Gun bans: using a tragedy to move a political agenda

member photo e1297275445101 Gun bans: using a tragedy to move a political agenda

Sen. Jeff Kruse (R-Roseburg)

The issue I have received the most email traffic on over the last few weeks has been guns.  People are using a tragedy to attempt to move a political agenda.  This is the type of politics I don’t like, but it clearly exists.  While guns can be an easy target in these situations, as policy makers I think it is our job to get past the emotions and get into the real underlying issues.

When planes were hijacked and flown into the World Trade Center was our reaction to ban planes?  Clearly those planes were used as weapons and any plane in the future could as well.  Our reaction was to put sky marshals on plane so we would have the ability to stop hijackings and we armed them with guns for that purpose.  The new Miss America from New York said “you can’t stop violence with violence”.  My question to her would be, what do you stop it with?

In all of these shootings the violence ended when the perpetrator was confronted by a show of force.  In the case of the Clackamas Town Center shooting the fact someone with a concealed carry permit showed his weapon stopped the shooting even before the police arrived.  A lesson should be learned from this.

If one looks at the profiles of the shooters we have had in school shootings over the last few years one would find the vast majority have been young middle class white males.  While we can talk about mental health issues and a number of other risk factors, there clearly is no simple answer.  One could make the case, however, that these young men are looking for their moment of fame or notoriety however convoluted that might be.  I think one can also assume these are people with at least a moderate level of intelligence.  Given this scenario it would make sense they would choose a venue where they had a high level of certainty theirs would be the only guns present?  I would think so and I would point out the Clackamas Town Center is also a gun free zone.  The issue in our schools should be the safety of our kids and to accomplish this we need to be focused on how we can stop the violence before it begins, and telling these people we are creating environments where they know they will have no opposition is not the answer.

Politicians have a tendency to put more restrictions on law-abiding citizens in attempts to deal with the criminal element.    New York State just passed some new gun restrictions that in the end will have a negative impact on lawful citizens, but I would submit will have no impact on their murder rate.  I have some statistics from the World Health Organization relative to murder rates.  There are 107 countries in the world with a higher murder rate than the United States.  What all of these countries have in common is the fact they all have a 100% gun ban.

My answer to Miss America is, you may choose to be non-violent but that will not stop someone from committing a violent act.  The only way to deal with this scenario is to have the ability to have a deterrent.  The history of the world shows us banning guns is not a solution.  In fact in most cases it leads to an escalation of criminal activity and in some cases real oppressive actions.

tt twitter big4 Gun bans: using a tragedy to move a political agenda tt facebook big4 Gun bans: using a tragedy to move a political agenda tt linkedin big4 Gun bans: using a tragedy to move a political agenda tt reddit big4 Gun bans: using a tragedy to move a political agenda

Posted by at 05:00 | Posted in 2nd Amendment, Oregon Senate | 117 Comments |Email This Post Email This Post |Print This Post Print This Post
  • DavidAppell

    If only the President had, oh, I don’t know, used an Executive Order to institute warrantless wiretapping of Americans, maybe conservatives would have been happier.

    • Ballistic45

      David you are so sallow in your thinking.. Both Bush Presidents were bad as far as diminishing our Rights using situations to stampede people into accepting their reasoning for reducing those rights and expectations… IT WAS WRONG.. Many fought against it from both parties… Now we have Obama doing the exactly the same thing, it is no more right now than it was with the Bush dynasties..

  • Rupert in Springfield

    Personally I love the idiocy of NY’s new gun law. It gives residents a year to disarm of essentially everything but their revolvers.

    That means semi auto AK 47′s, most pistols, and a whole bunch of guns are going to be selling for bargain bin prices in New York.

    Wonder who is going to be buy them all up?

    Hmmm,, who might be interested in buying up high capacity guns at low prices from motivated sellers?

    Should be interesting.

    When you have idiots making laws, such as the same idiots who promised us increased gun ownership would cause more homicide, increased concealed carry would turn every fender bender into a shoot out, expect idiotic results.

    • DavidAppell

      The Harvard Center for Risk Analysis finds that more guns = more homocide:
      http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/firearms-research/guns-and-death/

      The decline in US crime rates probably has a lot more to do with removing lead from gasoline than anything else:

      “America’s Real Criminal Element: Lead,” Kevin Drum, Mother Jones Jan/Feb 2013
      http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/01/lead-crime-link-gasoline

      • guest

        Tally here Ye – a down vote to DA’s drivel who seems to know little other than he’s a supplicant for a New World Order – which, it that happens, hell, Seig Hiel become slurry.

        • DummiesGoHome

          Can you please stop with the Oregon yokel vernacular? It is absurd and offers nothing. You’re a mere child trying to sit at the adult’s table. Go away.

          • valley person

            Oregon yokels would disown this guy.

          • Vern Acular

            DGH, Nurse Ratched says if you don’t eat your pleas you be sent to wed with BlueOregon.

    • valley person

      So you think law abiding people will sell their guns to gangsters and crazy people? Is that what you would do in their situation?

      • Ballistic45

        Well, by your reasoning Gun owners are Law Abiding and would never purposely sell guns to gangsters and crazy people, jeopardizing their gun rights by doing so? Remember the Government had no qualms about selling Guns to the Drug Cartels did they? So who should really be watched Citizens or Government?

  • Bob Clark

    I believe the New York law is unconstitutional. If I were an affected gun owner, I wouldn’t give up my gun. In fact, I think such gun owner would be within his/her rights to shoot any authority attempting to take his/her gun by this law. This even if the Black Robes on the U.S Supreme Court should not judge it unconstitutional; because just a plain common sense reading of the Second Amendment makes it clear the right to bear arms shall not be infringed by government (period). Even Obama’s executive orders are infringements upon the Second Amendment. Because of these violations of the Bill of Rights, an organized militia I would say is on perfectly just and fair grounds to physically remove these government officials from office. Alternatively, states more respectful of the Bill of Rights are on perfectly just and fair grounds to succeed from the Union whether or not granted permission form the current federal administration.

