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.
You have the right to go around and tell me what I need? How pretentious are you?
I own an AR-15 (aka THE EVIL BLACK RIFLE) and have never committed a crime. I use it for protection, hunting, and for competition. Should I be considered insane?..a criminal? ...a mass murderer? Just because you do not like guns does not give you the right to decided for everyone else.
As this debate continues it serves nothing more than to increase sales of the EVIL BLACK RIFLE.
People have been killed for a pair of shoes, morsels of food, televisions,etc... Who made GOD?
Would you prefer all gun owners to form militia?
You posted this five times.
What because you grew up in a crappy home I have to have my rights diminished?
Calling people names shows your lack of intelligence.
The number of guns and ammo has risen because of President Obama's comments saying he would make every attempt to diminish our rights of gun ownership. Couple that with the histories of his appointments Eric Holder, Rahm Emanuel, and the overall history of Illinois gun control suggests that there is good reason for people increasing the purchasing of guns and ammo.
Want to sell more guns?...start talking about gun control!
It is a lot easier to kill unarmed citizens.
If you were to do a poll in that detention center asking the murders if they preferred their victims to be armed or unarmed I am sure they would all agree that they would prefer them to be unarmed.
Really 2 years in prison for possession of magazine larger than 10rds?
Everyone except you of coarse, correct? You are special, after-all you have been trained, correct? After-all you are part of the Gestapo, correct?
Hitler's SS had the same logic. The general population are all subjects that must be obedient, correct? Civil dis-obedience will be crushed, correct?
Police tactics had to change because of of the growth of gangs which was facilitated by the sale of narcotics and overwhelming violence...and the is why I own an AR-15 because all it takes is another Katrina like event for the gangs to take over while the police like you flee in order to protect your family instead of doing your job, correct? As that is what exactly what happened in Katrina. Police fled, then federal troops were called in but by that time many many atrocities already happened.
If we lived in a utopian society then guns and self defense would not be necessary. But we don't and they are.
I completely disagree with the idea that we need more gun control as generally espoused on Diane Rehm shows in the past year or so. I disagree with it so much that I just cancelled my monthly contribution to the my local PBS radio station, KWMU in St. Louis.
In regards to the argument that an armed citizen is a danger to society. I would rather run the risks of an armed citizen than an armed criminal. After gun control only the criminals will have guns. Just look at Chicago.
Yeah, that was Justice Scalia's tortured reasoning in order to reach his result oriented decision stemming from his continual judicial activism. It might be introductory, but it is nonetheless limiting. Basic principles of judicial construction require that no word or phrase can be regarded as superfluous or meaningless. If the 2nd Amendment was to be interpreted as the pro-death groups would have you believe than it simply would have been written as follows. "Congress will pass no laws infringing on the right of the people to keep and bear arms;" but they didn't.
Yes, there is. The Constitution protects my right to liberty. I cannot be deprived of my liberty without due process of law. Your completely selfish belief that because you have a right to possess any weapon you want then these weapons should continue to be manufactured and distributed to the general public no matter who they are. My freedom to walk the streets and engage in public association without fear of mass slaughter is being impinged upon by these lax gun laws. I think that Partisan Politics' completely selfish view has to give way to that right. There are some occasions when the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one (and it's not really a "need.") No one needs these kinds of weapons or that amount of ammunition at one time. The needs of the many should certainly outweigh the wants of the few or the one on this occasion.
Jokr8790 wrote: "The needs of the many should certainly outweigh the wants of the few or the one on this occasion"
The needs of the many are the tools that the are required and placed in our Constitution to maintain the free society the founders had envisioned. I will definitely defer to their intelligence and far sighted vision for our country. Freedom has a cost, anything of any value does.
Your vision is the self serving selfish one. I walk the streets without fear, if you walk the streets in this country and have fear of "mass slaughter" may I suggest that that is completely irrational and psychiatric care is in order.
The so-called military grade weapons envisioned by the writers of the Constitution were a variety of single shot slow fire rifles, smooth bores, pistols, and cannons if varying sizes as a part of organized state militias. An experimental and highly questionable multi shot weapon of the time was a pepperbox, which shot all of its 6 barrels all at once.......it was very inaccurate and had an effective range of only a few feet. Interpreting the right to semiautomatic and automatic weapons and other powerful weapons for use by individuals outside the purview of a state militia is a REAL stretch, a contorted extension for sure.
IF technology can produce a particle beam weapon or hand held lazer etc. that could kill thousands at distances beyond line of sight, I suppose the "right" would be extended again ad infinitum.
Where does reason draw ANY limits for an individual or loosely organized gaggle?
Proposed dueling regulation:
:
Stay Puft marshmallows at 15 paces.
Maybe the suggestion that gun owners be supervised, registered militia members would at least be a form of tracking and monitoring. Note that the murdering Joker was rejected by a gun club.......better than no control at all.
EEEEK! EEEEK! The sky is falling! The sky is falling!
Evidently there is a "gun nut NRA member with an AR-15" behind every tree just waiting to slaughter all the passing innocents. If we only passed more laws we would be safe. How many laws did the CO nutbag violate? Would more laws have stopped him? It is possible that a couple of guns in the hands of moviegoers could have.
