight years of losses that spawned ISIS.
1
Actually, Michael S, most reasonable people with a moderate grasp of history know that the Bush-Cheney Neo-Confederacy of Right Wing Dunces created ISIS when they blew up Iraq into 10,000 pieces for no reason.
Ivy Ziedrich, a 19-year-old University of Nevada student, was kind enough to publicly remind Jeb Bush of that fact last year.
She questioned Jeb! about his flawed right-wing assertion that ISIS developed because Barack Obama had overseen the withdrawal of US forces from Iraq.
“You stated that Isis was created because we don’t have enough presence and we’ve been pulling out of the Middle East,” Ivy Ziedrich said.
“The threat of ISIS was created by the (Bush-era) Iraqi coalition authority, which ousted the entire government of Iraq.
“It was when 30,000 individuals who were part of the Iraqi military – they were forced out. They had no employment, they had no income, yet they were left with access to all the same arms and weapons. Your brother (George W) created IISIS!”
We repeat this again now for slow learners, the hard of hearing and for those with no access to history books:
George W. Bush and his Neo-ConArtist staff created ISIS.
The NRA-GOP Caucus is now happy to supply ISIS sympathizers with all the domestic terrorism weapons they need to shoot up America
The Party of Stupid Destruction strikes again.
Ivy Ziedrich, a 19-year-old University of Nevada student, was kind enough to publicly remind Jeb Bush of that fact last year.
She questioned Jeb! about his flawed right-wing assertion that ISIS developed because Barack Obama had overseen the withdrawal of US forces from Iraq.
“You stated that Isis was created because we don’t have enough presence and we’ve been pulling out of the Middle East,” Ivy Ziedrich said.
“The threat of ISIS was created by the (Bush-era) Iraqi coalition authority, which ousted the entire government of Iraq.
“It was when 30,000 individuals who were part of the Iraqi military – they were forced out. They had no employment, they had no income, yet they were left with access to all the same arms and weapons. Your brother (George W) created IISIS!”
We repeat this again now for slow learners, the hard of hearing and for those with no access to history books:
George W. Bush and his Neo-ConArtist staff created ISIS.
The NRA-GOP Caucus is now happy to supply ISIS sympathizers with all the domestic terrorism weapons they need to shoot up America
The Party of Stupid Destruction strikes again.
46
While you are bringing up history you fail to mention that Obama is the first American president to have a war going in each of his eight years in office.
Bush was eight years ago and ISIS showed up on Obama's watch. It is understandable that Obamabots prefer to drag up the Bush administration because Obama's wars and foreign policy are an utter disaster.
Bush was eight years ago and ISIS showed up on Obama's watch. It is understandable that Obamabots prefer to drag up the Bush administration because Obama's wars and foreign policy are an utter disaster.
1
Wow-level wrongness.
BHO is a 'war president' because GWB was a 'war president' who bequeathed war on his successor. GWB set the withdrawal with Iraq after he started the "Fiasco"* that led directly to ISIS. *Good book, try it.
Our European allies were the lead in the Libyan intervention that was designed to prevent an eminent humanitarian event. That event was, in fact, prevented.
Then Libyans dealt harshly with Gadaffi and the mission was over.
Given the regime's history of keeping control by promoting divisions and under-educating the populace, the mess being sorted out since is sadly predictable but not sure that it negates the original purpose of the no-fly intervention. Gaddafi forces were prepared to destroy 'rebel' cities and towns within days.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_military_intervention_in_Libya
It was not a lone POTUS action, the UN voted and the US Congress voted.
Syria was, is and may well remain a mess. At least they are a mess without chemical WMD, thanks in no small part to US efforts. I'm grateful that this POTUS has kept us out of it to the extent that he has.
Do try to keep up.
(The spellings of the deceased Libyan leader's name are intentional ;-)
BHO is a 'war president' because GWB was a 'war president' who bequeathed war on his successor. GWB set the withdrawal with Iraq after he started the "Fiasco"* that led directly to ISIS. *Good book, try it.
Our European allies were the lead in the Libyan intervention that was designed to prevent an eminent humanitarian event. That event was, in fact, prevented.
Then Libyans dealt harshly with Gadaffi and the mission was over.
Given the regime's history of keeping control by promoting divisions and under-educating the populace, the mess being sorted out since is sadly predictable but not sure that it negates the original purpose of the no-fly intervention. Gaddafi forces were prepared to destroy 'rebel' cities and towns within days.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_military_intervention_in_Libya
It was not a lone POTUS action, the UN voted and the US Congress voted.
Syria was, is and may well remain a mess. At least they are a mess without chemical WMD, thanks in no small part to US efforts. I'm grateful that this POTUS has kept us out of it to the extent that he has.
Do try to keep up.
(The spellings of the deceased Libyan leader's name are intentional ;-)
6
What difference does it make what the N.R.A. thinks? All I've heard from politicians, including the Ny Times favorite Hillary Clinton, is that campaign donations don't have any effect.
Fight as hard as we can for more gun regulations, just don't follow the money.
Fight as hard as we can for more gun regulations, just don't follow the money.
1
Obviously no NRA members are gay or have LGBT family or friends, right?
2
The GOP has blood on their hands.
They've undone and blocked regulations, made the gun industry immune to lawsuits, blocked the CDC from studying gun violence, taken millions of dollars from the NRA...
Get involved!!!
http://csgv.org/blog/bullet-counter-points/2016/8-steps-can-take-stop-gu...
They've undone and blocked regulations, made the gun industry immune to lawsuits, blocked the CDC from studying gun violence, taken millions of dollars from the NRA...
Get involved!!!
http://csgv.org/blog/bullet-counter-points/2016/8-steps-can-take-stop-gu...
13
Thank you for this -- on the nose. Our legislators and political leaders need to grow a backbone and stand up the NRA instead of simply being bought off. And we also need to address the strange paranoia fantasies whipped up by the NRA and gum manufacturers that so many gun owners use to justify owning assault weapons and such...where does that come from -- why do so many Americans seem to think the government might turn on them any second? Or is it just drivel to excuse their gun fetishization?
5
A list of members of Congress (virtually all GOP) who have received quid-pro-quo "donations" from and pledge allegiance to the NRA narrative rather than constituants. (Paul Ryan got $36,800).
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/nra-donations/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/nra-donations/
14
Strict gun laws did not stop attacks by Muslims in Europe. I'm a liberal but I swear enough is enough. This man did this in the name of Islam. When this paper refuses to admit his motivation and deliberately excuses a conservative, homophobic ideology it cannot be called liberal.
3
Motivation means nothing. A radical islamist (or christian), or unemployed plumber, or mentally ill person without a gun is a radical islamist (or christian), or unemployed plumber, or mentally ill person. A radical islamist (or christian), or unemployed plumber, or mentally ill person with an assault weapon and 30 round magazine is a danger to all.
3
The evil of monotony is to listen to the same old news story about the same old propaganda from the NRA that the larger solution is to arm everybody in the USA. I guess the only thing depressed people can do is laugh about it, and then feel even better by reading today's NYT column by Gail Collins "A Pistol for Every Bar Stool." Time for action, not cynicism or hypocrisy.
8
Pro tip: If you want to come out in support of the gun control measures you list here, you need to address the Second Amendment explicitly. The failings of lawmakers to debate and the power of the NRA to lobby all stem from that origin point.
If you truly want change the conversation, you're going to have to move the goalposts -- the bounds of the field. Fortunately or unfortunately, those bounds are set by the US Constitution. Be realistic about what needs to change, and start that conversation realistically and directly.
If you truly want change the conversation, you're going to have to move the goalposts -- the bounds of the field. Fortunately or unfortunately, those bounds are set by the US Constitution. Be realistic about what needs to change, and start that conversation realistically and directly.
3
I am willing to bet the NRA's response to this latest tragedy is that it wouldn't have been so bad if everybody in the nightclub was carrying a gun. I just don't see how republicans can sleep at night.
13
There are those who are seriously preparing for Civil War 2.0. They call themselves patriots and see the second amendment as an excuse to war against what they call a tyrannical government. They are larger in number than we think. All it will take for them to become full blown warriors is the election of one too many Democrats to hold the office of POTUS. They have blind enablers who are called Republicans.
I read that an off-duty police officer was carrying and tried to shoot the gunman but was unable to do so. Gun versus assault rifle held by a madman who wants to kill as many as possible: gun loses.
This nation is being held hostage by the NRA, the Republican party and the Second Amendment zealots in the electorate.
I don't want to live in the country they've created. I don't want to carry a gun to defend myself against other Americans who feel they need a gun to defend themselves from me.
We need legislators who are willing to buck the NRA. We need courts who are willing to reverse the twisted interpretation of the Second Amendment that hampers attempts at gun control.
More than anything else, we need a press that will expose the workings of the NRA and how they go about the dirty business of creating an America that's armed to the teeth.
I don't want to live in the country they've created. I don't want to carry a gun to defend myself against other Americans who feel they need a gun to defend themselves from me.
We need legislators who are willing to buck the NRA. We need courts who are willing to reverse the twisted interpretation of the Second Amendment that hampers attempts at gun control.