    It should be no wonder why gun sales have spiked since Obama took office.

    Of course, I don’t belong to such militia but would understand such militia’s moral footing; as long as this militia were acting with the intent to restore the Constitution as the effective law of the land. I like the succession idea as a first course of action. Of course, too many in Oregon are addicted to the specious monies transferred to the state, and are too dependent to cut the cord from their over-sized federal dependencies. But some in the great state of Texas have started petitioning for succession.

    • DavidAppell

      By all means, keep the crazy talk coming. Nothing your opponents could do would do more damage to your cause. Thank you.

      • Ballistic45

        When can you kill Government agents?
        video line; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cElTyqJkMEw

        • crabman34

          Alright, fair enough. So you’re in the same camp as the Black Panthers. That’s fine, but let’s hear you say it.

          • DavidAppell

            When the Black Panthers carried guns into the California legislative building in Sacramento, Ronald Reagan proposed gun control legislation the next day, and signed the Mulford Act.

            The more extremists differentiate themselves from responsible gun owners (and responsible citizens), the more many will see them as the real threat, not some imaginary tyrannical government.

          • Ballistic45

            Who are these extremists that differentiate themselves from responsible gun owners?

          • DavidAppell

            The NRA is now in danger of being marginalized just as was the John Birch Society.

          • Ballistic45

            Says who? Seems to me if that were true the growing number of States who are implementing anti gun grabbing bills for state legislation would not be happening.. Seems to me if Gun owners were being marginalized, a growing list of Democrats who are up for re-election in 2014 would not be opposing anti gun Presidential dictates and proposed gun grabbing legislation.. Keep dreaming the Liberal dream of UN-opposed dictatorial power…

          • DavidAppell
          • Ballistic45

            David, your using Internet data, WOW, I thought you were against such as not being trustworthy, OH, I get it, only if it supports your view…. LOL…

          • DavidAppell

            It’s “‘you’re’ using…” dummy, not “your.”

            The Internet is a way to communicate information, and CNN is a proven source.

          • Ballistic45

            another messenger attack David? You know this is a forum for discussion not an English class where we go over and over our work before submitting it.. Oh, I forgot you are a writer, right, now I understand, you have the time to proof read your work… CNN has proven itself as a Propaganda Machine for the Gun Grabbers who recently refused to allow opposing views thanks to Janelle Rodriguez Programming VP.. I listen to CNN David, it is so riddled with anti-gun trigger words in their reporting of the news it makes one sick… How they call themselves a News Service is beyond understanding.. It does one thing only, preach to the Choir who eat it up…

          • DavidAppell

            It’s “proofread,” not “proof read,” and if you can’t take 30 seconds to verify your words they don’t mean much in the first place.

            Why are you afraid to use your real name?

          • Ballistic45

            One more thing David, Lets see if you and your Liberal lemmings have the guts to post a sign in front of your house or on the door of your apartment stating that “This home is unarmed” I think you will refuse, because you know the outcome of that invitation, you will choose to hide behind others who do arm themselves and not separate yourself from them in such a sign in order to put doubt in the minds of any who would choose your home for break in or worse, you want them to believe you could be armed like others who really are… Your gun grabbing agenda hurts YOU just as much as anyone else David, Don’t you realize that? You are like sheep who vilify the sheep dog when no danger stands at your door but will hide behind him when the wolves are near… People like you make me sick… Don’t worry about who I am David…

          • DavidAppell

            Don’t assume everyone is as scared and paranoid as you are.

          • Ballistic45

            Don’t assume and be so arrogant that our Government cannot and will not become Corrupt or Tyrannical.. If you do, you are more stupid than what you try to paint our Forefathers in their attempt to protect us from Government in the Bill of Rights… It’s not Paranoia, it is being wise enough to realize that History does repeat itself if not guarded against…. OH, by the way, you might check on the latest Leaked News that Obama is checking on what Ranking Commanders would Fire upon our own Civilians if ordered to do so… Check it out, seems this was done before in the 30s somewhere…

          • DavidAppell

            In current America, it’s far more likely that tyranny will come from gun-toting militia wingnuts thinking they live in the 18th century, or who would become the brown shirts of some future extreme conservative candidate, or that gun violence becomes so widespread people fear going to the grocery store.

            I don’t waste my time reading wingnut sites that purport to leak astonishing news.

          • Ballistic45

            You are so full of it and it is an affront to all gun owning Citizens that do nothing to harm anyone.. You purposely ignore the Millions of times citizens with guns have stopped crime including Mass killings before police even arrive each year.. You ignore the lessons of History and Gun Confiscation.. Count the number of Tyrannical Governments in the world, how many are Leftist and how many are Conservative Wingnut Governments.. Your ignorance is born from your head up your posterior… Your the one Choosing to keep your head up there David, Why…

          • DavidAppell

            Which “millions of times?” Where has that been documented?

          • Ballistic45

            Pull your head out David, look it up…. You will not believe anything or source I present.. You have a history of denial so look it up yourself, maybe then you will have an epiphany..

          • DavidAppell

            I believe sources if they are of quality. Do you have such a source? Or any source at all?

          • Ballistic45

            Yes and you do to if you look them up, they are not hidden from you… They are not advertised by the media for a reason… But they are not hidden….

          • DavidAppell

            Then provide the source.

          • Ballistic45

            No, you start looking at University research and Clinton era research set up to refute those finding only to fail….

          • DavidAppell

            Ultra lame. If you can’t even provide the source for a statistic you quote, you lose the debate by default. You shouldn’t even have suited up.

