8 responses to “Commonsense Gun Laws”

  1. jgardner

    Lanza stole the guns and then entered a place that had a 100% ban on any type of firearm. Please tell me what new, more restrictive law you could have passed that would have made any difference. Pro-tip: The AWB that expired in 2004 would not have applied to the AR-15 that was used in the shooting.

  2. Jonathan Jacobs

    A comprehensive re-evaluation of the definition of “assault weapon” would. As would a discussion oabout the reason and rationale of the second amendment. I think the congressman has brought up some very valid points and it is up to the people to now speak on behalf of our national security.

    1. jgardner

      “A comprehensive re-evaluation of the definition of “assault weapon” would.”
      Would what?

      As a side note, I hope included in this national conversation is a discussion regarding the failed “war on drugs” and the role it plays in the deaths and destruction of so many lives and families.

    2. DogDiesel

      Please point out exactly which of the Congressman’s proposals would have prevented Newtown?

  3. Jonathan Jacobs

    “Please tell me what new, more restrictive law you could have passed that would have made any difference.”
     A comprehensive re-evaluation of the definition of “assault weapon” would [have possibly made a difference]. Newtown happened. Pointing out which of the congressman’s proposals would have made a difference is not a constructive conversation. We all have to move forward. However, this constistent “why bother” mentality that fuels the conversation of those who are afraid of having to give up their guns is basically saying that living with gun violence is the price America must pay for the freedom of owning deadly weapons.

    1. DogDiesel

      Assume much? Where did I say why bother? I’m all for a discussion on working to prevent this from happening again. He’s proposing knee jerk legislation that would have had no effect and plays to his political base. We have to approach this from the point that the horse is already out of the barn.  Closing the barn door will have little effect. Everyone knows that government seizing legally purchased firearms will never pass muster with the right or left so let’s get serious about what went wrong and try and fix it. This was a crime and making law abiding citizens criminals by outlawing their weapons won’t solve anything.

    2. parared

      You are failing at logic.  Here you essentially admit that all of the leftist ‘we have to *do* something’ would not have prevented the tragedy that got you spun up, while ignoring the possibility that you might be heading in the wrong direction.  If, as you tacitly admit, the redefinition of assault rifle, the banning of scary things, the trashing of the constitution, all would not have saved one of those kids, why do you not recognize that what *would* have saved (some of) those kids would have been a single weapon in the hands of a good-guy on site.

      Do you so disdain your fellow citizens that you deny the possibility of anyone other than an ordained police officer coming to the aid of those kids?  Or are you satisfied that the principle and teachers only had their bodies to throw at that animal? 

  4. rmastel

    Yet the number of deaths attributed to alcohol, drugs, automotive, and other non-firearm related deaths, far outweigh those having anything to do with firearms. The number associated with tobacco, heart disease, and other health issues is also staggering. Stop trying to limit the rights of law abiding citizens. Focus on something that will actually make a difference like education, healthcare, and social services. Make sentencing tougher. But then I guess we would have to make sentencing tougher across the board and then politicians and their families couldn’t get off with light sentences.

Add Comment Register

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.