More than anything else, we need a press that will expose the workings of the NRA and how they go about the dirty business of creating an America that's armed to the teeth.
38
If 20 dead children at Sandy Hook could not change minds and laws, nothing will.
21
It seems that way, but you never know when the cure will come...sometimes it comes when you least expect it, when most people finally get sick of the carnage...
2
Yesterday it was the Republican party today the NRA what will it be tomorrow?? I am sure it will not be the real reason this person pulled the trigger. He was a self declared Islam extremist bent on killing as many gay people as he could and getting points in heaven for it. It would not have mattered to him if by gun, bomb, knife or automobile. The gun argument is like seeing a drunk run a car into a crowd and then everyone say "let's ban the car". It will not work and if it would Obama when he had a veto proof congress would have passed anything he wanted. I do not want terrorists to be able to buy a gun . If they can come up with a sensible way to stop that it will be great, but with this congress I will not hold my breath.
5
It's easier to affect access to these weapons than it is to make people stop having radical, hateful thoughts.
The latter will take generations.
That should be obvious to anyone with a brain and a teaspoon of common sense.
The latter will take generations.
That should be obvious to anyone with a brain and a teaspoon of common sense.
Obama only had a veto proof majority until Kennedy died and Brown from Mass was elected.
Republican Congressman win elections, NRA fills its coffers with millions, the public loses...
A similar loose policy on assault weapons in Lebanon led to the death of over 150,000 citizens, in a population of 5 million, when the fratricidal war broke out between political parties and sects, from 1975-1990...neighbor killed neighbor, former friends killed friends...
A similar event will wipe out millions in the USA, and the NRA will be the winner.
A similar loose policy on assault weapons in Lebanon led to the death of over 150,000 citizens, in a population of 5 million, when the fratricidal war broke out between political parties and sects, from 1975-1990...neighbor killed neighbor, former friends killed friends...
A similar event will wipe out millions in the USA, and the NRA will be the winner.
8
"There is a word for their role in this form of terrorism: 'complicity'." Indeed? I can think of two other, more apt "C" words: "cowardice" and "criminal." All three terms seem to be hallmarks of a Congress in hock to the American enablers of mass murder.
Shame on Congress. Shame on our representatives. Shame on us for putting them there.
www.endthemadnessnow.org
Shame on Congress. Shame on our representatives. Shame on us for putting them there.
www.endthemadnessnow.org
50
Agree. The Congress should ban assault weapons. I would like to see an interview where NRA explains what are is the "ideal" usage of an assault weapons for civilians? Should people start to carry assault weapons when they go to dance in a night club? Sounds barbaric.
26
I believe that the membership of the NRA should rise up en masse and revoke their memberships - they have considerable power, and most "responsible gun owners" do support universal background checks, mandatory waiting periods for gun purchases, and a broad ban on automatic military weaponry. There is a rabid, conspiracy-obsessed cohort among the members of the NRA - but given that this organization does not actually reflect or represent the interests of the majority of its members - they should quit or demand that LaPierre be kicked out in favor of someone who isn't so delusionally maniacal in his views.
326
Their members have done nothing since Sandy Hook. By doing nothing and maintaining the same leadership (Ted Nugent, LaPierre) it is clear they are in agreement with the NRA's extremist views.
The NRA is not principally funded by its members, it is funded by the gun industry. Resignations en masse would have little effect...except to deprive members of the benefits of membership (firearm safety training etc.)
1
What views are maniacal? That free american citizens should be able to protect themselves and their family. Tell me what views are maniacal.
Americans should be in the streets, protesting the NRA, What are we doing instead? We are lining up to give blood (which Red Cross collects, and because it doesn't need that much blood, either sells or dumps it, as it did after 9/11). In other words, Americans, by their sheepishness are complicit in this. No other nation would respond to mass murder MERELY by donating blood and holding vigils. Elsewhere people protest. See what the French are doing.
441
Clearly, it is obvious that, for many Americans, they have all but given up on their politicians and their political system to do anything or make any real change in the country for the better. This has what has given rise to Bernie Sanders and sadly, Donald Trump, yet, many, in their tunnel vision, refuse to understand why this has happened. The massive amount of money in this rigged political/economic system has created a situation where the power brokers act as counter revolutionaries and from the Star Trek Next Generation television series use the BORGS approach to controlling others:
RESISTANCE IS FUTILE.
RESISTANCE IS FUTILE.
1
Don't see what protesting would do except make for nice news footage. Until the money is removed from our political process nothing will change. The gun lobby owns most of Congress. As long as legislators do nothing but raise money to get re-elected they are beholden to special interests such as the death merchant lobby. Public financing of elections now.
NRA - Not Really American
16
I'm confused... So.... because this shooter was a brown white person(as middle Eastern people are Caucasoid), we are calling this terrorism. Rare do we call the light skin white shooters terrorist. I do but not the public. Why? So if you are a brown skin white person you can't go crazy but hey if you're a light skin white person you basically get a pass and not labeled a terrorist. Wow.
7
Let's not mince words here. The NRA is a terrorist organization.
14
Let's not mince words here Susan. America suffers from a cultural abuse gun sickness on both the left and right...
1
The last time I checked, the NRA has zero ability to write or vote in congress to make new or amend existing laws. The ability to do so sits squarely with the elected politicians in each state and in Washington.
The NYT and liberal left is AGAIN using a tragedy to deflect responsibility from the very few Americans (some 600 lawmakers in congress, out of the more than 300 million Americans) who can and should tighten some of the rules.
The second tragedy is that by doing this over and over, the discussion and debate are deflected AWAY from those who can make a change and onto those we you want to demonize - in this case the NRA. Yesterday, on these pages it was republicans and conservatives.
Wrong, wrong and wrong. All you're doing is venting hate to groups of Americans who DO NOT make the laws.
And if you said well, the NRA donates to politicians - well, then its still the politicians who make the laws. The NRA doesn't get to do that.
Period.
The NYT and liberal left is AGAIN using a tragedy to deflect responsibility from the very few Americans (some 600 lawmakers in congress, out of the more than 300 million Americans) who can and should tighten some of the rules.
The second tragedy is that by doing this over and over, the discussion and debate are deflected AWAY from those who can make a change and onto those we you want to demonize - in this case the NRA. Yesterday, on these pages it was republicans and conservatives.
Wrong, wrong and wrong. All you're doing is venting hate to groups of Americans who DO NOT make the laws.
And if you said well, the NRA donates to politicians - well, then its still the politicians who make the laws. The NRA doesn't get to do that.
Period.
4
The NRA buys votes. Money talks, The NRA is the mouthpiece of gun manufacturers. Bought and bossed congressmen toe the line. How do you not get it? Rational people have felt impotent against this trifecta- but maybe the tide is turning. I sure hope to God that it is.
1
Sorry but nothing will change unti the rich and powerful are affected.
8
You would think the NRA wants to disarm terrorist. They don't because we have domestic terrorist groups like the klan and anti-government groups like Timothy McVeighs group.
Disarming domestic terrorist groups would mean millions of white people would be targeted. Many of those people are sympathetic or are in the NRA, so it will never happen.
Disarming domestic terrorist groups would mean millions of white people would be targeted. Many of those people are sympathetic or are in the NRA, so it will never happen.
4
Make no mistake, the NRA is about SALES REVENUE, not the second amendment.
26
The upcoming election between Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Donald Trump , as well as upcoming Congressional elections, is truly a MORAL ISSUE.
A vote for the Republican Trump and for Republican Senators and Representatives is a vote for more killings by guns and more mass shootings of innocent Americans.
I pray that Americans will reject hate, death, and firearm slaughters-----and will vote against the Republican-NRA-Gun Industry coalition to save lives and to return America to a more peaceful nation.
A vote for the Republican Trump and for Republican Senators and Representatives is a vote for more killings by guns and more mass shootings of innocent Americans.
I pray that Americans will reject hate, death, and firearm slaughters-----and will vote against the Republican-NRA-Gun Industry coalition to save lives and to return America to a more peaceful nation.
10
How will voting for a democrat help this. There has been democrat in office for the last 7+ years. Chicago has toughest gun laws in the country. It is the murder capital of the US. It is and has been democrat controlled city for long time. Tell me how the NRA is causing this?
Our level of private gun ownership tracks closely to our global military capabilities - both generally approved of by our voting, tax-paying population...
2
NRA propaganda and lobbying have resulted in more American deaths in this century than all Americans killed in terrorist incidents all Americans killed in battle.
They are THE terrorist organization of our time!
They are THE terrorist organization of our time!
21
And Congress's complicity, too. They're the ones who pass the laws or don't; not the NRA.
9
While watching the news coverage yesterday I felt sick when the GOP leaders talked about consulting with the NRA over changing gun laws. Better to consult with the victims families and law enforcement . I hope that between Trump and inaction on this the party is do e for
16
Complicity is an excellent definition for Congress' and the NRA's role in these massacres.
However, it feels like ISIS is the new Nazi Party, waging a holocaust against infidels, or just about anyone else they feel like killing. So in that regard, Congress and the NRA are collaborators, like Pétain's Vichy government.