          • Ballistic45

            Here is one of many:
            Research conducted by Professors James Wright and Peter Rossi, a landmark study funded by the U.S. Department of Justice, points to the armed citizen as possibly the most effective deterrent to crime in the nation. Wright and Rossi questioned over 1,800 felons serving time in prisons across the nation and found:

            81% agreed the “smart criminal” will try to find out if a potentialvictim is armed.

            74% felt that burglars avoided occupied dwellings for fear of being shot.

            80% of “handgun predators” had encountered armed
            citizens.

            40% did not commit a specific crime for fear that
            the victim was armed.

            34% of “handgun predators” were scared off or shot at by armed victims.

            57% felt that the typical criminal feared being
            shot by citizens more than he feared being shot by police.

            Professor Kleck estimates that annually 1,500-2,800 felons are legally killed in “excusable self-defense” or “justifiable” shootings by civilians, and 8,000-16,000 criminals are wounded. This compares to 300-600 justifiable homicides by police. Yet, in most instances, civilians used a firearm to threaten, apprehend, shoot at a criminal, or to fire a warning shot without injuring anyone.

            Based on his extensive independent survey research, Kleck estimates that each year Americans use guns for protection from criminals more than 2.5 million times annually. 7 U.S. Department of Justice victimization surveys show that protective use of a gun lessens the chance that robberies, rapes, and assaults will be successfully completed while also reducing the likelihood of victim injury. Clearly, criminals fear armed citizens.

          • Ballistic45
          • Ballistic45
          • Ballistic45

            Another: http://www.constitution.org/2ll/2ndschol/58tenn.pdf — when you get tired, skip to the end for their Conclusion

          • Ballistic45
          • Ballistic45
          • Ballistic45
          • DavidAppell

            Wait a minute. Earlier you gave data starting on Jan 1, 2010, for which I asked for the source. But this Harvard article is from 2007. How does that work, exactly (unless they can read the future)?

          • Ballistic45

            I didn’t really think you would commit to an answer about the meaning of the 2nd Amendment because you know that would expose your real view for all to see.. The Gun Defense Clock is based on findings of earlier stats paid for by the Justice Department, you know David kinda like those Deficit clocks showing the incremental rise in real time of our National debt… Which of course are not based on real time spending but on past and present spending trends… But you know that don’t you David, good job avoiding the Question.. Typical Liberal tactic that is evident to everyone…. You make no comment on many of the subjects I have brought to your attention like what role do you think the decline of our Society has in Mass Killings? What role do you think UN-secured ‘Gun Free Zones’ play in mass killings? What role do you think pharmaceuticals play in Mass Killings? Show us real data proving that less Guns mean less Crime.. Show us data on how Chicago, Washington DC, New York City crime has been reduced by gun bans… Show us data on what type guns kill the most people in America.. David, you didn’t read any of the data I gave here, you saw where they came from, the trend of the information and dismissed it without reading them completely… So much for an objective view… Even pro-gun control scholars have found no fault in the methodology in which these finds were derived… What else can I say David? You are a lemming believing Infringement on our rights is the answer to our safety, no other finding are valid… What’s the old saying? “You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make him drink.”

          • DavidAppell

            What stats from the Justice Department?

          • DavidAppell

            You didn’t give any “data” — you cut-and-pasted a bunch of links. If they contain relevant information, quote it and provide the source, so its quality can be ascertained.

            Throwing up a bunch of links proves nothing but that you know how to use a search engine.

          • Ballistic45
          • DavidAppell

            Read: http://www.alicemariebeard.com/scholars/texts/Kates_criminology.doc

            ———————————————-
            This isn’t even a published paper, let alone peer reviewed.

            Do you know how to evaluate the quality of a study? How to determine if it might be legitimate, meet minimum standards of scholarship, use accepted methods of analysis?

            Or are you just doing Google searches for whatever high school term papers back your preconceived position?

          • Ballistic45
          • DavidAppell

            I don’t see where any of the three documents you quote support your earlier statistic about crimes prevented by guns. Where exactly in any of them (page number) is that provided?

          • Ballistic45

            After you read just a few references you asked for that I have for you below, I will ask a simple question of you David.. Do you believe that the 2nd Amendment is about the right to Hunt and the guns used for that purpose? OR, that the 2nd Amendment is about Citizens right to self protection and the preservation of liberty and the guns used for that purpose? Simple Question David !

          • DavidAppell

            I don’t think it’s a question that is properly phrased as either/or.

            I also don’t think anyone not in the military should have access to weapons intended only to kill large numbers of people very, very quickly, or that, if they do, they shouldn’t be checked, licensed, and insured. One of the small children at Newtown was shot 11 times. 11. What tyranny was he threatening the country with?

          • DavidAppell

            I believe the 2nd Amendment is outdated, and needs to be updated for our times. I believe our society should not be held hostage to what you or me things some rich men might have thought 200+ years ago. I think all people have the right to decide what laws work for them, in their day and age, without consideration for what ancient men thought who had no understanding of future needs. I think making deities of the Founders is unwise and just plain stupid.

          • Ballistic45

            If your really gave a crap about kids being killed David you would be not mesmerized by Gun Control and changing the foundation of our nation.. It hasn’t changed David, WE HAVE, and not for the better…

            To really stop gun violence, stop invoking “Gun Free Zones” unless you are willing to pay for adequate armed security for those inside such zones. Enforce current Gun Laws.. Do a better job of tracking known violent criminals after their release from incarceration, similar to Pedophile tracking.. Require hospitalization and treatment of mentally ill who are a danger to themselves and others.. Make any crime committed with a gun of any kind double penalty up and including capital punishment… A felon who has used a gun in the past who is found in possession of a gun of any kind is automatic 10 year imprisonment..

