Gun Control In An Election Year
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2012-07-24/gun-control-election-year
In the wake of the Colorado shootings, national debate over gun control is in the spotlight, but most politicians are remaining silent. Diane and her guests discuss the absence of political debate over gun control in an election year.
Guests
Ladd Everitt
Director of Communications at the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence.
Robert Spitzer
Chair of the political science department at the State University of New York in Cortland, and author of "The Politics of Gun Control."
John Velleco
director of federal affairs at Gun Owners of America.
Juliette Leftwich
legal director, Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
The CDC is barred by Congress from explicitly studying gun violence. The US is, by far, the most violent industrialized country on the planet. And the 2nd amendment only applies to a well regulated militia. Private ownership was inconsequential to the founders of the country.
What are the gun laws in Norway. Did they prevent the horrific slaughter in Oslo? Where did that shooter obtain his weapons, and how? Did the rate of violent crime in the U.K. decrease after gun the restrictive laws were passed in the wake of the attack on the elementary school in Scotland?
Circular reasoning ( or faulty reasoning) the guest says one needs a gun to protect from a person with a gun. Well why is it so easy to GET a gun? Why are laws and the culture so liberal about rights for everyone to have a gun?
Also the other guest points out a HUGE flaw in background checks. The first time we get to know about mental illness often is after such a horrible crime.
Gun and ammunition buying has risen since 2008 because of the racist attitudes of the right wing crazies after Obama was elected.
rtgreene wrote: 'Stupid, stupid stupid'
The militia are the people!
I don't understand why anyone would need a military-style assault weapon to defend themselves in their OWN HOME or 100 rounds of bullets to protect his wife from getting raped! That line of reasoning is absurd.
A handgun is more than adequate to protect yourself in your own home against an intruder. A few shots would scare a potential robber or rapist out of your house.
Also, you are NOT protecting your children if you have a loaded AK-47 in your house!!!!!
What are the chances that is a GROUP OF MEN are going to come into your house to attack and rape your wife that you'd need 100 rounds? ? Terrorism doesn't single out ONE FAMILY. I'm sorry to say that you just aren't that important. The people who are that important have security guards and personnel to protect them.
I'm quite sure that Our Forefathers did NOT envision that the right to bear arms would include mass shootings in movie theaters, shopping malls, and colleges? Ladd Everritt is spot on: we've gone too far.
Why can't guns have AT LEAST the same if not, more stringent regulations as registering for an auto license? Gun rights groups cite that more people are killed in cars in comparison to guns. But cars are not designed to kill people, guns are. If citizens want the right to own guns, there should be a nation-wide background check, mandatory education of safe use and a licensing process that is reviewed over a set period of time. If gun owners want the right to own guns, they should be prepared to bear the responsibility too.
John Velleco needs 100 round clips in semi-automatic weapons to protect his family from intruders?
Classic bad shot, move to a better neighborhood. Idiot.
If you are in a store and robbers come in, you pull your gun and start shooting at the robbers because your goal is to protect yourselves and others in the store, but you, by accident, shoot and kill two innocents - Do you get arrested and possibly go to jai? Do you just go home and turn on the TV? What are the repercussions?
A psychiatrists insightful perspective on news coverage's perpetuation of mass shootings. http://youtu.be/PezlFNTGWv4
I find it more than a little disingenous that the NRA continues to use one of the more provocative arguments, the raping and killing of wives and daughters, to further their arguments. To suggest that high-volume weapons (I know nothing about guns, so forgive me) are needed to protect your homestead is not only paranoid, but ludicrous. I find gun advocates to be some of the most fearful people on the planet, and pity them.
It seems that the NRA lives in a world that does not really exists. They want their gun rights to be protected by the government, but seem to forget that the victims have rights as well. One very rarely hears this side of the debate. It is all about me!!!
The NRA is protecting terrorists as well as citizens (if the NRA is doing so). If the shooter at the theater had been a member of al Qaida, the issue of tracking ammunition and gun sales would be resolved in an instant.
I wonder if the panelist who is so opposed to requiring an ID check to purchase ammunition (ostensibly because it would infringe upon a constitutional right) is similarly opposed to requiring an ID check to vote (also a constitutional right)?
Diane,
Why must you have guests as irrational as John Velleco. I cannot bear to listen any longer to this show.