However, it feels like ISIS is the new Nazi Party, waging a holocaust against infidels, or just about anyone else they feel like killing. So in that regard, Congress and the NRA are collaborators, like Pétain's Vichy government.
2
How is the NRA responsible? The shooter pledges allegiance to ISIS and this is the NRA fault.
Aiding and abetting terrorists? Bloodshed? Schoolchildren mowed down? Gays and lesbians slaughtered? A full-blown national-security hazard?
As long as their sugar daddy, the NRA, keeps its wallet open, all we're ever going to get from the spineless, soulless GOP is more thoughts and prayers.
As long as their sugar daddy, the NRA, keeps its wallet open, all we're ever going to get from the spineless, soulless GOP is more thoughts and prayers.
24
So at what point does the NRA become a terrorist organization? Or has it already? And if the NRA does support or give comfort to terrorists, well then when can the leadership of the NRA, its corporate supporters, and members begin to be legally held accountable?
18
It is time to call the Republicans who will not keep guns from terrorists what they are. "Complicit" is too weak a word. They are traitors.
31
They are assessory to the murders. Every one of us should sue the gun manufacturers for forcing us to endure this horror time after time.
1
and accessories to crimes
A simple first step would be to list every senator who voted against Sen. Feinstein's 2015 bill. Expose these senators for the gun lobby finger puppets that they are, and let them explain themselves to their constituencies.
We've certainly not let Sec. Clinton off the hook for her ill-advised senate vote to authorize war in Iraq. Why should we let the NRA-beholden senators off the hook? The NYT and other news outlets should be excoriating these senators by name.
We've certainly not let Sec. Clinton off the hook for her ill-advised senate vote to authorize war in Iraq. Why should we let the NRA-beholden senators off the hook? The NYT and other news outlets should be excoriating these senators by name.
28
stop making excuses for the for the gutless inaction of the U.S. CONGRESS.
every group has a lobby to promote itself.
every group has a lobby to promote itself.
17
The notion that universal background checks will prevent gun massacres is ridiculous. AR-15 type assault weapons must be banned from private ownership.
133
BOTH measures would help even more, John. I cannot fathom why any normal American citizen would need an AR-15 assault weapon unless it is to show off or kill a whole bunch of people. It's useless for hunting. We have a deranged mindset in America that says that guns are the answer to just about every dispute now. No other country in the Western world sees life the same way....WE are the outlier, and yet we either don't see that or don't care. Sad and scary....scary and sad.
1
Why AR-15? What is it about the AR-15 that is different from other firearms?
Call your Senators and express your support of the Senate Democrats filibuster last night and ask them to vote in favor of the proposed gun control legislation for universal background checks.
16
Did the NYT just claim that 5 Million+ US Citizens are complicit in terrorism?
Yes, yes they did.
Grandfathers, grandmothers, Moms, Dads, kids, gays, straights, blacks, whites, your neighbors, your family, complicit in terrorism.
Yes, yes they did.
Grandfathers, grandmothers, Moms, Dads, kids, gays, straights, blacks, whites, your neighbors, your family, complicit in terrorism.
63
Yes they did and yes they are.
16
The NRA doesn't represent its individual members; it represents the gun industry that provides its funding. A large majority of NRA individual members have long favored a ban on assault weapons and other sensible measures to keep machine gun-like weapons out of the hands of killers.
30
Your hysteria is unhelpful here. The second paragraph of this editorial refers to "a gun lobby that has blocked sensible safety measures at every turn, and by members of Congress who seem to pledge greater allegiance to the firearms industry than to their own constituencies. There is a word for their role in this form of terrorism: complicity."
How does the gun lobby and members of Congress add up to 5+ million?
How does the gun lobby and members of Congress add up to 5+ million?
20
The gun industry provides the guns; the National Rifle Association (NRA) is just a shill for the gun industry that is reaping enormous profits. Until those two unholy partners are brought under control in accordance with majority wishes, the United States will continue to be the shame of the developed world and will be complicit in the slaughter of its people.
Republicans take notice. They're your constituents who are dying for your childish selfishness.
Republicans take notice. They're your constituents who are dying for your childish selfishness.
162
It is clear to this Canadian that the gun control issue has long since been about guns. It is about politics and the money that pervades politics.
If it wasn't, this issue would have been resolved in a common sense manner. Politics and political money in the hyperpartisan atmosphere has abandoned common sense eons ago.
If it wasn't, this issue would have been resolved in a common sense manner. Politics and political money in the hyperpartisan atmosphere has abandoned common sense eons ago.
545
Yes, Irene, but you are a Canadian and believe in common sense. U.S. politicians believe mostly in their own re-election.
1
And what is clear to our Canadian observer is clear to millions of plain American citizens as well. The NRA can do whatever it wants, with profit (fig leafed by the Constitution) as the real motive. But for those in Congress who do the NRA's bidding, who see their reelection as the highest contribution they can make to American civilization, let them know that an immense amount of American blood is on their hands. Those who put them in office should care about this, one would think.
What is really incredible to me is that, at the national level, about half of the 'professional (i.e., elected) officials are indifferent to the mass slaughter of their constituents. They didn't even act when one of their own was shot and almost died in Arizona.
The best they do is the really old bromide 'our thoughts and prayers are with you' and the really meaningless 'moment of silence'.
Shame on them.
The best they do is the really old bromide 'our thoughts and prayers are with you' and the really meaningless 'moment of silence'.
Shame on them.
259
Wayne LaPierre is public enemy number one. The fact that he and his crony band of riflemen are able to purchase Republican legislators is scary. im glad the Democrats are growing a spine by filibustering the entire Senate. About time.
Reinstating the assault weapons ban is a good first step. We need way more stringent measures in place to curb these atrocities. Mass murders and violence will never go away but if we tell ourselves we live in a civil society then doing nothing amounts to insanity
Reinstating the assault weapons ban is a good first step. We need way more stringent measures in place to curb these atrocities. Mass murders and violence will never go away but if we tell ourselves we live in a civil society then doing nothing amounts to insanity
197
Well said. Everyone should watch the Frontline report on the NRA.
There is only one thing the NRA and the gun sellers understand and this article points to -- hold them liable -- legally. It's time to use the courts and sue these people for making and marketing a defective product. The Sandy Hook plaintiffs are on this path and it's time to open multiple fronts in this "war" of reasonable, common sense gun regulations versus war mongering complicit killing machine sellers.
763
Unfortunately, I believe that there are two events which must happen before Congress will do anything meaningful to improve the situation.
First, it will need a crazed gunman like the Orlando shooter to make his way into a session of Congress and shoot fifty or more congressmen.
The survivors should then declare the NRA a terrorist organization.
Only then will we have any chance of restoring the essential phrase about a "well-regulated militia" to the second amendment.
First, it will need a crazed gunman like the Orlando shooter to make his way into a session of Congress and shoot fifty or more congressmen.
The survivors should then declare the NRA a terrorist organization.
Only then will we have any chance of restoring the essential phrase about a "well-regulated militia" to the second amendment.
3
Problem is, it is not defective. It does exactly what it is intended to do.
1
I completely agree. We must pressure Congress to remove the shield they put in place to protect gun manufacturers from being sued. I am surprised and inspired to see the Sandy Hook parents' lawsuit get this far.
1
I dare Ihe Editorial Board to cite a single instance in which any of the measures recommended would have had any impact on any of the too many mass shooting incidents. Instead there is nothing but the usual empty rhetoric probably followed tomorrow by praise for a grandstanding senator. We have a serious problem in this country; it will not be solved easily, and the Editorial Board is not helping.
3
So, criticism without helpful proposals is meaningless. Where's your brilliant ideas?
4
I dare Howard to cite a single instance in which a "good guy with a gun" had any impact on any of these mass shooting incidents.
No civilian needs an AR-15 - they are designed to be a weapon of mass murder, and should be banned.
If the NYT Editorial Board succeeds in stirring enough people to action who are fed up, then I'd say they are performing a great public service and are helping a great deal. The only way this is going to get fixed is for those of us in the majority to get angry enough to force change.
No civilian needs an AR-15 - they are designed to be a weapon of mass murder, and should be banned.
If the NYT Editorial Board succeeds in stirring enough people to action who are fed up, then I'd say they are performing a great public service and are helping a great deal. The only way this is going to get fixed is for those of us in the majority to get angry enough to force change.
7
One solution - sic the Insurance companies on the NRA by making it mandatory to purchase gun owner's insurance. There's nothing in the Second Amendment against that!
This issue can be forced by having Gun Control advocates back civil lawsuits against gun owners, gun owners families, gun sellers, and gun manufacturers, as is happening by the Newtown families.
This issue can be forced by having Gun Control advocates back civil lawsuits against gun owners, gun owners families, gun sellers, and gun manufacturers, as is happening by the Newtown families.