            Our current society has degenerated into a give me society that has been taught that respect for one another has to be earned.. It use to be our society was taught to respect one another until it was abused.. There is a world of difference between the two.. The latter if followed would stop most bullying.. The latter if followed would allow one less fear to walk down the streets alone at night.. It would be more of a taboo for criminals to act against others… It is society that allows Mass Killings, not guns…

          • DavidAppell

            And I think people like you should get treatment for their paranoia before it completely ruins our civilization. We who care will not let you do that.

          • Ballistic45

            For others reading this so called discussion, Note, you will not hear about the:

            13809412
            Gun defenses since January 1, 2010.
            Date and Time Now: Wed 23 Jan 2013 07:38:08 PM PST

            Why, because there is a shared agenda of the Media and Administration for you not to know this information.. And a citizen stopping crime is not as sensational as citizens being killed by crime.. So how many crimes are stopped by armed citizens each year during that period of time?

          • DavidAppell

            This is a laughable number. No one can possibly know it to 8 significant figures — that immediately tells you it’s made up by some false methodology. And the fact that you can’t name its source tells me you, too, know it’s crap.

            It would also imply about 13 defenses PER MINUTE. That’s not believable.

            Is there anything you won’t believe as long as it’s what you want to hear?

          • Ballistic45

            Where are those Tyrannical Conservative Wingnut Governments David?

          • Ballistic45

            It is the Political Left who are paranoid and scared. Their long time history of continually using any excuse to whittle away at the 2nd Amendment is well known and because of their push to exploit gun violence in a RUSH to further erode that right is obviously a political goal of being paranoid of opposition to their overall agenda..

          • DavidAppell

            Yes, mass shootings of school children tends to make people scared. Imagine that.

            And afterward is only the second-best time to take steps to curtail the possibility of more violence.

          • Ballistic45

            Scared of guns or the people pulling the trigger David? It is people like you who focus on the weapon used over the conditions causing people to do such things… It is people like you who try to turn the focus of WHY someone would do this to the friggin tool they used to do it.. The gun, no matter the type did not get up, walk out the door, go to a school intent on killing children… Someone, a breathing life form did do exactly that, why.. You don’t even care! You don’t even Question it as a factor to be dealt with.. You can only see the opportunity to stand on the victims bodies and ‘Chimp out’ about the evils of guns, instead of the state of Society that breeds such people.. You want to vilify legal law abiding gun owners and again limit their rights in the misguided idea that somehow that will cure those who do such things..

          • DavidAppell

            OF COURSE people focus on the weapon. It’s people *with* guns that are the problem, not people with spoons or people with pitchforks or people with rocket launchers. It’s people with guns.
            More guns = more killings.

          • DavidAppell

            Wow, you’re just not very bright…. Upon seeing such a sign, any semi-intelligent person would assume the house was, in fact, *very armed*, and that it was all a trap, leading them to avoid the house completely.

            It’s clear you are paranoid, but try to be at least a little bit intelligent about it, could you?

          • Ballistic45

            Your not to bright David, my point is that with every swipe at the 2nd Amendment you are putting up that sign whether you like it or not one word at a time, and by the time the sign is complete, it will be against the law for you to have guns inside.. Paranoia David, No, I question anyone who approaches our Liberty with plans to yet again infringe on them…. But try it David put the sign up NOW… If (you’re)right then you will be more secure than you are now… If you’re wrong, then Ooops..

          • valley person

            The old slippery slope argument. You can’t pass a sensible restriction because it will inevitably lead to a nonsensible restriction. What this is Ballistic, is a way of avoiding discussion of the merit of the proposal on the table.

          • Ballistic45

            Executive Orders from King Obama are not on the table.. A growing number of bipartisan opposition is growing in Congress on this issue.. The knee jerk emotional reaction is wearing off and giving away to real problem solving of what allowed this tragic killing of children to happen… Gun type, Magazine type, ammo used is now sliding down the list as the major problem.. You have NEVER addressed the role of ‘Gun Free Zones’ role in Mass killings or the need to hold those who implement them responsible for every ones safety that enter the zone.. You made some snide remarks about guards being ineffectual and such, if that view holds true then the White House, Capital Building, Obama children’s school which are ALL gun free zones with armed guards with REAL full automatic Assault weapons are wasting their time and taxpayers money and we should no longer pay for such ineffective security, right?

            Yeah, I’ll talk about real solutions to gun violence but will resist emotional knee jerk reaction to start cutting the rights of law abiding Citizens from buying Semi-Automatic guns that LOOK like Assault weapons or limit their Magazine size.. I will look for REAL solutions to the killings, not to fulfil a Political Long Time Well Established Liberal view of needed Gun Control..

          • valley person

            A real solution is for the gun and buyer to be linked in a data base. This makes it hard for the buyer to re-sell to someone who should not have that weapon, whether it is a handgun or an AR 15.

            A real solution is to require testing, licensing, and insurance, just like we do for driving a car.

            And a real solution is a magazine size limit.

          • Ballistic45

            Gun ownership is a “RIGHT” not a Privilege like driving a car.. RIGHTS do not have to be EARNED, BOUGHT, RENTED or QUALIFIED for from anyone including Government.. Apply your premise to the other Rights.. How about Showing an ID before you vote? How about passing a Grammar test and paying a fee before being allowed to express your opinion? Ridiculous Right? Background checks are NOT Constitutional BUT gun owners did agree it is a need and did not oppose this INFRINGEMENT on this Right.. Ever sense this capitulation the left has pushed for a growing list of Infringements and have vilified gun owners for opposing them.. As far as the Supreme Court, is that a JOKE.. It is what it is, no different than any other branch of government.. Its findings are more in tune with Political views than on Strict Constitutional adherence.. It can reverse its findings in a heartbeat… Supreme Court Justices should have Term limits and be voted into office by Citizens…

          • crabman34

            Last I checked people like you (conservatives) support requiring an ID before you vote. Oh, right, but only for minorities and the poor.

