Posted: 12/28/2005 11:43:01 AM EDT
|
I read this the other day in the Washington Post online (titled "The Gun Control Lobby, Thinking Small, 12/25/05"), now it's in the Hartford Courant today. Don't be fooled, this is really the ultimate goal and agenda of the Gun Control movement. It's just that she had the balls to actually say it. Bags Misplaced Aim  The Answer To Gun Violence Isn't More Piecemeal Regulations On Handguns December 28, 2005 Jenny Price Five years ago, an elderly Los Angeles woman who had agreed to move out of her daughter's apartment bought a handgun. She cleared the background check, passed the safety test and practiced on targets at the local shooting range. Then she shot and killed her daughter and her daughter's fiance - my brother David. As someone who has lost a member of my family to gun violence, I see the new federal legislation to limit gun manufacturers' liability as unconscionable beyond my ken. But what troubles me most is that the gun control lobby is pouring its resources into battles that probably won't save many lives - and we're losing even those. In the past decade, states have passed law after law to require safety locks, force gun-purchase waiting periods, trace bullets back to their sources and allow victims to sue manufacturers for negligence. That such measures have produced at best slight decreases in the rate of gun deaths is hardly surprising, because only 3 percent of gun deaths are accidents, and most murderers own their handguns legally and know how to use them safely. California has passed a raft of such laws in the past five years and is widely praised as one of the most progressive states on gun control. In that same period, the number of handgun-related homicides has fallen and then risen again, with no correlation whatever. The real problem is not that handguns aren't safe or well-regulated enough, or that you can't sue and try to bankrupt a corrupt manufacturer after someone you love has been killed. The problem is that 60 million people in the United States own handguns. The gun used to kill my brother was a Glock 19, a light and portable semiautomatic. These guns are designed to kill people: That's their sole purpose. Nearly 12,000 Americans annually use guns to do just that, and the majority use handguns. Twelve thousand: That's comparable to the number of AIDS deaths each year in the United States. (Britain has about 100 gun deaths each year.) And if the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, which leads the gun control crusade, continues to assure us that it won't try to outlaw handguns? Then new laws to restrict who can buy guns and where they can carry them might reduce the annual toll to 10,000. But that's optimistic. Wouldn't it make more sense to define the ultimate battle as one for a national ban on handguns - the sole gun control measure that promises to save tens of thousands of lives? With an endgame that can actually achieve the ultimate goal, perhaps we'd acquire the logical and moral authority to win more of the smaller battles. I can hear the gun lobby scoffing, "Guns don't kill people. People do." This ditty is familiar to all of us. Yes, and bombs and chemical weapons don't kill people either, but they're not sold over the counter to just about anyone without a criminal record who can prove that he or she can use them safely. Of the 12,000 guns used to kill people every year, 160 are used in legitimate self-defense. Guns in the home are used seven times more often for murder than for self-defense. I cannot say whether the woman who shot my brother was vicious or insane: I myself no longer understand the exact difference. But we all know that rage, vengefulness and deep alienation are hardly unusual in our society, and a handgun makes it horrifyingly easy for people to express them, on purpose or on impulse, by killing people. If the National Rifle Association wants to pour its own considerable resources into creating a society ruled by absolute peace and brotherhood, I'm all for it. But let's stop arming the populace in the meantime, which pro- and anti-gun advocates alike know for certain will create a mountainous death toll. Jenny Price is a writer in Los Angeles. She wrote this for The Washington Post. www.courant.com/news/opinion/op_ed/hc-guns1228.artdec28,0,6674549.story www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/23/AR2005122301465_pf.html |
|
Yea, no shit. He fails to point out that there are CIRCUMSTANCES in every gun death that usually explain that there isn't a need to ban all guns. I bet most gun deaths are accidents, criminal use, justifiable homicide/self defense, or criminals killing each other/ gang violence. - rem |
I wonder where the author is getting her number from? I read the BBC News web site and they report murder and meyhem there all of the time. Some of might want to read the liberal/anti-gun BBC for a different slant on the news: news.bbc.co.uk/ |
There are so many things to tear apart in that article it ain't funny... but I'll just do this one for now:
Well, actually ALL GUNS ARE DESIGNED TO KILL!!! Just like all knives are designed to cut, and all vaginas are designed to have sex! What a stupid comment. |