25
This is a compelling proposal that has the advantage of being equitable. The problem with gun ownership in America is that it imposes negative externalities on third parties. When epidemiologists study the effect widespread gun ownership has on a community, they find that shootings are significantly more likely to happen in places where lots of people own guns, legally or not. This I think decisively refutes the assertion that guns make us safer. You're more likely to have your gun stolen from you and used in a violent crime than you are to use your gun in the prevention of a violent crime. That means that any gun that someone owns imposes risks on everyone else in the community, and right now gun owners aren't paying that risk.
So we could change our legal liability laws to allow victims of crimes to sue a gun's legal owner, then require gun owners to have insurance to pay those costs. Then we could let the market decide how to adequately price the risk guns impose on the rest of us. Private insurers would assign high rates if, as I suspect is the case, the risks are substantial. As long as the people deciding to buy guns pay that risk, that seems equitable.
Or we could impose product liability on gun manufacturers, which would force them to buy insurance, the costs of which they would push onto consumers.
Or we could have the government set up a gun victims' compensation fund with a high unconditional payout, and fund it with gun licensing fees.
So we could change our legal liability laws to allow victims of crimes to sue a gun's legal owner, then require gun owners to have insurance to pay those costs. Then we could let the market decide how to adequately price the risk guns impose on the rest of us. Private insurers would assign high rates if, as I suspect is the case, the risks are substantial. As long as the people deciding to buy guns pay that risk, that seems equitable.
Or we could impose product liability on gun manufacturers, which would force them to buy insurance, the costs of which they would push onto consumers.
Or we could have the government set up a gun victims' compensation fund with a high unconditional payout, and fund it with gun licensing fees.
14
Does the second amendment supersede my right to feel safe from massacre in a grocery store, or my right to send my children to school unarmed, or my right to attend a sports function without a kevlar vest, because it's an acceptable risk that someone exercised their constitutional right to bear arms and decided to have a bad day in a public place while carrying an assault weapon?
Somehow I don't think that's what the framers had in mind when they wrote the amendment.
Somehow I don't think that's what the framers had in mind when they wrote the amendment.
56
You truly have a broken political system when a small interest group---gun owners---can absolutely impose their particular interest on a vast majority of American citizens who oppose this interest. It even becomes more absurd when considering that their particular interest involves supplying terrorists with high powered weapons to kill us.
31
The main problem is not gun owners but the organization and the backer of the organization that are the true culprits. Gun owners generally do not own automatic or semi-atomic weapons - those are owned buy seditionists and the mentally and emotionally challenged (paranoia and a lack of human empathy) among us. My preference would be to end all gun sales except for rifles used specifically for hunting, though I find that repugnant too, I would allow that it would be an impossible practice to end. "No guns" does not mean that we'd have mass killings with knives, because with a knife it is quite impossible to kill as broadly and as quickly.
1
The NRA mostly represents gun SELLERS
2
The fear that the NRA promotes, why they don't want to bite the bullet on gun control, is based on the domino theory. If they take away your AR-15's, they now have a pretext and a precedent to take away any and all other guns that they might deem unworthy for civilian use. America was founded by the gun, we expanded westward via the gun. It's as woven into our collective mythology as apple pie and mom. A gun is also a fetish for those who feel powerless to become themselves as "god," deciding with hellacious fury who lives or who dies. Trying to break these deep psychological roots is what the NRA fears. It may be as resilient as a dandelion, but it is time for a roundup of excesses with common sense.
9
To the extent that the NRA opposes reasonable and common sense restrictions on guns they should be condemned. However, as stated repeatedly over the last few days the strictest of gun control laws does not prevent terrorist attacks in places like France and would not do so here. Until the left lead by our incompetent President recognizes and identifies Radical Islam as the National Security threat that it is and takes effective action against it these type of attacks will become more numerous and severe
27
What good does applying a label do to anything? Some magical words?
Sim, Sim, Salabim? Open Sesame?
Please explain how using three words does anything at all?
Sim, Sim, Salabim? Open Sesame?
Please explain how using three words does anything at all?
11
And having recognized Radical Islam as a threat, what does he do next? Or does the phrase itself have the power to stop terrorists?
9
Until Republicans will admit that their lies got us into the mess of the Middle East you mean
14
The NRA's complicity pales in comparison to the elected officials who fail to act on gun control. Aside from the paper tiger the NRA is in actuality, the NRA funds elected officials not to act on these measures, and uses it's active minority of supporters to intimidate elected members of congress. If the House and Senate accepted moderate proposals and unanimously passed the laws every politician would have political cover, and the NRA and gun manufacturers would stop having such a stranglehold on American politics and culture.
22
The easy access to guns has not made us a safer society. We need to recognize that while water is great, too much will cause you to drown. We are drowning in easy access firepower.
The NRA would tell us its people not guns who kill, so why do they oppose limiting which people can get a gun? Public safety needs to be considered when deciding the reasonable firepower that a private citizen should be allowed to own. No one wants a canon on their neighbors front lawn. We don't need assault rifles and we certainly don't need to make them readily available to people who are suspected of promoting violence, whether it is a member of a terrorist watch list or a violent domestic family member.
The NRA would tell us its people not guns who kill, so why do they oppose limiting which people can get a gun? Public safety needs to be considered when deciding the reasonable firepower that a private citizen should be allowed to own. No one wants a canon on their neighbors front lawn. We don't need assault rifles and we certainly don't need to make them readily available to people who are suspected of promoting violence, whether it is a member of a terrorist watch list or a violent domestic family member.
21
As the the daughter of a long-time NRA member, I've witnessed the organization evolve into the arms lobbyist that it is today. The NRA uses very smart tactics to convince its member base that any reform, even the most sensible and lukewarm, would by extension be an attack on their personal freedoms. The single-issue voter is the popular bolster and democratic veneer to the internal dealings of the NRA.
But the job of government is not to bend to lobbyists, even when they wield popular support, but to protect and ensure the well-being of its citizenry. The ongoing mass shootings in this country, various forms of gun-related violence, and the less tangible but very real physiological impact of not feeling safe anymore in public spaces should make our representatives, on both sides of the aisle, consider the urgency of this issue.
But the job of government is not to bend to lobbyists, even when they wield popular support, but to protect and ensure the well-being of its citizenry. The ongoing mass shootings in this country, various forms of gun-related violence, and the less tangible but very real physiological impact of not feeling safe anymore in public spaces should make our representatives, on both sides of the aisle, consider the urgency of this issue.
68
Banning semiautomatic rifles and limiting magazines to 4 cartridges is the only action which will have a significant effect in reducing mass shootings.
Semiautomatic rifles are potentially dangerous to society, and serve no purpose.
Hunters do not use a weapon like this because they know that if they miss with the first shot, the animal is gone.
Home defense is better done with a shotgun.
Target shooters will have their sport slightly affected, but it is a worthwhile sacrifice.
Semiautomatic rifles are potentially dangerous to society, and serve no purpose.
Hunters do not use a weapon like this because they know that if they miss with the first shot, the animal is gone.
Home defense is better done with a shotgun.
Target shooters will have their sport slightly affected, but it is a worthwhile sacrifice.
13
This is a horrible mass murder, but it and those like it, are nothing compared to the daily carnage that happens in the inner cities. It might even be surpassed by the 23 Americans shot by toddlers so far this year (it's June). More guns equals more fatalities – a simple and terrible equation. Those that are in denial of this fact should be forced to live in a neighborhood awash with guns, where young men in a moment of anger or perceived disrespect grab a gun and kill. Their tunes might change. But wait, those are mostly black and hispanic young men. Never mind, who cares about them? Let's all just buy guns and mask our deep insecurity with a toxic pseudo-masculinity.
23
Republicans who block responsible background checks and gun sales to those on terror watch lists are actively supporting terrorists in this country and should be openly challenged for their positions.
The argument that innocent people on those watch lists won't be able to purchase guns is a joke. Even if a small percentage of the innocents who happen to be mistakenly added to the list want to purchase guns, isn't that a minuscule price to pay for safety?
The argument that innocent people on those watch lists won't be able to purchase guns is a joke. Even if a small percentage of the innocents who happen to be mistakenly added to the list want to purchase guns, isn't that a minuscule price to pay for safety?
19
Let's call a spade a spade. The NRA's stated position for many years is that they are protecting the right of the people to keep and bear arms in order to be prepared to revolt against a "tyrannical government." They define a tyrannical government as one that would enact any reasonable limit on access to any gun. Therefore, they defend the "correctness" of their position by preparing their followers for sedition. Meanwhile, American gun manufacturers fund their operations which ignore the opinion of their membership.
American gun manufacturers bankroll an organization that preps millions of people for armed revolt. That organization uses the way political campaigns are financed in America to enforce Congressional adherence to its agenda.
Meanwhile, scores of innocent people die daily in the slo-mo bloodbath that this agenda has wrought in our country.
Something's got to change. Call your Senators and Reps this week to express your opinion about common-sense gun control measures in this country.
You, or someone you love, may be the next victim of this corporate plunder thinly veiled as a seditionist movement.
American gun manufacturers bankroll an organization that preps millions of people for armed revolt. That organization uses the way political campaigns are financed in America to enforce Congressional adherence to its agenda.
Meanwhile, scores of innocent people die daily in the slo-mo bloodbath that this agenda has wrought in our country.