Chicago has some very restrictive gun laws. Does that result in a low murder rate? Not so much.
Two questions.....
1. What percentage of murders are commited by licensed gun owners?
2. Can someone here point out just how many of these mass shootings have taken place between the criminal and a group containing legal gun owners? It seems to me that these events have unarmed victims.
I wouldn't have that fear if people like you actually gave a crap about the victims of more and more mass shootings. You don't. You actually don't give a crap about anyone but yourself and your supposed right to possess weapons of mass destruction. Their deaths are in your hands not mine. All because you refuse to be bound by reasonable restrictions and regulations that could prevent things like Aurora and Columbine and mall shootings from occurring. BTW- how exactly does you having a semi-automatic weapon (easily convertible to fully automatic) keep anyone free? Free from what, exactly?
Diane... I'm very disappointed you let Mr. V. get away with that ridiculous remark that "hundreds of thousands" of people with guns prevent crimes and protect themselves and others each year. What nonsense!
If it were just ONE hundred thousand gun owners doing that in a year, that would be more than 2,700 people PER DAY accosting criminals, stopping crimes, defending others in public places. What nonsense! You should put out a call for those who've done that and interview them for "hero" recognition!
--DW - Tucson
I live in the kind of town in which, every time there's another senseless mass shooting, I have the priviledge of observing, "Yep, we're famous again."
Submitted to the public, minus any all pretense of copyright:
GUNS DON'T KILL PEOPLE;
PEOPLE WITH GUNS DO.
As a leftist, I don't think the tragedy in Aurora creates cause for gun control. I think it creates cause for better medical care in the U.S. especially mental healthcare. In this country we avoid asking and giving help. We fear being perceived as needy and distrust those who are injured or in need. We don't need gun control as much as we need the compassion to ask how each other are doing and the foresight to call in an authority when it's needed. We're also a nation in denial about mental illness, and it's effects.
What boggles my mind is this young man went through grade school, high school, college, and graduate school, and not a single administrative authority raised a flag? He's attractive and white, does that give him a pass? Or did people just not want to interfere? I am a bit appalled that the shooting range owner, if he deemed James Holmes to be too dangerous to let in his store, why didn't he call the cops? Is that's where our cultural boundary is to protect someone's individual right to mental sickness?
I feel this tragedy illustrates that we are all put at risk by neglected and poor health of our fellow countrymen. If James Holmes had gotten access (voluntarily or by force if needed, he does seem to be a psychopath) to the care his condition required a lot of people would be alive today. It's in health our system fell apart, not in gun control.
we should change our culture...we need free and anonymous counseling for people in a rough spot. people shoot each other for the same reasons we see abortion and drug addiction. you are not alone in your outrage, but lots of people who are outraged are alone. create a different culture, americans will never give up their guns.
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/07/25/colorado-shooting-reminder-tha...
As a leftist, I don't think the tragedy in Aurora creates cause for gun control. I think it creates cause for better medical care in the U.S. especially mental healthcare. In this country we avoid asking and giving help. We fear being perceived as needy and distrust those who are injured or in need. We don't need gun control as much as we need the compassion to ask how each other are doing and the foresight to call in an authority when it's needed. We're also a nation in denial about mental illness, and it's effects.
What boggles my mind is this young man went through grade school, high school, college, and graduate school, and not a single administrative authority raised a flag? He's attractive and white, does that give him a pass? Or did people just not want to interfere? I am a bit appalled that the shooting range owner, if he deemed James Holmes to be too dangerous to let in his store, why didn't he call the cops? Is that's where our cultural boundary is to protect someone's individual right to mental sickness?
I feel this tragedy illustrates that we are all put at risk by neglected and poor health of our fellow countrymen. If James Holmes had gotten access (voluntarily or by force if needed, he does seem to be a psychopath) to the care his condition required a lot of people would be alive today. It's in health our system fell apart, not in gun control.
You can always count on Liberals to make everything to be about politics and black people will make everything to be about race. The solution to everything is for the tax payer to provide more money for the things they like and to ban everything they dislike.
Diane you always have the stupidest guest that seem that they can't speak without stammering and saying ah, ahh, ahhh,. I know you guys say that is being nuanced and introspective. That's Bull. That's just searching for something to say that sounds smart when you really don't have a rational argument.
Shame on you Ms Rehm! A good journalist should remain objective and let their guests debate a subject, yet over and over when this subject comes up you make your contempt clear. As just one example I've included an excerpt from the July 24 transcript in which your guest is simply advocating educating every young person about gun safety and safe use. Your derisive "Whoa" tells all the world of your fear and contempt (the audio is priceless!). One hundred years ago in our great country you would have had a very difficult time finding a 10 year old that HADN'T shot a gun. Kids in that time were not known for running around shooting at one another. Perhaps you would take the challenge to go get a lesson or two at a gun range from a qualified instructor. I look forward to your report following that.
VELLECO
10:53:31
Well, we can quibble about, you know, 10 or 11 or 12 or 15.
REHM
10:53:35
Whoa.
VELLECO
10:53:36
But just to know that if you -- to know what a firearm is.