I don't know about her numbers specifically, but the usual tactic of the gun grabbers is to compare murder rates with those who are acquitted of murder because of self-defense, which of course hugely skews the results. |
She lost her credibility with this line. She basically is saying that anyone who owns a handgun is a murderer waiting to strike thier victim. This article is emotional propaganda and drivel. The author is a hypocrit who accuses the NRA of beating the old mantra about "only people kill people" yet she uses the same BS stats that the Brady Campaign and many other anti's use to make thier arguments about how many thousands are killed each year. |
|
From Warlord: news.bbc.co.uk/ How do you make a hotlink? I see you did it and I want to hotlink those urls' at the end of my original message. Can't seem to find the formula for it in the help section. Thank, Bags |
|
If she wants to play the numbers game, she should use some other facts as well. Like, how many of these murders using guns were illegal guns. How many were police officers in the line of duty (not sure that it would be considered self defense). How many were caused by the same person. THere are too many variables to try and play numbers either way |
|
Dear Jenny: It is unfortunate that your brother and his fiancee were killed. It was not however the gun that killed your brother. It seems as though it was a woman with murderous intent. Clearly from your example, she not only purchased the pistol after passing the background check, but then took specific steps to learn how to use it. Clearly, she intended to kill your brother. She could have used an automobile which cause roughly 50, 000 deaths per year in this country, a blunt object, or even poison. She is the one who killed your brother. He is not the victim of gun violence as guns by their very nature as inanimate objects, are not capable of violence. It was all her. As you mentioned, there are millions upon millions of firearms in circulation in this country. Even if they were all banned tomorrow, all you would succeed in doing is disarming honest citizens who have no ill intent. Some 3 million of those citizens annually use firearms to defend themselves from violent people such as the one who killed your brother. Most never fire a shot. You are correct that a glock 9mm pistol is intended for killing or wounding people. That is the point and general outcome of a self defense situation. Its a matter of physics. The intent however is a matter of the person. Firearms can be used for good intent or bad as can any object. Today, I took my target pistol to the range. I fired about 200 shots at paper targets and then at some pop cans. Not once did my pistol seek to harm another human nor was it happy or sad that it got some use today. It is incapable of feelings. I am capable of feelings though. I had fun. I however had no hatred for the paper targets, nor for the pop cans. Neither do I have such hatred for anyone else that I would want to do them harm. The fact is though that I could and would use my pistol if someone tried to do harm to me or an innocent person in my presence. It is a tool. No more and no less. You see, the use of the tool is dictated by the person. As you mentioned, there are millions of them out there. If tomorrow they were all banned, the criminals who by definition do not obey the law, would not turn them in. They would simply become predators among helpless prey. One need only look to Canada for proof of this. While I can understand your frustration and anger over the murder of a loved one, please Jenny, place that anger where it belongs, with the person who deliberately took the steps to murder him. Yes, he was a victim, but why would you seek to make us all victims too. Its just not right. |
This is the liberal way, if you ignore the human aspect of the tradgedy all that is left to blame is the gun. If you admit that she probably had some psychological issues, then it is her fault for killing them. If you admit women in Afghanistan have more rights now than 5 years ago in a round about way you are saying that Bush did something good. You can't win with these people. |
|
I can hear the gun lobby scoffing, "Guns don't kill people. People do." This ditty is familiar to all of us. Yes, and bombs and chemical weapons don't kill people either, but they're not sold over the counter to just about anyone without a criminal record who can prove that he or she can use them safely. $200 tax stamp anyone? |
|
Dear Jenny, You are a dumbass and I'm glad your brother is dead. Hopefully you are next. I hope someone breaks into your house in the middle of the night, rapes you, then shoots you with a handgun taken illegally, proving your little idea ineffective. Criminals gain their guns illegally and will continue to do so. Only the law abiding citizens will be disarmed. Nice plan, Hitler. Sincerely, James |
C- |
| It's kinda sad that she thinks she speaks for ALL people who lost loved ones to gun violence. Even then, there really is no such thing as gun violence, if you think about it, because on their own, guns aren't very violent, are they? So her story is just one giant lie beginning from the title. |
You frighten me.  96Ag |