I am the Rhode Island State Coordinator for the Progressive Democrats of America. My primary interest is Rhode Island's economy and what we can do to fix it.

9 responses to “Exeter confirms polling: RI supports gun reform”

  1. DogDiesel

    The problem with gun reform in Rhode Island is people of your ilk keep blurring the lines between what you advocate and the results you are seeking. The proposed reforms will do NOTHING to solve Providence’s gun violence. Gang bangers are not running the streets with ‘assault’ weapons. Exeter wasn’t about gun reform. It was about who approves carry permits. Not the same. If you allow anti-gun nuts into the conversation, you must expect the other side to allow the pro-gun nuts into the conversation. Result? Stalemate. Rhode Island needs to be honest with itself and come up with something meaningful like contributing the names of those with mental illness to the NICS database.

  2. Steve Ahlquist

    Are you suggesting that anyone who wants to buy a firearm be pre-screened with a mental health exam?

    1. DogDiesel

      No, I am suggesting as a part of their treatment that those who have suffered from mental illness be evaluated on their risk level owning or possessing a firearms. Those evaluators should be required to submit high risk names to NICS.

  3. leftyrite

    That’s right.
    It would take balls and diligence to go after assault rifles.
    Go after people who are mentally ill, instead. They’re easy targets, if only their care providers will yield up the names. From what we’ve seen already, that shouldn’t be too hard.
    Or, maybe we can identify the mentally ill by their ideas. Maybe they act or write funny.
    If somebody is, say, clinically depressed, stigmatize them further.
    Make their lives even more difficult.
    Deny them visas to leave the country while you’re at it.
    Sounds like a plan that could only be cooked up by
    someone who sees himself as a libertarian.

    1. DogDiesel

      “It would take balls and diligence to go after assault rifles.”
      Because the mentally ill only us assault rifles? Who knew? See my response to Steve regarding the mentally ill. As for being a libertarian, sorry no but they do have some great ideas.

  4. Jonathan Jacobs

    Firstly: How does s body legislate between psychological disorders that allow a person to carry and/or conceal a firearm? What this sounds like is a field day for the ACLU and a class action lawsuit based on discrimination. ADD? ODD? Depression (the number one disability in Americans age 14-45)? How about excessive creativity? It is listed as a mental illness in the most recent version of the DSM IV. 
    Secondly: Would a sensible measure be to limit the number of new firearm purchases based on a tax scale designed to create a fund that would be used exclusively for the purpose of gun education, prevention and aide for those who are victims of gun violence? 
    Finally: Statistics show that gang violence is only one piece of the puzzle. Domestic violence. Accidental death. Suicide. These are major issues as well. 

    1. DogDiesel

      “Finally: Statistics show that gang violence is only one piece of the puzzle. Domestic violence. Accidental death. Suicide. These are major issues as well.”
      So what’s your point? Taxes will solve this?

  5. Jonathan Jacobs

    Well, Dog … yes.
    Taxation generates revenue. High crime centers tend to be so due to a shortage of funding for services such as afterschool programs, drug treatment centers, domestic counseling centers, psychiatric treatment centers, school quality, cops on the beat, etc.
    When an unfunded liability is given funding it is no longer unfunded and less of a liability.
    When a locale with a violent crime problem begins to improve its detrimental crime problem, it becomes more attractive for residents and businesses alike. More business leads to more jobs and more jobs lead to less poverty. When an area improves its financial infrastructure and, at the same time, makes firearms less appealing, violent crime rates decrease and the area has (as you would myopically perceive and state) fewer “gang bangers.” Although, gang violence is really much more of a symptom than a cause.

    1. DogDiesel

      The liberal fallacy. Problem? Here’s more money, no problem.

Add Comment Register

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.