Something's got to change. Call your Senators and Reps this week to express your opinion about common-sense gun control measures in this country.
You, or someone you love, may be the next victim of this corporate plunder thinly veiled as a seditionist movement.
86
The right wing conspiracy crowd believes that these mass murders are perpetrated by the government in order to advance gun control. Yet what happens after every one of these atrocities? Retail gun sales and gun manufacturers stock prices rise. Yes. The gun industry profits from mass murder.
2
The perverse insanity of this inverse logic, "to revolt against a tyranical government", is all the more apparent when one considers that the original 18th Century intent of the 2nd Amendment was to provide armed citizens who could help defend the government.
3
Banning semiautomatic rifles and limiting magazines to 4 cartridges is the only action which will have a significant effect in reducing mass shootings.
Semiautomatic rifles are potentially dangerous to society, and serve no purpose.
Hunters do not use a weapon like this because they know that if they miss with the first shot, the animal is gone.
Home defense is better done with a shotgun.
Target shooters will have their sport slightly affected, but it is a worthwhile sacrifice.
These weapons would not be effective in keeping this country free of a totalitarian government. These weapons, and their amateur shooters would be no match for military units and firepower.
Semiautomatic rifles are potentially dangerous to society, and serve no purpose.
Hunters do not use a weapon like this because they know that if they miss with the first shot, the animal is gone.
Home defense is better done with a shotgun.
Target shooters will have their sport slightly affected, but it is a worthwhile sacrifice.
These weapons would not be effective in keeping this country free of a totalitarian government. These weapons, and their amateur shooters would be no match for military units and firepower.
43
I also don't know why Finger print safety is not mandated. That is where only the owner of the gun can fire it. Would save hundreds of lives and have no effect whatsoever on the right to bear arms. Think of all the children whose lives that would save.... that one little mandate.
2
AJK, what makes you think the military units and their firepower will chose your side to defend? Even if a third of active duty side one way or another it's not cut and dry as to the outcome. The military is loaded with good old southern boys who have very conservative views and want to keep their own personal firearms.
"These weapons, and their amateur shooters would be no match for military units and firepower." Somehow, this escapes the consciousness of the fantasists awaiting the revolution. The military has heavy machine guns, RPGs, tanks, mortars, smart bombs, and napalm, and the people who know how to use them, to mention but a few options available if the desire is there to destroy you and your revolt. You would not stand a chance. Oh, and did I not mention close air support?
2
I suspect we will see action on this bill and Congress will pat itself on the back, smugly declaring they have done all they can do about guns. Meanwhile the country will lose focus and more bodies will pile up quietly until the next splashy, news worthy rampage. We lost our way on this when twenty children were slaughtered. I have no hope.
29
Pessimism is the nra's ace in the hole, Paula C. America is a democracy and WE can change it with our votes any day.
1
The best thing that can be done to stop the gun murders, massacres, and mayhem that put all our safety at risk, is to kick out of any legislature any legislator that takes even a dime from the vile NRA or the gun lobby, and to insure NO republican gets to be president so as to appoint a mindless gun loving conservative to the supreme court. The great majority of Americans are not gun nuts who have held this nation in servitude to the gun lobby and NRA. This, of course, means getting rid of most republicans who are a bunch of do-nothings on the subject, and electing those Democrats or others who clearly indicate their intention to pass rigorous gun control laws. Such laws need to require background checks on all guns sold, no matter where or by whom, the outlawing of assault rifles, and the requirement for owners of the same who want to keep them to see to their being made inoperable, and the limitation of all magazines of any firearm to a 10 shot limit. No one needs an assault rifle for the legal uses of firearms, i.e. hunting or target shooting. And 10 rounds is quire enough for any one allowed to carry a weapon for personal protection. It wouldn't be a bad idea for the government also to institute at tax on purchased weapons to be used to buy back and destroy weapons of those who wish to hand them in, like Australia did. And no one on any watch-list of dangerous persons should be allowed to purchase or own a firearm.
34
On average, approximately 1,500 Americans are stabbed, sliced, and gutted to death by a variety of blades each year — combat knives, butcher knives, pocketknives, and so on down the list. In comparison to firearms, knives are incredibly easy to obtain. The only federal legislation regulating knives is the Switchblade Knife Act of 1958. Beyond that, only a patchwork of state laws govern the ownership of knives, and these laws are permissions more often than restrictions.
So, to the extent that liberal politicians either oppose or neglect to implement tougher knife-control legislation, are they "complicit" in the hundreds of knife-related deaths each year? Or is the Times' conception of "complicity" something that, conveniently, applies only to the issue of firearms?
So, to the extent that liberal politicians either oppose or neglect to implement tougher knife-control legislation, are they "complicit" in the hundreds of knife-related deaths each year? Or is the Times' conception of "complicity" something that, conveniently, applies only to the issue of firearms?
1
Your argument only serves to highlight how toothless and absurd any counterpoint to assault rifle legislation is. Show me a knife that can stab 30 people per minute at a distance and we'll talk. You have to reach a person physically to stab them. The AR-15 is a cowards weapon because you can stand and point.
The days of your argument are over. Wholesale ignorance and weak talking points ring hollow when bodies are stacking up like they are now.
The days of your argument are over. Wholesale ignorance and weak talking points ring hollow when bodies are stacking up like they are now.
6
Knives have another purpose. Assault weapons do not.
6
Oh for goodness sakes pleeezzze with the tired old, "hey 20 people died from being hit with a tire iron, ..... so should we outlaw tire irons." Jason, I don't know about your stats but I will assume they're correct. 1500 die from knives, compared to 30,000 plus by guns. Do the math for crying out loud. This country seems to have more guns in peoples hands every year and amazingly, the death rate goes up. Simple logic that simple people don't seem to grasp.
5
The "terrorist watch list" is nothing more than a secret list of those disliked due to heritage and religion. I know. On September 6, 2002 I was arrested based upon a "Confidential Informant" for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, to wit, an M-16, and possession of weapons of mass destruction by the NYC Joint Terrorist Task Force, none specified. I did not have an M-16 nor "weapons of mass destruction". With a PE license in NY and being a member of the NJ Bar I never was convicted of a felony. After torture those 2 charges were thrown out, but then a charge of sending a"threatening e-mail" was brought. The law was unconstitutional, and I would have liked to challenge it, but the e-mail did not exist, and the US Attorney for the Southern District of New York refused to give details.
Likely basis for the arrest was my statements the IRA, known to be financially supported by members of the FBI and NYPD (recall photos of the Boston FBI and Whitey Bulger loading a boat with firearms being sent to the IRA) was a real terrorist group who killed a family member and maimed others with hundreds of terrorist attacks whereas 9/11 was a simple one and done exacerbated by responses by unprepared NYC departments. Numbers don't lie, 3,660 in Ulster, 1,649 by the NYC Medical Examiner.
I believe I am on a terrorist watch list 14 years later, likely due to spite at having their charges thrown out.
Solution simple: nobody on terrorist watch list unless public hearing.
Likely basis for the arrest was my statements the IRA, known to be financially supported by members of the FBI and NYPD (recall photos of the Boston FBI and Whitey Bulger loading a boat with firearms being sent to the IRA) was a real terrorist group who killed a family member and maimed others with hundreds of terrorist attacks whereas 9/11 was a simple one and done exacerbated by responses by unprepared NYC departments. Numbers don't lie, 3,660 in Ulster, 1,649 by the NYC Medical Examiner.
I believe I am on a terrorist watch list 14 years later, likely due to spite at having their charges thrown out.
Solution simple: nobody on terrorist watch list unless public hearing.
4
For the rest of the country to be effectively ruled by the NRA on the issue of gun control is simply insane. At most - and you'd have to believe the NRA on this, which I don't - the NRA has five million members. This is a ridiculously small percentage of both gun-owners in general and the voting public. Yet they rule the country on their absolutist version of the Second Amendment.
If they were First Amendment absolutists instead of Second Amendment absolutists, they would have their lobbyists demand the right to yell "Fire" in a crowded theater. In fact, they would insist that the country would be safer if everyone, every day, yelled "Fire" in crowded public places. That's clearly insane. So is the NRA stance on making AR-15s available to virtually everyone who wants to buy one.
It's time the rest of us stood up and took political action to stop the mindless, endless slaughters that happen seemingly weekly in our country. Why are we letting five million (And I'm betting it's more like three million.) fanatics hold their guns to our heads?
If they were First Amendment absolutists instead of Second Amendment absolutists, they would have their lobbyists demand the right to yell "Fire" in a crowded theater. In fact, they would insist that the country would be safer if everyone, every day, yelled "Fire" in crowded public places. That's clearly insane. So is the NRA stance on making AR-15s available to virtually everyone who wants to buy one.
It's time the rest of us stood up and took political action to stop the mindless, endless slaughters that happen seemingly weekly in our country. Why are we letting five million (And I'm betting it's more like three million.) fanatics hold their guns to our heads?