            And last I checked, your Saint Ronald Reagan and his fellow conservatives supported sensible restrictions on gun ownership. Oh right, but only in response to black men arming themselves.

          • Ballistic45

            Show me anywhere that advocates only requiring ID to vote for ONLY Minorities and poor… I have no Earthly Saints unlike Obama Lemmings lined up to drink his Bath Water.. Once I realized by investigating the reasons for the 2nd Amendment in our History, I also became aware of how much of that RIGHT we had ALREADY lost.. The 2nd Amendment has NOTHING to do with Hunting as Liberals try to paint it in order to justify limiting guns to ONLY that use or the Magazines that are to be used… The 2nd Amendment has EVERYTHING to do with preserving Liberty and the weapons needed to for that purpose. That alone is the reason for Semi Automatic Weapons and large Capacity Magazines in the hands of Civilians…. One upon a time, Civilians could buy Thompson Machine Guns from a Catalog with no tracking by the government or asking for permission.. But because a few evil people used these weapons in crime, the masses were disarmed from owning them with the promise it would free us from the criminals having them… NOT so, Organized Crime STILL have Machine guns and STILL use them… I do not advocate going back but I certainly do not support infringing even further on the 2nd Amendment with the same old worn out promises of Loosing rights to garner safety that has not worked… And to do so without even questioning the role of other mitigating issues that allowed Children to be slaughtered…. I want REAL Answers, not Political Agenda GAMES….

          • Ballistic45

            Oh and one last thought on this.. It was Democrats who came up with the FIRST Gun Ban —-> Keeping guns out of the hands of mmmmm Blacks!!!!

          • DavidAppell

            It was Reagan who proposed gun control in California the day after Black Panthers carried rifles into the state capitol building.

          • valley person

            This is beginning to sound like Vessini facing the Dread Pirate Roberts in the Princess Bride. Are you the type of person who would put up a sign saying you do not have guns in order to trick me into thinking you do have guns, or are you the type of person who would put up a sign saying you have guns when you really do not?

            Its so simple! You’ve revealed everything!

          • DavidAppell

            CBS NEWS/ January 17, 2013, 6:30 PM
            Poll: Majority of Americans back stricter gun laws
            http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57564597/poll-majority-of-americans-back-stricter-gun-laws/

          • Ballistic45

            I wouldn’t site any CBS data… Pravda is more balanced than CBS…

          • DavidAppell

            Your erudition is atrocious… It’s “cite,” not “site.” Dummy.

          • valley person

            Sometimes, horrific events create conditions for change. That happened on 9/11 with the airline industry, and it may happen after the slaughter of 20 little kids in Newtown. People across the country, excluding yourself of course, are horrified and angry and ashamed over what we allowed to happen to these kids. and make no mistake, we allowed it to happen by making it too easy for disturbed people to get very deadly weapons.

          • Ballistic45

            It was the idea of disarming people in certain areas that liberals came up with that provided the killing fields called the fuzzy and warm ‘Gun Free Zones’ without holding those who impose them responsible to see that EVERYONE entering such zones are actually disarmed.. In short if your going to disarm people in certain areas you make yourself responsible for their safety while in your zone…. WE allowed it to happen to these kids by setting them up as clay pigeons in a zone where the school district disarmed everyone in it and DIDN’T provide any armed Security to protect them…. Is that so hard to understand? It is NOT being addressed by you or this Administration.. NO one is being held accountable but inanimate objects (guns).. Even the shooter is not being held accountable, but glorified for days in the news media earning himself a slice of history assuring copy cat idiots to follow.. As for 9/11, it was used just like this by the Bush Dynasty to justify infringements on Search a Seizure Rights and wire tapping abuse… Nothing to be proud of…

          • valley person

            The shooter in Newtown held himself accountable.

            More guns are not going to prevent gun deaths. We tried that in the wild west and it didn’t work out so well.

            They had an armed guard at Columbine, If did not help a bit. They had an armed guard at that school in California that got shot up a few weeks ago. No help. If a rickety old guard had been posted at Newtown he would have been the first victim and nothing more.

            4 armed cops sitting in a cafe in Tacoma were murdered by a lone gunman a few years ago. Its called the element of surprise.

            You say “guns” are being held accountable. No. the accountability my friend, is on you and me for making it so easy for people who should not have guns to have them. You can be drunk, suicidal, manic depressive, pissed off, drugged up or just flat out irresponsible, walk into any gun show, walk out armed and shoot up any place you like. Only in America.

          • DavidAppell

            The other reason is you. The fact that you’re afraid to use your real name here tells me you know your views are socially anathema, and that you must hide your identity.

            People who are sure and proud of their opinions don’t hide their identity.

          • Ballistic45

            No, my identity has nothing to do with the message I carry.. But like most Liberals when you can’t dispute the message, attack the messenger..

          • DavidAppell

            Your identity has, of course, everything to do with your “message.” You are clearly ashamed to associate it with your real name.

          • valley person

            Oh I don’t know. How about those 2 geniuses who paraded around Portland last week with AR-15s slung over their shoulders, walking right past a school in full view, causing a lockdown and about 100 9-11 calls. Would you call them “responsible?”

          • DavidAppell
    • crabman34

      The first amendment is pretty clear in saying the right to free speech and assembly shall not be infringed by the government (period). But, what say you, I can’t publish the locations of our military during times of war? I can’t burn my draft card? I can’t scream fire in a crowded theater? I can swear on cable television but not network television? But, you said my rights shall not be infringed (period)!

