Tuesday, June 28, 2011

Democrats and Republicans Coming Together on Gun Control

via Laci a good article in The Guardian

Every day, 34 Americans are killed by handguns and semi-automatic weapons, many of which are purchased or owned illegally. Weapons like the 9mm Glock pistol used by Jared Loughner to kill six and critically wound US Representative Gabrielle Giffords (as well as wounding 13 other people) this past January in Tucson, Arizona. Loughner's Glock, capable of firing an extended magazine of 30 rounds in 15 seconds, was purchased at a local Tucson sporting goods store and could be lawfully carried throughout the state without a concealed weapon's permit. As those who eventually tackled and subdued Loughner attest, if the shooter had had to take a moment to reload his weapon sooner, they might have been able to spare some of the lives lost that day.

The Tucson shooting, like others in recent US history, brought Americans together and reignited the nation's ongoing debate on gun control and the second amendment to the US constitution (which protects the right to bear arms).
The author goes on to call for bi-lateral support for gun control. He says the time is now for both Democrats and Republicans to come together in agreement on such things as background checks. Do you see that happening?

Please leave a comment.

8 comments:

  1. "The author goes on to call for bi-lateral support for gun control. He says the time is now for both Democrats and Republicans to come together in agreement on such things as background checks. Do you see that happening?"

    Loughner passed a background check. So did Cho and so did that muslim extremist that attacked Fort Hood.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Loughner passed a background check. So did Cho and so did that muslim extremist that attacked Fort Hood.

    And so did the Marine Reservist that was caught shooting up Military landmarks in VA/Arlington Cemetary......

    ReplyDelete
  3. Mike, you have repeatedly told us that there is no time to react during these mass shootings, so why aren't you calling BS on those who say he could have been stopped sooner? His gun jammed according to witnesses and police. That is a lot different than a normal reload and blows the whole therory that he could have been tackled 5 seconds after the shooting began (the time it would take him to empty a 10 rd mag).

    ReplyDelete
  4. Plus let's not forget that he dropped the fresh magazine and someone was already lying on the ground in a good position to grab it. That is a lot of things that need to happen exactly as tuscon in order for a magazine ban to save lives, and still all that goes away if the shooter decides to bring two or more guns. Since loughner decided that the 15 rd mag that the gun came with wasn't good enough, there is no reason to think he would have been content with one gun holding 10 rounds.

    ReplyDelete
  5. TS, I told you a million times I'm not a big fan of the magazine restrictions, but here's how I see it.

    Armed CCW guys are usually not able to help unless they happen to be positioned exactly right, good vantage point or immediate proximity. Any unarmed witness could tackle the guy as soon as he begins changing magazines.

    About FWM's observations, I'd say that along with background checks being made mandatory for EVERY gun sale, the data base certainly needs improvement, especially to pick up the mental defectives and those unfit for the military for psych reasons. The way it is now, some States don't even report their domestic abusers and felons.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I know, Mike. I was responding to the quote, not directly to you. However, how can you claim that there is no time to use a gun for self defense, but there is time to tackle the shooter? I can't see how you can justify that train of thought.

    ReplyDelete
  7. ". Do you see that happening?"

    Absolutely. In fact, right after the shooting, there was no shortage of traitorous east coast RINOs joining forces with various democratic gun haters.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Well, TS, if you had every single person in the crowd carrying, you'd have a point. But, I don't think even you can envision that. Therefore, back to what I said before, one of the guys who is carrying, would have to be in the very perfect position, whereas anybody near enough to the shooter could grab his arm as he changes magazinies.

    ReplyDelete