116
Only after Newtown did we see Democrats with the courage to even speak out about guns. Meanwhile Trump plays on voters distaste for being expected to be respectful to USA's diversity, while Republican elected officials bow to the NRA, and make no bones about it. Rarely bothering with the pretense of representing rank and file voters.
No more lectures about "political correctness". If you dislike PCism, look in the mirror. The party will go to the ends of the earth to serve its master, the NRA.
No more lectures about "political correctness". If you dislike PCism, look in the mirror. The party will go to the ends of the earth to serve its master, the NRA.
40
Political correctness is the reason for these recent mass shootings. The Democratic party's refusal to profile is killing people. Profiling doesnt happen because of racism, it happens because of statistics. Half of all murder victims and murderers are black Americans and yet anyone who ever speaks out about the racial statistics of gun violence is labeled a racist. The son of a Taliban supporter who has been investigated twice by the FBI was allowed to purchase a gun. I would put money on the fact that the FBI probably didnt go any further in the investigation because they would have been accused of racism and sued if they did anything else to affect his "rights". The NRA didnt do this. An ISIS supporter who was a registered Democratic did this.
Mass shootings are profitable for the gun industry, as is fear. The NRA represens gun manufacturers and will work diligently to protect those profits. The NRA and the elected officials they have bought and paid for have a far larger appetite for carnage and death than the general public.
66
It's absurd to say that the NRA is complicit in Terrorism. I reject that immediately. Its much more accurate to say that the "Party of No" has an agenda which will stand in opposition to any Democratic sponsored legislation. If there is true bipartisan support for closing a loophole, I have no doubt it will happen.
Since the FBI is in charge of background checks, it makes sense to cross reference with Terrorism investigations and deny instant clearance for gun purchase and perhaps force a hearing and review. I would support that wholeheartedly.
I see Middle Easterners from time to time at the gun range dressed in traditional garb practicing their firearms skills. I always give a little nod of respect. You see, Middle Easterners want to keep their families safe too.
Since the FBI is in charge of background checks, it makes sense to cross reference with Terrorism investigations and deny instant clearance for gun purchase and perhaps force a hearing and review. I would support that wholeheartedly.
I see Middle Easterners from time to time at the gun range dressed in traditional garb practicing their firearms skills. I always give a little nod of respect. You see, Middle Easterners want to keep their families safe too.
62
Safe from what exactly?
The extraordinarily rare "home invasion" by an armed stranger?
(Bureau of Crime Statistics)
The Zombie Apocalypse?
How about keeping everyone's family safe from being blown away by the proliferation of assault rifles.
The extraordinarily rare "home invasion" by an armed stranger?
(Bureau of Crime Statistics)
The Zombie Apocalypse?
How about keeping everyone's family safe from being blown away by the proliferation of assault rifles.
7
If there were even a few examples of an armed citizen stopping a mass murder (or even a small one), I could take your self-defense argument seriously. Instead, the fact is that most gun owners cannot hit a human-sized target with a pistol from seven feet. Those who argue that self defense is the best protection have a fantasy that everyone is Wyatt Earp.
8
Wayne, is that you...?
3
Is probable cause, the standard the article on Trump's turn on guns claims Cornyn's bill uses, really a nearly impossible standard to meet? It's the same standard we use to decide whether or not to arrest people. If probable cause isn't the standard, what should be? Reasonable suspicion? Presence on an unvetted list?
The editorial says that the Feinstein bill allows people to appeal in federal court. Is there a similar provision in the current proposal to use the no-fly list + 5 years? How do you even appeal the fact that you've been on the no-fly list in the last five years? The current no-fly list doesn't have a federal appeals process; it doesn't even have an effective process to even find out if your name is on the list or why it is.
I don't really give a flip about gun rights, but I worry that we might just be expanding the application of a bad list, one that discriminates and doesn't adequately respect due process.
The editorial says that the Feinstein bill allows people to appeal in federal court. Is there a similar provision in the current proposal to use the no-fly list + 5 years? How do you even appeal the fact that you've been on the no-fly list in the last five years? The current no-fly list doesn't have a federal appeals process; it doesn't even have an effective process to even find out if your name is on the list or why it is.
I don't really give a flip about gun rights, but I worry that we might just be expanding the application of a bad list, one that discriminates and doesn't adequately respect due process.
2
Assault rifles have been and potentially are objects of Domestic Terrorism. I would think the President could ban them under an anti- terrorism law of some sort.
We have so many laws to deter terrorists how about some laws to deter the availability of those objects potentially used in these crimes.
Domestic terrorism is real. Assault rifles the favored weapon. There is no reason for anyone outside the military to have access to one.
If you want to shoot and fantasize with these weapons join the military.
Politicians need to listen to law enforcement and their constituents to end this insane policy of easily available weapons.
The argument that there are millions of these weapons on the street already is lame. If we stop now the country will be much safer in the future for our children and theirs.
We have so many laws to deter terrorists how about some laws to deter the availability of those objects potentially used in these crimes.
Domestic terrorism is real. Assault rifles the favored weapon. There is no reason for anyone outside the military to have access to one.
If you want to shoot and fantasize with these weapons join the military.
Politicians need to listen to law enforcement and their constituents to end this insane policy of easily available weapons.
The argument that there are millions of these weapons on the street already is lame. If we stop now the country will be much safer in the future for our children and theirs.
12
It is a measure of the NRA's effectiveness that this piece advocates only the most minimal forms of gun control. If we really want to tackle gun violence, we will ban semi-automatic rifles – guns which have no legitimate hunting uses. If we really want to tackle gun violence, we will require trigger locks and smartgun technology. If we really want to tackle gun violence, we will limit the number of guns individuals may purchase and limit ammo purchases. If we really want to limit gun violence, we will start trying to get guns off of the streets and out of households through buyback programs.
These are the sorts of rational policies that would dramatically reduce gun violence and death, but the NRA has fought so hard that it is difficult to pass even trivial regulations like those recommended in this article.
These are the sorts of rational policies that would dramatically reduce gun violence and death, but the NRA has fought so hard that it is difficult to pass even trivial regulations like those recommended in this article.
41
The all too often moments of silence or thoughts and prayers that Speaker Ryan seems to love is a dodge favored by the gun lobby. It excuses the Republican Congress to maintain its 'do-nothing' stance about an urgent national issue of the daily slaughter of innocents. It is a craven political evasion of the responsibility of the Congress to see to the health and welfare of those citizens who elected them to govern responsibly.
There are reasonable restrictions for gun ownership that the NRA refuses to accept. Yet with full knowledge of the fact that individuals on the terrorist watch list can buy guns when they aren't permitted to fly is definitely complicit with fanatical killers of every stripe whether jihadist or mentally deranged. Yet the GOP is in thrall to the NRA, an organization that doesn't care to hear 'thoughts and prayers' but prefers complete silence on the subject of reasonable restrictions to keep terrorists from getting guns.
Republicans are demanding accountability for Benghazi, but every day the murderous equivalent of the Benghazi death toll is happening right here
in the USA with no accountability at all from the Congress. The Republican
party has forsaken its duty to govern and to be accountable for its own dismal record of doing nothing at all in the face of a national crisis of mass murder.
There are reasonable restrictions for gun ownership that the NRA refuses to accept. Yet with full knowledge of the fact that individuals on the terrorist watch list can buy guns when they aren't permitted to fly is definitely complicit with fanatical killers of every stripe whether jihadist or mentally deranged. Yet the GOP is in thrall to the NRA, an organization that doesn't care to hear 'thoughts and prayers' but prefers complete silence on the subject of reasonable restrictions to keep terrorists from getting guns.
Republicans are demanding accountability for Benghazi, but every day the murderous equivalent of the Benghazi death toll is happening right here
in the USA with no accountability at all from the Congress. The Republican
party has forsaken its duty to govern and to be accountable for its own dismal record of doing nothing at all in the face of a national crisis of mass murder.
34
The NRA has power because we grant it to them. Our legislature refuses to act. You and I elect them. Whatever we want to say about the influence of gun lobbies, we do have ballot boxes.
Our judiciary, appointed by people we put in office, issues rulings that a middle schooler could arguably dispute when they read the actual language of the Second Amendment. (A single sentence guaranting the citizens of a new democracy without police, national guard or standing army the capability to repel invaders, put down insurrections or address other safety needs with a state or local militia. How we got from that to guaranteeing a capability to rapidly mow down children with a military assault rifle is beyond shame.)
Background checks and suspected terrorist exclusions are great, but until we address the real issue - military weapons in an open market - we are refusing to deal with a serious flaw in our culture.
Our judiciary, appointed by people we put in office, issues rulings that a middle schooler could arguably dispute when they read the actual language of the Second Amendment. (A single sentence guaranting the citizens of a new democracy without police, national guard or standing army the capability to repel invaders, put down insurrections or address other safety needs with a state or local militia. How we got from that to guaranteeing a capability to rapidly mow down children with a military assault rifle is beyond shame.)
Background checks and suspected terrorist exclusions are great, but until we address the real issue - military weapons in an open market - we are refusing to deal with a serious flaw in our culture.
913
GUNS KILL. They are weapons of mass destruction and we are not demanding enough of lawmakers. We do not want gun lovers guns. We want them to stop killing us.