      The fourth amendment says we have a right to be free of search or seizure without a warrant issued on probable cause. But wait, is it true? That right too has been whittled down? Huh.

      And what’s that? Your Great Saint Reagan supported gun control in the 80s? And what else? Conservative republicans in California and DC supported gun control when? IN 1968? Why? Oh, right, because black men wanted to arm themselves to protect their communities. But I thought the founding fathers said our rights were absolute?

      You’re insane. Let Texas secede. You and your friends promoting violent actions against a sitting President can move there. And then we’ll build a huge fence to keep the ignorance where it belongs, with you and yours.

      • DavidAppell

        The Supreme Court has ruled the right to gun ownership has limits:

        “Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons.”
        - DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA et al. v. HELLER (2008)
        http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/07-290.ZS.html

  • Bob Clark

    Also, no one seems to object having armed federal marshals show up randomly on airline trips. Why not allow such armed marshals, or those properly deputized for such duty, show up randomly (with pre notification to school staff) in our public schools? In fact, it might not be too crazy to enlist some of the most responsible high school age students/teachers with years of weapons training in this endeavor. Our political leaders seem to be pretty primitive in their knee jerk reactions to guns. The best course is not to ignore guns by futile attempts to ban them, but to actually get to know them much better and to shape attitudes in their proper use.

  • Ballistic45

    Liberals have no problem using situations to further their goals… Twisting the Meaning of Assault Rifles to include Semi-Automatic rifles, it sounds more threatening, but false.. To call full metal jacket bullets found in many gun stores as Armor Piercing, because it sounds more threatening, but false. To imply that the 2nd Amendment is about hunting therefore there is no need for high capacity magazines because it sounds logical, but false..

    The Truth:
    Military description of an Assault weapon is distinguished by its ability to be switched from semi-auto fire, (one pull of trigger for one round being fired) or Full auto fire ( one pull of trigger causes bullets to spray out until trigger is released or weapon runs out of bullets)..

    FMJ is a Full Metal Jacket which is a slug of lead covered completely by a layer or jacket of copper. These are used by the military as mandated by the Hague Accord. They do not mushroom, they only slightly deform and do not do the damage that a hollow point does. These are also used by target shooters as they are not as affected by wind as others and have a better trajectory. They are the safest bullet to be hit by, that is why they are to be used in war as they pass through the body with the least amount of damage being done causing more people to be involved with caring for the wounded..

    AP or Armor Piercing uses a projectile of a very dense metal. These are strictly Military/Police use. Early APs were hard steel but most today are tungsten carbide. These are used to penetrate armor such as that found on personnel carriers and tanks. They can also shoot thru barriers such as cinder block walls and concrete. Not available to the general public….

    JHP or Hollow Points have a hollow point, hence their name. These points fill with fluid or tissue when they enter a body or animal and this hydraulic action causes the bullet to mushroom very rapidly. This dramatically increases the size of the projectile causing it to deliver more damage as well as slow way down to deliver more kinetic energy and attempt to avoid over penetration. By international agreement, these bullets are banned in War, (to Lethal) but the Obama Administration have bought close to a Billion of this ammo through Agencies Like the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Homeland Security and even the Social Security Administration… What use is this truly Lethal ammo for, to be used on our own citizens? And why in such numbers?

    The 2nd Amendment has NOTHING to do with Hunting, Skeet shooting or any other ‘Sport use’, or the guns made for that purpose…

    The 2nd Amendment has EVERYTHING to do with preserving Liberty and the weapons that are made for that purpose…

    This alone explains the need for Semi-automatic weapons and large capacity magazines….

  • valley person

    “Our reaction was to put sky marshals on plane so we would have the
    ability to stop hijackings and we armed them with guns for that purpose.”

    We had sky marshals long before 9/11. What we did was to make it a lot harder for hijackers to take control of a plane. We did this by improving passenger and baggage screening, securing cockpit doors, and creating a watch list.

    “In all of these shootings the violence ended when the perpetrator was confronted by a show of force.”

    Wrong. In the Aurora shooting the gunman basically stopped once he had had his fill of killing, walked outside, and waited to be arrested. In Arizona the shooter was stopped by unarmed bystanders when he was reloading. At Clackamas and Newtown the shooters stopped themselves with bullets to the head. They were not shot by good guys with guns.

    “I would think so and I would point out the Clackamas Town Center is also a gun free zone.”

    Yet you claimed a patron with a gun had something to do with the shooter deciding to kill himself. So it wasn’t very gun free was it?

    “Politicians have a tendency to put more restrictions on law-abiding citizens in attempts to deal with the criminal element.”

    Proposed restrictions are an effort to keep guns out of the hands of those who may do us harm. Law abiding citizens, including gun owners, ought to support this goal and be willing to suffer a few inconveniences, as we do when we go to the airport, to make things safer all around.

    “The history of the world shows us banning guns is not a solution.”

    Actually it shows us the opposite. Nations where guns are very hard to get have very very low murder rates, and nearly non existent gun death rates.

  • DavidAppell

    In other news, will this blog be noting that the stock market just hit a 5-year high?

    Or that House Republicans just totally caved on the deficit ceiling?

    • Ballistic45

      Which proves WHAT? That massive amounts of borrowed money in the hands of out of work citizens can maintain and even grow the economy for a limited period of time is GOOD news? I am not surprised at all that the GOP caves any time, they are nothing more than a token Party to placate Conservatives and give them the false feeling they are being represented.. I have long advocated that true Constitutionalist stop supporting this disguised CINO organization.. It left its founding principles of small constitutional government long ago and has joined Liberals in vilifying anyone who advocates Constitutional Government.. So what’s your point? (CINO – Conservative In Name Only)

  • Faron Balanced

    Request for OC to explain why signing in is now required for registering a down-vote and not for up-voting blog material or comments. That seems a democratic thing to do even if Dems posting here may disagree.

