Report on the news that matters to your community and don't let us miss a beat. Send in your stories and photos.
My Recent Comments
“They did not take into account the multiple-round weaponry available to individuals today.”
They did not take into account modern media like radio, television, photography, the internet, etc. Does that mean that the First Amendment does not count for these media? Also, the Second Amendment does not grarentee a right to keep and bear obsolute arms, and I believe that the framers of the Constitution would support citizens keeping and bearing modern arms. They placed more faith and trust in the people than the government and its officials.
“…we ought to think about who should be allowed to possess them.”
We have not only thought about this but it was decided and made into law that citizens are prohibited from owning or possessing firearms if he/she:
Has been convicted in any court of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year
Is under indictment for a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year
Is a fugitive from justice
Is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance
Has been adjudicated as a mental defective or committed to a mental institution
Is illegally or unlawfully in the United States
Has been discharged from the Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions
Having been a citizen of the United States, has renounced U.S. citizenship
Is subject to a court order that restrains the person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner or child of such intimate partner
Has been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence
“Back to the Second Amendment: Grenades, IEDs, chemical weapons, etc., were not addressed, but certainly could be used by citizens as a defense against an overbearing government or a potential home invasion. Yet, those devices are not allowed to be possessed by ordinary citizens. So, what’s the difference?”
When the Bill of Rights was ratified Arms was defined as rifles, pistols, and swords but not cannons, and the same applies today. That is what the NRA supports.
Citizen disarmament zealots and organizations use the nuclear weapons, grenades, IED, nuclear, Etc. argument to confuse the issue and an attempt to deceive the public into believing that those who support the Second Amendment support owning such weapons which is false.
“For example, if you want to buy a rapid-fire, large ammunition volume “assault rifle…”
When I purchased my AR-15 over thirty years ago no one called it a “Assault Weapon” or “Killing Machine” “Battlefield Weapon,” “Rapid Fire Weapon” Etc. It was the semi-auto (Fires one shot per one pull of the trigger) version of the semi-auto plus full-auto (Fires continuously as long as the trigger is pulled) M-16, but citizen disarmament zealots and organizations found that they could gain support for gun bans through semantics. For example, they called affordable handguns “Saturday Night Specials” or “Junk Guns.” So, that started calling AR-15s and the like “Assault Style Weapons” and later just “Assault Weapons” in an attempt to deceive the public into believing that they were advocating banning machine guns. A semi-automatic firearm is not a rapid fire weapon, and they have been available to the public for over a hundred years.
As Josh Sugarmann, the executive director and founder of the Violence Policy Center, put it in Assault Weapons and Accessories in America, 1988, “The weapons' menacing looks, coupled with the public's confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons—anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun—can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons.”
The inconvenient fact is that in 2010, Aks, ARs, Uzis and all other semi-auto “Assault Weapons” as well as all other rifles accounted for 358 murders nationwide. That is less than three percent of all homicides and comes to less than one homicide a day. Not only does that mean that no one in you state will be murdered by an “Assault Weapon” or any other rifle this month but likely not next month, or even the month after that.
By contrast, over four times the number of murders, 1,704, were with knives or cutting instruments, over twice the numbers of murders, 745, were with hands, fists, feet, etc, and more murders, 540, were committed using blunt objects like clubs, hammers, baseball bats, etc.
Additionally, a study funded by the Department of Justice concluded, “Should it be renewed, the ban’s effects on gun violence are likely to be small at best and perhaps too small for reliable measurement. AWs were rarely used in gun crimes even before the ban.”
In an April 5, 1996, column in the Washington Post, Charles Krauthammer, who forthrightly supports total gun prohibition, wrote, "Passing a law like the assault weapons ban is a symbolic — purely symbolic — move in that direction. Its only real justification is not to reduce crime but to desensitize the public to the regulation of weapons in preparation for their ultimate confiscation."
You are far more likely to be killed with a weapon other than a firearm than one of those so called “Assault Weapons” or any other rifle.
Of course, citizen disarmament zealots and organizations ignore these inconvenient facts because they are trying to frighten the public into banning all firearms one class of weapon at a time.
“And, some weapons may be restricted to that “well-regulated militia” (National Guard?) and simply not be allowed to be sold over-the-counter.”
The National Guard is not a Militia. It is a Federal military force under state administration. Furthermore, the Second Amendment speaks of two separate groups the Militia and the People. If the right to keep and bear arms was meant ONLY to apply to the militia it would read “The right of Militia members to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” Or, it would read “The power of the States to maintain armed militias shall not be infringed.” It reads “The right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” It calls for a “Well-regulated Militia” and not a well regulated populace, and all other references to “The People” in the Bill of Rights are also rights of individual citizens.
See also: DC v. Heller
1. The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a
firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for
traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.
(a) The Amendment’s prefatory clause announces a purpose, but
does not limit or expand the scope of the second part, the operative
clause. The operative clause’s text and history demonstrate that it
connotes an individual right to keep and bear arms. Pp. 2–22.
This decision wasn’t reached in a vacuum. Most law review articles dealing with the Second Amendment conclude that it protects an individual’s right to keep and bear arms.
“It’s about safer schools, malls and movie theaters for all of us.”
We had an “Assault weapons ban” and that did not make us safer. The fact is our right to Keep and BEAR arms have been increasingly restored over last several years and more citizens are now free to carry firearms in more places since the year 1900. Yet, homicides, including homicides with firearms, as well as all other violent crime have been decreasing since 2006. Moreover, after a dramatic increase in firearms sales and ownership after the last Presidential election including an increase in first time firearms purchases and an increase in firearms carry permits, citizen disarmament zealots and organizations predicted that there would be a corresponding increase in homicides and other violent crime. However, the U.S. homicide rate decreased from 5.0 per 100,000 in 2009 to 4.8 per 100,000 in 2010 and all other violent crime decreased as well.