Every gun in America must be registered on a national database, state licensed and fully insured for liability. It is not difficult to do any of these things. Gun manufacturers have a list of every gun they manufacture, and every bullet, so they can track sales so it's just a matter of making them provide those lists to the Justice Department where law enforcement officers can access them. States already have licensing offices for cars and it's easy to add guns to the menu. Insurers already insure guns against theft and it is time they took on the responsibility of insuring the public against misuse of guns. It's not complicated and we simply need to elect the people who will get it done.
Every gun in America must be registered on a national database, state licensed and fully insured for liability. It is not difficult to do any of these things. Gun manufacturers have a list of every gun they manufacture, and every bullet, so they can track sales so it's just a matter of making them provide those lists to the Justice Department where law enforcement officers can access them. States already have licensing offices for cars and it's easy to add guns to the menu. Insurers already insure guns against theft and it is time they took on the responsibility of insuring the public against misuse of guns. It's not complicated and we simply need to elect the people who will get it done.
6
Implicit in Fred's message is a mandate, in the minds of outraged voters, to vote the elected officials out of office when they do not act to ban military weapons.
3
Get Representatives and Senators sympathetic to the NRA's tripe out Congress. Go to the polls in November and strike a blow for decency and common sense.
4
The N.R.A. has no more power and influence beyond that conferred upon it by the elected, appointed and selected representatives of the American people in the three branches of federal, state and local government.
As long as our elected representatives fear the financial political wrath of the N.R.A. more than the power of the people who elected them then the status quo ante will remain. Public opinion polls regarding majority support for certain types of gun control do not matter. Votes in elections and binding referendums plus money are all that matter.
The nature and extent of the 2nd Amendment Constitutional right to bear arms is something that is subject to some reasonable forms of legal regulation, limitation and restriction. Neither terrorists nor criminals nor domestic abusers nor kids nor the mentally ill nor those who have not been properly trained in the safe use of fire should have them. But there are due process and privacy concerns that must be dealt with in a nation where there is a presumption of innocence along with a right to a speedy trial before a jury of your peers along with a right to counsel.
The silence of the American people in the voting booths absolves the N.R.A. of any complicity in terrorism. Coupled with the furious focused support of the N.R.A. membership in determining the cost benefits of their gun policy and practice things are going just according to the N.R.A. plan.
As long as our elected representatives fear the financial political wrath of the N.R.A. more than the power of the people who elected them then the status quo ante will remain. Public opinion polls regarding majority support for certain types of gun control do not matter. Votes in elections and binding referendums plus money are all that matter.
The nature and extent of the 2nd Amendment Constitutional right to bear arms is something that is subject to some reasonable forms of legal regulation, limitation and restriction. Neither terrorists nor criminals nor domestic abusers nor kids nor the mentally ill nor those who have not been properly trained in the safe use of fire should have them. But there are due process and privacy concerns that must be dealt with in a nation where there is a presumption of innocence along with a right to a speedy trial before a jury of your peers along with a right to counsel.
The silence of the American people in the voting booths absolves the N.R.A. of any complicity in terrorism. Coupled with the furious focused support of the N.R.A. membership in determining the cost benefits of their gun policy and practice things are going just according to the N.R.A. plan.
35
Well here's the deal: The NRA contributions are VOLUNTARY. Taxes are COMPULSORY. Your money and mine are in their bags: limos, Security, Vacations, Health Insurance, Pensions.
Got it?
Got it?
1
In your last paragraph you seem to be saying that we deserve what we get when there are mass shootings. There are millions of us who write our Congressional representatives, sign petitions, vote for gun legislation; but mass shooters don't discriminate between those of us who vote for/against gun control.
It is long past the time that action should have been taken. The congressmen that cater to this group have blood on their hands. The data is clear and obvious, more guns equals more murders per capita. No civilian needs to be able to shoot 30 rounds straight or have weapons for one purpose-- to hunt humans. Suspected terrorists or sympathizers are only the latest group to come to the front-- seriously mentally ill, those with a history of abuse should be included. It is a shame that we can't even conduct public health research and find ways to reduce the death toll from our idolatrous view of guns and wild misinterpretation of the 2nd amendment. Voting for representatives that suckle the nipple of the NRA puts blood on the hands of the voter too. The United States nerds to join the rest of the civilized world and stop the bloodshed as severe as many war torn or gang riddled nations.
Enough of the ignorance-- let facts and support the primacy of the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Enough of the ignorance-- let facts and support the primacy of the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
14
The data is clear and obvious, more guns equals more murders per capita
====================
That data is not clear at all, especially since you don't cite any.
The data actually shows that as the number of guns in circulation in the US has more than doubled since the early 1990s, the gun murder rate has been cut in half:
Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/05/07/gun-homicide-rate-down-49-sinc...
====================
That data is not clear at all, especially since you don't cite any.
The data actually shows that as the number of guns in circulation in the US has more than doubled since the early 1990s, the gun murder rate has been cut in half:
Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/05/07/gun-homicide-rate-down-49-sinc...
Campesino - The report you cite is rather old considering the high number of mass shootings in 2015 and 2016. Regardless, the (old) report also states:
"As for gun crime, research has found that the U.S. has a higher gun homicide and overall homicide rate than most developed nations, although the U.S. does not have the world’s highest rate for either. The U.S. does not outrank other developed nations for overall crime, but crimes with firearms are more likely to occur in the U.S. (Van Dijk, et al., 2007)."
"According to U.N. statistics, the U.S. firearm homicide rate and overall homicide rate are higher than those in Canada and in Western European and Scandinavian nations, but lower than those in many Caribbean and Latin American countries for which data are available."
and
"However, the report placed the U.S. among the top countries for attacks involving firearms. “Mexico, the USA and Northern Ireland stand out with the highest percentages gun-related attacks (16%, 6% and 6% respectively).” The U.S. had the highest share of sexual assault involving guns."
So, I suppose we should be grateful for "N. Ireland, many Caribbean and Latin American countries"... But, as noted, these studies are not current so we may have surpassed some of those countries. Also, the emphasis of the study is on gun homicide and crimes. If the emphasis was on all deaths and injuries caused by guns, I suspect the "greatness of America" might move us closer to the top of the list.
"As for gun crime, research has found that the U.S. has a higher gun homicide and overall homicide rate than most developed nations, although the U.S. does not have the world’s highest rate for either. The U.S. does not outrank other developed nations for overall crime, but crimes with firearms are more likely to occur in the U.S. (Van Dijk, et al., 2007)."
"According to U.N. statistics, the U.S. firearm homicide rate and overall homicide rate are higher than those in Canada and in Western European and Scandinavian nations, but lower than those in many Caribbean and Latin American countries for which data are available."
and
"However, the report placed the U.S. among the top countries for attacks involving firearms. “Mexico, the USA and Northern Ireland stand out with the highest percentages gun-related attacks (16%, 6% and 6% respectively).” The U.S. had the highest share of sexual assault involving guns."
So, I suppose we should be grateful for "N. Ireland, many Caribbean and Latin American countries"... But, as noted, these studies are not current so we may have surpassed some of those countries. Also, the emphasis of the study is on gun homicide and crimes. If the emphasis was on all deaths and injuries caused by guns, I suspect the "greatness of America" might move us closer to the top of the list.
2
The N.R.A. is a private organization. The U.S. Congress, on the other hand, consists of "public servants" (supposedly). Their failure to represent the clear desire of a majority of Americans is the real criminal complicity in gun violence.
In sheer practical terms, congressional inaction boils down to the small group of Republican party operatives who run the party's ideological platform. Their names came be listed on a single sheet of paper. If a majority of Americans are able to see the wisdom of common-sense guns laws, Congress is obligated to act representationally. They see the same evidence that the entire global community sees. There is nothing special or smarter or better about this small group of Republicans who have become ensconced in the U.S. Capitol Building that gives them better knowledge, more accurate information, or better insight. To the extent our system of governance is broken, leaving Americans at daily risk from assault rifle violence, the breakdown lies entirely in our inability to remove these particular people from office.
The blame absolutely can be assigned. It lies heavily on Republicans in Congress, and on the American people for not removing them from office.
In sheer practical terms, congressional inaction boils down to the small group of Republican party operatives who run the party's ideological platform. Their names came be listed on a single sheet of paper. If a majority of Americans are able to see the wisdom of common-sense guns laws, Congress is obligated to act representationally. They see the same evidence that the entire global community sees. There is nothing special or smarter or better about this small group of Republicans who have become ensconced in the U.S. Capitol Building that gives them better knowledge, more accurate information, or better insight. To the extent our system of governance is broken, leaving Americans at daily risk from assault rifle violence, the breakdown lies entirely in our inability to remove these particular people from office.
The blame absolutely can be assigned. It lies heavily on Republicans in Congress, and on the American people for not removing them from office.