  • Ballistic45

    I have a new concept that I want introduced as a bill in Congress..

    Women have the right of choice to be a mother or not via Abortion even if they cannot afford it.. Taxpayers are being FORCED by law to pay for those abortions whether they agree with abortions or not.. Evidently Government is OK with this Concept, SO…

    Citizens have the Right of choice to Bear Arms, guns are being priced out of range for a lot of citizens budgets.. A bill is needed to force Taxpayers to pay for guns for lower income people that can no longer afford them, whether they agree with the 2nd Amendment or not.. In short if you can’t afford a gun, Government will provide you one…

    Let us see who really supports RIGHTS of the individual… Let us see if the LEFT is willing to be fare and balanced in their application of their logic…

    Liberals can not use the excuse that they will not support government providing guns because guns kill people, for they do support killing 3000+ each and every day in Abortions… They cannot use cost as a factor. The average hand gun cost $400, the average Abortion cost $350 up to over $600, depending on trimester it is performed..

    • crabman34

      How are taxpayers being forced to pay for abortions? Ever heard of the Hyde amendment? DoD appropriation bills that prohibit use of taxpayer funding for abortions?

      What on earth are you even talking about? I think you need to try and articulate your point a little better. This isn’t a clear enough analogy to try to refute. After all, your premise starts out unequivocally false, so how are we to get beyond that?

      I can’t be FAIR and balanced with my application of my logic, whatever that means, unless you try a little harder to explain your “new concepts.”

      • Ballistic45

        “While the Hyde Amendment prohibits the use of these funds to directly pay for most abortions, Congress
        must add the Hyde Amendment to the Labor, Health & Human Services (LHHS) Appropriations bill annually—a practice the abortion industry is actively lobbying to end. Further, there is growing evidence, including testimony in recently unsealed “whistleblower” lawsuits, that some abortion providers already fail to routinely provide “meaningful” separation of funds, ensuring that tax dollars are not directly paying for abortion-related services. Given that the majority of Americans oppose taxpayer funding for abortion, this is deeply troubling.”

        Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/oct/31/harned-taxpayer-funding-abortions-set-increase-und/#ixzz2Im0lDpwp

        And we won’t even get into the provisions of Obamacare to provide Abortions..

        So why not provide GUNS to those who no longer can afford them???????

        • DavidAppell

          And how to taxpayers feel about funding for drones that kill actual, living children?

  • MadeleineTector
  • Ballistic45

    Which is it? About innocent kids or Politician safety.. Gun ban is for everyone, EXCEPT Politicians and Government, hmmm..

    Yesterday, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) introduced the liberals’ plan to restrict our Second Amendment rights… In addition to limiting handgun magazine capacities to just seven rounds, Feinstein and her leftist allies have identified more than 150 firearms they want to keep out of the hands of law-abiding citizens… Now for the twist……. The Washington Times reports that the “sweeping legislation” now before the Senate would EXEMPT “government officials..” WTF…..

    • DavidAppell

      What, are seven rounds not enough to kill a roomful of 1st graders, if you reload a few times? Don’t you people practice that? How many does it take, anyway?

      • Ballistic45

        What, Politicians don’t have enough Secret Service with Machine Guns to protect them so they feel the need for Semi Automatic Weapons and Large Capacity magazines but not the rest of us because we are Evil or something? And they need to ban 150 firearms for everyone else BUT THEM..

        • DavidAppell

          Have you realized yet that you aren’t POTUS, and don’t get the threats he or his family does?

          • Ballistic45

            Oh Stop, Stop Please! I’m so Sorry, I didn’t realize he gets DEATH THREATS.. OH Golly GEE Wiz… But Wait a minute, his children’s school has reportedly 11 Armed Guards not counting the Armed Secret Service WE pay for to protect them… Their HOME the White House is a GUN FREE ZONE but with ARMED GUARDS and security measures not even known to the public besides obviously having escape routes and security rooms.. ALL paid for by TAX PAYERS.. Yeah I see how afraid they are to leave home on all those Vacations, sending their daughter and friends to Central America get away for a birthday or graduation or some such thing, All paid for by Tax payers.. Yeah, I get it… Those kids that were set up in a (so called) gun free zone didn’t rank high enough in our new Society of worthiness to warrant not even 1 able bodied armed guard.. Hell the Teacher and staff couldn’t even be armed to protect the kids… Yeah Now I get it, Only the Elite warrant protection… I think he and his family are Pretty Damn well covered, from fighter plane escorts to full Military capability.. Even Pravda warns Americans against giving up our rights, hmmm, could it be they know the effects of that mistake? If you dare READ ALL of this link, I’m not coping it and posting it, read it yourself… http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/28-12-2012/123335-americans_guns-0/

          • DavidAppell

            So you still can’t tell the difference your security needs and those of the President of the United States and his family?

            No wonder you’re confused.

          • DavidAppell

            “One of the National Rifle Association’s senior lobbyists said an ad by the nation’s leading gun-rights group after a school shooting in Connecticut that refers to President Barack Obama’s children was “ill-advised.”
            http://news.yahoo.com/exclusive-nra-senior-lobbyist-says-attack-ad-ill-181051948.html

          • DavidAppell

            You are a uniquely sick person if you think that 1st grade teachers need to be armed to protect themselves from maniacs with high powered weaponry.

            Your conception of society is unlike that of anyone I know, and unlike anything they want to live in. Please — get help for yourself, because you are ruining America.

      • Ballistic45

        You are an affront to meaningful dialog. To suggest ALL gun owners having more than 7 rounds in a clip would kill a room full of kids is discussing and an attack on every ones intelligence and common sense.. Your not even worth recognising any longer in this discussion…

  • Ballistic45

    Regarding the NRA Ad now upsetting the Liberals….