Preliminary data from 2011 shows all Violent Crime was down 6.4%, Murder down 5.7%, Rape down 5.1%, Robbery down 7.7%, and Aggravated Assault down 5.9%.
By contrast, The United Kingdom enacted extreme firearms bans years ago, and gun crime in the U.K. has double in a decade.
Criminologists have found that U.S. citizens use firearms for self-defense 2.5 million times a year, and for every life that is lost to firearms violence 65 lives are saved by firearms in self-defense.
Firearms are used thousands of times a day for other lawful purposes like hunting, competitive shooting, recreational shooting, and collecting. Shooting is an Olympic and NCAA sport as well as in the Boy Scouts, ROTC/JROTC, 4-H and others. With all of this taken into account it is clear that the vast majority of firearms are used for lawful purposes.
Suter E. "Guns in the Medical Literature - A Failure of Peer
Review." Journal of the Medical Association of Georgia. March 1994; 83: 133-48.
Combine the uses of firearms for self-defense along with the other
It is no wonder that a Gallup Poll of October 26, 2011 found that 60% of those surveyed supported enforcing current gun laws more strictly and NOT pass any new laws while only 35% responded to enforce current gun laws more strictly and pass new gun control laws.
“One broad statistic that Stamper-Brown did not mention is that gun-based homicide rates in Europe (where guns are much less available) are roughly 1/4 or less than in the USA…”
It has also been found that there is no correlation between firearms ownership and homicide and suicide rates, and many of the countries with the strictest firearms prohibitions have higher homicide and suicide rates than nations without such restrictions.
According to Smallarmssurvey.org, the United States ranks first (88.1) in per capita civilian firearms ownership per 100, so the casual observer would believe the U.S. would be in top 10 in murders, or at least the top twenty. However, the U.S. is not even in the top 30. The U.S. ranked the 35 in the World murder rate. In 2009 that came to 5.0 per 100.000 in 2009, and 4.8 in 2010.
Switzerland ranks third (45.7) civilian firearms ownership per 100, and it unlikely that military weapons kept in Swiss homes are included since they are property of the Swiss Government. Yet, their murder rate was an extremely low 0.66 per 100,000 in 2009.
By contrast, El Salvador ranked 92nd in civilian firearms ownership (5.8) per 100, so the casual observer would believe that they would not be in the top fifty murder rate. However, they ranked first in the world murder rate at a staggering 71 per 100,000 in 2009, second in murder rate in 2010 with 66 per 100,000 in 2010, and second in 2011 at 71 per 100,000. Honduras ranked 88th in firearm ownership per 100 and they were first in 2011 world murder rate at a staggering 86 per 100,000.
April 26, 2002 - GERMANY - In Erfurt, eastern Germany, 19-year-old Robert Steinhauser killed 12 teachers, a secretary, two pupils and a policeman at the Gutenberg Gymnasium, before killing himself.
November 7, 2007 - FINLAND - Pekka-Eric Auvinen killed six fellow students, the school nurse and the principal and himself
September 23, 2008 - FINLAND - Student Matti Saari opened fire in a vocational school in Kauhajoki in northwest Finland, killing nine other students
March 11, 2009 - GERMANY - A 17-year-old gunman dressed in black combat gear killed nine students and three teachers at a school near Stuttgart. Two additional passers-by were killed and two policemen seriously injured, bringing the death toll to 16 including the gunman.
June 2, 2010 - BRITAIN - Gunman Derrick Bird opened fire on people in towns across the rural county of Cumbria. Twelve people were killed and 11 injured.
He didn't have an "assault weapon".
He didn't have 6,000 rounds of ammunition.
He didn't have a pump action shotgun.
He didn't have two Glock handguns.
He didn't have a 100 round magazine.
He had a 22 caliber bolt action rifle of the kind used to shoot squirrels, rabbits, and for target shooting.
August 30, 2010 - SLOVAKIA - A gunman shot dead six members of a Roma family and another woman in the Slovak capital Bratislava before killing himself.
April 9, 2011 - NETHERLANDS - Tristan van der Vlis opened fire in the Ridderhof mall in Alphen aan den Rijn, south of Amsterdam, killing six before turning the gun on himself.
Please note that most of these mass shootings occurred in nations with strict gun control laws.
“…can do better than live with the status quo and intransigent (and/or profit-motivated) gun rights views.”
The vast majority of us that support our right to keep and bear arms as well as the vast majority of NRA members are not motivated by profits. We defend our right to self-defense and other lawful uses of our firearms.
9 months ago
“This is why their push for bills that allow guns on “gun free” zones is endless and relentless.”
“Gun Free Zones” should be called “Kill Zones” because criminals and the deranged know that no one in those areas will be able to defend themselves.
““I just don’t want to see a repeat, in Texas, of what happened at Virginia Tech” said Sen. Jeff Wentworth (Texas).”
Virginia Tech was a “Gun Free Zone,” and that certainly did not stop the attack there.
“How can students learn or professors teach at their highest level with the anxiety of being surrounded by armed, unpredictable people every day in class?”
Nine public universities in Utah, Colorado State University, and Blue Ridge Community College in Virginia allow licensed students and faculty to carry firearms on their campuses. Mississippi and Wyoming now allow it as well. Of course, there have been no shooting tragedies by licensed permit carry holders on those campuses as predicted by the gun ban zealots.
Zachary, since there have been no “Catastrophic” problems at those institutions, what makes you think there would be any different in Arizona?
Mar 9, 2012