135
The NRA position that good people with guns can stop bad people with guns has been proven false over and over again. Despite this our politicians are too afraid of the NRA to do anything about limiting the types of firearms private citizens can own. Our politicians refuse to acknowledge the fact that there is no good reason for anyone to own an assault rifle. Therefore what they are saying is that it's perfectly fine for Americans and tourists to America to be shot and killed by a bad person with an assault rifle. Massacres are now an American way of life. If a person is sufficiently unhappy and not on a list saying he can't own a gun he can walk in and purchase an assault rifle, pass the background check, plan his massacre and carry it out. Why? Because this country, with its odd fixation on gun rights rather than gun control, protects that more than it protects our rights to live without the fear of being shot and killed for no reason other than one person's anger.
Mateen is not the American monster. It's the NRA with its insistence that protecting people is less important than allowing unlimited gun ownership. Worse than that is the fact that our politicians believe that they need NRA endorsements more than they need to craft thoughtful thorough gun control laws to prevent more of these massacres.
Mateen is not the American monster. It's the NRA with its insistence that protecting people is less important than allowing unlimited gun ownership. Worse than that is the fact that our politicians believe that they need NRA endorsements more than they need to craft thoughtful thorough gun control laws to prevent more of these massacres.
199
How has anything been proven false? All of these mass shootings happen in gun free zones!!! The only people who obey gun free zones ARE the good guys with the guns. You cant disarm the good guys and claim that they are ineffective.
2
The NRA position that good people with guns can stop bad people with guns has been proven false over and over again.
===================
In fact, you are completely incorrect. A study by the Centers for Disease Control showed that defensive gun use is more common than use by criminals:
Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year, in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008.
http://www.nap.edu/read/18319/chapter/1?page=
But then again - if a good guy with a gun can't stop a bad guy with a gun why do police have them?
===================
In fact, you are completely incorrect. A study by the Centers for Disease Control showed that defensive gun use is more common than use by criminals:
Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year, in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008.
http://www.nap.edu/read/18319/chapter/1?page=
But then again - if a good guy with a gun can't stop a bad guy with a gun why do police have them?
1
I would encourage all readers so go to the Sig Sauer website and view the video selling the MCX rifle used in the Orlando massacre. They aren't selling freedom, they aren't selling patriotism, they aren't selling rights. They are selling a killing machine with incredible firepower. Watch what it can do. It's terrifying. They are selling an instrument of combat. In fact, the video specifically mentions law enforcement and military as the intended users of this weapon.
They are selling buy my product and you too can be a commando, a Navy Seal, an Army Ranger, a Green Beret. Is it a right to own a weapon of such capability? Should law enforcement have to go up against these types of weapons in the public's hands? That's why we banned Tommy guns. These rifles aren't machine guns but once you reach a fire rate of eight rounds a second that can be reloaded in less than five seconds, does it make any difference? Accurate to 300 yards. High velocity military grade rounds. No cop should have to be faced with one of these and anyone buy one.
To be effective against the threat of terrorism, we should ban the sale and ownership of all detachable magazine weapons. Yes, pistols too. Limit all magazines to eight rounds. Gun owners should be willing to make that small sacrifice for the security of the nation. Let the cops be the cops. It takes more than a retail purchase to make one an Army Ranger.
They are selling buy my product and you too can be a commando, a Navy Seal, an Army Ranger, a Green Beret. Is it a right to own a weapon of such capability? Should law enforcement have to go up against these types of weapons in the public's hands? That's why we banned Tommy guns. These rifles aren't machine guns but once you reach a fire rate of eight rounds a second that can be reloaded in less than five seconds, does it make any difference? Accurate to 300 yards. High velocity military grade rounds. No cop should have to be faced with one of these and anyone buy one.
To be effective against the threat of terrorism, we should ban the sale and ownership of all detachable magazine weapons. Yes, pistols too. Limit all magazines to eight rounds. Gun owners should be willing to make that small sacrifice for the security of the nation. Let the cops be the cops. It takes more than a retail purchase to make one an Army Ranger.
402
No professional uses the fully-automatic capability of assault weapons because it is impossible to hold aim.
2
Excellent compromise, Bruce. I have been advocating for years the ban of semi-automatic firearms to the general public. My contention has been that six round revolving chamber handguns should be perfectly adequate for personal protection and bolt action hunting rifles are capable of bringing down any prey. Not to mention the shotgun as the best weapon for home defense.
However, I could get on board for a proposal eliminating detachable clips and magazines with a limit on the intrinsic capacity of each weapon, perhaps 6 rounds. That would have a real effect on mass shootings but probably not much would change in the annual results attributable to our gun culture. But it would be a start.
However, I could get on board for a proposal eliminating detachable clips and magazines with a limit on the intrinsic capacity of each weapon, perhaps 6 rounds. That would have a real effect on mass shootings but probably not much would change in the annual results attributable to our gun culture. But it would be a start.
7
Bruce, do you suppose the rash of shootings you're concerned about was in any way influenced by media? I do. So should we ban that, too? It's about as reasonable, you know. Would this have made you feel better if he used a shotgun or knife? You don't have to reload a saber. 29 were killed in a Chinese knife attack about two years ago. Google 'mass knife attacks. They are just as deadly. See a loophole there for a ban at all?
One way to close the gun show loophole was a proposal in NYS adopted by organizers of major gun shows. This was before the NYS Safe Act.
Would the gun lobby support this sensible proposal.
" They agreed to procedures that would track all guns brought into the show by private sellers. Each weapon is tagged so that operators could track sales and background checks. Private sellers have to account for every gun they bring into the show. If they sell a weapon they have to produce paperwork to prove that the buyer passed a background check and the buyer has to show proof that he passed a check before leaving the show with his purchase."
see "Enough" page 188 by Gabrielle Giffords and Mark Kelly
Would the gun lobby support this sensible proposal.
" They agreed to procedures that would track all guns brought into the show by private sellers. Each weapon is tagged so that operators could track sales and background checks. Private sellers have to account for every gun they bring into the show. If they sell a weapon they have to produce paperwork to prove that the buyer passed a background check and the buyer has to show proof that he passed a check before leaving the show with his purchase."
see "Enough" page 188 by Gabrielle Giffords and Mark Kelly
73
david, your proposal is excellent.
I have often thought that each bullet should have embedded in it a strip of copper which would identify the bullet, or at least the box from which the bullet came. This would not help with massacres like the one in Orlando but would work with the majority of murders.
A terrorist does not care if he is identified, and neither does the person committing suicide.
But for most other killings with guns, the killer's trump card is that he/she cannot be identified. Identifiable bullets would change this scenario.
I have often thought that each bullet should have embedded in it a strip of copper which would identify the bullet, or at least the box from which the bullet came. This would not help with massacres like the one in Orlando but would work with the majority of murders.
A terrorist does not care if he is identified, and neither does the person committing suicide.
But for most other killings with guns, the killer's trump card is that he/she cannot be identified. Identifiable bullets would change this scenario.
3
Unfortunately, as we have seen far too often, once the NRA buys itself a politician, he or she stays bought—even after events like the Pulse massacre or Sandy Hook or countless others. The Senate has had ample opportunities to do the right thing (once and for all) but the vast majority of its republican members have been bought and won't even consider sensible gun control. Hence we know who is really owning (literally) the conversation—the gun manufacturers (not even the general membership of the NRA, which supports sensible things like closing the terror loophole and full background checks).
So I suggest (as has been seen online) a new solution. Let the leadership of the NRA go to Orlando and face the consequences of what they've done. These so-called leaders should be made to go to Pulse and clean up all the blood and guts from the floors and walls. If they think there's no reason to close these loopholes, make them face the consequences in real time. I bet not one would do it, because, well, let's face it, the leadership of the NRA is a bunch of sniveling cowards (to be kind).
So I suggest (as has been seen online) a new solution. Let the leadership of the NRA go to Orlando and face the consequences of what they've done. These so-called leaders should be made to go to Pulse and clean up all the blood and guts from the floors and walls. If they think there's no reason to close these loopholes, make them face the consequences in real time. I bet not one would do it, because, well, let's face it, the leadership of the NRA is a bunch of sniveling cowards (to be kind).
449
Its pretty clear that the nra can buy politicians. But they can not really buy votes. Its the dumb republican voters that keep electing these bozos that are ultimately to blame. They let themselves be scared by the nra nd since most gun owners live in fear of many things, they are easy prey for scare mongers.
15
Why just the NRA leadership? Why not send the leadership of the Republican Party along with them?
10
If you know someone and you want them to do something, do you start by abusing them and then ask them to do what you want?
Is your message to the NRA, "You sniveling cowards! Now go to Pulse (at your own expense) and see what happened."?
Immature and angry talk works for Trump, but he has had years of practice on TV. It does NOT work for the rest of us.
The truth is that Democrats have steadfastly looked away from the role of Islam in this event. And as long as you close one eye, NRA will close the other.
Is your message to the NRA, "You sniveling cowards! Now go to Pulse (at your own expense) and see what happened."?
Immature and angry talk works for Trump, but he has had years of practice on TV. It does NOT work for the rest of us.
The truth is that Democrats have steadfastly looked away from the role of Islam in this event. And as long as you close one eye, NRA will close the other.
2
A reasonable time: seven days, 10 days, 30 days, no limit? What do you think is fair?