    Just another example of the hypocrisy of the left.. Liberals are JUST
    LIKE Muslims, they believe they have the RIGHT to attack anyone,
    anywhere, with anything, at any time they feel like it but squeal like
    pigs if any one dare say anything or do anything to them…. Where was
    all this indignation when the Liberals attacked Sara Palin and her
    family and kids.. Snide remarks about her pregnant Daughter and Husband and her Down’s Syndrome Son? Every major opponent to the Socialist Agenda has been severely attacked in Character Assassination attempts not only of themselves but their families if anything could be found andsometimes made up or skewed to look bad.. Obama declared his family out of bounds while setting back and allowing his supporters free rein to attack opponents families.. I support the NRA AD, it tells the
    truth of the overwhelming protection given to his children, most of
    which is not known to the public… It was and is secure enough for him
    and his wife to send his daughter and her numerous child guest to
    somewhere in Central America for a Party at our expense…. Yet he and
    his Lemmings put our kids in unprotected “Killing Fields” called “Gun
    Free Zones” knowing full well they have been magnets for every crazy
    Mass Killer out there for years.. That’s Offensive, That’s Criminal,
    That’s Hypocrisy given the fact he and HIS FAMILY is afforded the best
    security in the world and HE won’t even look at allowing the same Tax
    dollars to pay for any MEANINGFUL security for our own kids while in
    school… Then to use OUR Children NOT HIS as a backdrop to a photo op for his courageous (?) signing of EXECUTIVE ORDERS… Dictating even more infringements on our right to bear arms diminishing our own
    abilities to protect OUR families in our own homes is Elitist and Class
    Based given the exemptions of Politicians from the Gun Laws now before the Senate.. This whole scam is not about the Kids or any ones safety except the Elitist Ruling Class… OUR Kids Dead Bodies and the Photo Op kids are the mechanism being USED to slowly disarm citizens… This is true gutter Politics being used by the Liberals, not the NRA Ad….. It is not new, All Dictators surround themselves with LOWER CLASS children and use them to promote their expansion of power over their parents ‘for their own good’… Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, Mao, Saddam
    Hussein, they all did it… Obama is doing it….. Some Obama supporters claim those in opposition to this gun-grab are sick, terrorist, evil, law breakers, would be child killers, it is easy to spot them on Comment pages.. They are the ones that will not commit to the meaning of the 2nd Amendment as being about the preservation of Liberty, they are the ones who try to sell the idea of the 2nd Amendment as being for the protection of Hunting so they can follow with the question for the need of so called Assault Rifles and High Capacity Magazined to HUNT.. Watch for them, they are easy to spot on here…

    • DavidAppell

      Really — you’re defending Sarah Palin (note spelling). Even Fox News has thrown her overboard….

  • Ballistic45

    Some Liberal Commentators on here are so arrogant as to think this Government can not or would not dare become corrupt… Therefore there is no need for any style gun having to do with a military use in civilian hands.. Already the Current Gun-Grabbing bill that targets 150 guns before the Senate EXCLUDES Politicians from those purposed bans !!! So we mere Citizens know that will leave only Government Agents, Politicians and of course Criminals Armed to the teeth…. While our fire-power is cut drastically to 7 rounds? Thanks a lot, for saving us from ourselves…. Watch this, The FBI director was asked if Obama has the RIGHT to kill Americans on our own soil… See the answer here: http://clashdaily.com/2013/01/fbi-director-i-have-to-check-to-see-if-obama-has-the-right-to-kill-americans-on-u-s-soil/

    • DavidAppell

      Right now the problem is the killing of 6-years olds in elementary schools, not government tyranny. They should not have to die for that sake of your paranoia.

      • Ballistic45

        Then address the REAL Problems that allowed it.. This Legal Immigrant put it better than I : http://conservativevideos.com/2013/01/immigrants-amazing-testimony-against-gun-control-few-saw-the-third-reich-coming-until-it-was-too-late/#ixzz2JbJmQ0E7 – I guess some people feel we are so advanced that Government corruption will never come to America, Nah, I guess it is a matter of degree, See : http://voxvocispublicus.homestead.com/Battle-of-Athens.html

        You are the slimiest commenter I have ever seen, “They should not have to die for the sake of your paranoia”? Your are disgusting! They died because of people like you placing kids in “GUN FREE ZONES” Without adequate security! They died because of your paranoia of guns, any guns, all guns.. If Citizens want semi automatic rifles they are called “Mass killing machine assault rifles” but when DHS wants them they are called “Effective Personal Protection weapons” WHICH IS IT? You keep forgetting it is not I who killed anyone, nor you for that matter.. It is CRAZY People who Kill Kids.. The world has always dealt with crazy people doing crazy things, the crazy thing is disarming sane people and think it will cure the crazy ones…. Now that is CRAZY….

        • DavidAppell

          Slimy? At least I have the courage to use my real name. You clearly do not.

        • DavidAppell

          I get it — you are afraid, you are paranoid, you think the government is about to kick down your door, and, to boot, you think gangs are gathering outside your house to storm in and rape your women and take all your baseball cards.

          You, and only you, are defending it all, with your pistols and knives and things, which are far more likely to be found by children who blown their own heads off.

          You need some serious help, man. Your beliefs are killing you, and killing America. Buck up, and try to face the future without ruining civilization.

          I believe you can do it, even if you do not.

        • DavidAppell

          More guns = more killing
          Clearly.
          You are the enemy.

Stay Tuned...

Stay up to date with the latest political news and commentary from Oregon Catalyst through daily email updates:

Prefer another subscription option? Subscribe to our RSS Feed, become a fan on Facebook, or follow us on Twitter.

Twitter Facebook

No Thanks (close this box)