Its the same tired argument by the NRA/ILA. Its amazing that the well regulated militia some how ignores the regulation part of gun ownership. The reason that men age 16-40 were mandated to purchase a firearm and keep it at the ready is because they were being called up to serve in military defense operations. It never ceases to amaze me that the NRA will stand and wave that line from the constitution in taters over their heads at a gun show, where anyone can buy a 100 round clip and ignore the rest of the amendment. Assualt rifles didn't exist, and should be regulated like automobiles, which also didn't exist when the constitution was amended. Just as we need to take drivers ed, pass a written and practical test, prove that we don't have a physical limiation like epilepsy in order to drive, register and insure our vehicles, so the same should hold for fire arms.
The guests refer to mental illness and how the Denver shooter would have been stopped had he had any record of mental illness. I think we must consider that true evil exists and that clear-thinking evil men have preyed on others since time began. In the last hundred years we've seen Hitler, Hussein, Assad, Amin, Sandusky...and others. Evil is not mental illness. Perhaps this cinema killer is 'simply' evil.
Good men and women need to defend themselves against such people and probably guns are the best way to do that.
I find it odd that you can purchase guns, ammo, alcohol and tobacco online. Shouldn't all of these items (allegedly regulated by one oversight organization) require a trip to an actual store, with the proper ID/requirements staffed by professionals who have the right to size you up against their regulated and stringent parameters and be able to say yes or no to your purchase?
The gun rights activist is bought and paid for. I'm sure he lives in better neighborhood than average people. I sincerely doubt the scenario he talks about for having hundred round magazines would ever happen to him. He has no credibility.
I own 2 handguns, legally, for home protection. It is my view that it is far, far too easy for anyone to get all types of firearms, ammo, and other dangerous items. I also think unless all 50 states have the same laws and regulations, this debate is futile.
I agree with a comment made on air earlier that personal firearms should be kept in the home, it should be much more difficult to acquire them, and those who do should be required extensive mental evaluations and training.
The militia is the National Guard and the US Army Reserve.
I was a psychologist at a very large City Detention Center for 9 years and have interviewed hundreds of murderers. There is no doubt that guns kill people. The NRA refused to come on the show because it is "not the time for this political and policy discussion". That is the truth because this is NOT a Constitutional issue. Gun control does not infringe on the right to own guns as part of a militia and this issue is only NRA propaganda. Self defense with a gun is a joke and a lie. I have trained with SWAT and trained thousands of correctional officers and most law enforcement want gun control. The NRA is a murderers best friend. Stop the NRA lies.
Hello,
A Friend of mine was shot in the back of the head while she sat in her running parked car South of Sedona AZ in Jan. She was a completely peaceful and loving person bothering no one, ever. The guy who shot her had an assault rifle, fired 23 shots and walked away. The bullets were military issue, and though the murders were "connected" to another shooting a day later in Tucson, it was not definitive. I have been haunted by this loss and will continue to be. The man who shot her obviously had training enough to come up behind a NH Grandmother and blow her away.
maybe if they had checked the id of the person buying 1000s of rounds of ammo, maybe they could identify a person who's getting ready to go postal on us.
I think that a database of gun and ammunition purchases, similar to cough and cold medicines, could alert authorities to excessive purchases. Excessive purchases may mean that there is a potential issue and possibly help prevent tragedy's such as the theater shooting.
I have been listening today and more that once I have heard that "the reason for the public to own guns is to have the right to shoot and kill public and elected officials" and they want to be armed against "us". This is silly. Gun owners are not out to kill public and elected officials no more than they are out to kill the general public. Criminals are out for both and gun owners are only protecting themselves.
A research study claims that 1 in 5 Americans may have some degree of mental illness. Can your guests address this concern. Also what percentage of gun related crimes are domistic and what percentage are commmitted by crininals?
Thank you,
Rodney
Gwen wrote: "Its the same tired argument by the NRA/ILA. Its amazing that the well regulated militia some how ignores the regulation part of gun ownership"
"regulation" in the second amendment refers to proper functioning, not complying with laws.
There are several countries that require their citizens to own firearms and it is a great deterrent. If you are trained and stable, then you don't need to worry about saving yourself and not relying on the police 5-10 minutes later.
Assuming for the sake of argument that the Constitution permits gun ownership so that we can maintain an armed citizen militia, there is nothing in the Constitution that prevents the regulation of or banning of things like bullet-proof vests, tear gas, booby-trap devices, gun powder, etc. Remember the Constitution says that this armed citizen militia should be "well regulated."