Enough is enough: No more guns and repeal SYG laws

Monday, May 26, 2014

Good morning:

This is Memorial Day.

Mass shootings have become commonplace and more guns will only beget more mass shootings and innocent deaths.

The time has come to stop the insanity.

The LA Times is reporting this morning:

The father of Isla Vista shooting victim Christopher Michaels-Martinez said he wants to meet with the father of his son’s killer to work toward preventing future tragedies.

“I lost my son. He lost his son. We have that in common,” Richard Martinez said. “We want, if possible, that the deaths of our son and his son should mean something.”

While we are at it, let’s get rid of our SYG laws that are nothing more than licenses to kill minorities and teenagers.

This darkness has got to give.

27 Responses to Enough is enough: No more guns and repeal SYG laws

  1. J4TMinATL says:

    Several issues citing stats:

    Since 2007, the CDC has spent less than $100,000 a year on gun focused issues. The measly amount is not used by the CDC for research; instead the money is used to provide a very rough estimate of people injured by guns. Congress with help from the NRA banned CDC from researching gun violence. As most are aware, the ATF has been prohibited since 1978 from compiling data on firearms sales. Firearm deaths have NOT been treated and researched as a public health matter like drunk driving is. Vehicle fatalities are down by 36 percent (20 yr period) because our cars and highways are safer as a result of research conducted by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Groups like MADD, law enforcement, education contribute to low numbers.

    “Government resources committed to firearms related research amounted to about 0.0018% of the CDC’s 2013 budget. If firearm deaths constitute roughly 1.3 per cent of all national mortality, it could be argued that the CDC’s budget should have been 722 times larger.” When and if the proposed FY15 $10M is allotted to the CDC for research, questions like how many people are shot by police officers? What about adults who are shot serving in the military? How many of the injuries and/or deaths are crime related? How many are suicides? Which cities and counties of each state accurately report violent crime data to the FBI? The FBI does NOT track the total number of nonfatal gunshot wounds. The CDC’s WISQARS injury database only has limited data from 16 states. DOJ estimates.

    Regarding the impaired driving statistic, it is misleading as this number accounts for all alcohol impaired deaths (drivers and passengers). More than 1.4 M drivers were arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol or narcotics. And MADD has never stopped working to lower BAC. Drugs other than alcohol (e.g., marijuana and cocaine) are involved in about 18% of motor vehicle driver deaths. Key word- driver. Number of drivers in the U.S. and how often people drive far outweighs the numbers of gun ownership. In 2010, the population was more than 308 million people.

    Changes in economics, demographics, population and health will all have an effect. For example, one would guess that the better the economy is the less suicides we see. I hope one day that we will all know how many people are shot in the U.S each year. We’re nowhere close to knowing.

  2. MKX says:

    For example, my proposed law would have made Zimmerman guilty due to the fact that he got out of his car with his gun. If he was scared, he had every right to stay in that car with his gun and wait on law enforcement.

    A gun is for self protection, not a license to feel free to intimidate others by your actions or words.

    Dunne, Zimmerman and the theatre shooter all felt they had a right to confront others based on having a hidden fire arm. Second Amendment rights should not be promoted such that they infringe the First Amendment rights of others.

  3. MKX says:

    The right to bear arms is distinct from being accountable for one’s actions.

    If you are “so scared” that you need to have a gun to go to a supermarket, fine, that is a right.

    That said, because you are carrying lethal force, you should be required to do everything possible to avoid a confrontation. And laws mandating such actions do not violate the Second Amendment.

    Instead, we have stand your ground laws that are a license to confront others knowing that you have a trump card hidden from sight of the “confronted”.

    I advocate that carrying a hidden gun mandates that one be required, by law, to do everything possible to not start a confrontation.

    And that does not violate the right to bear arms.

  4. kllypyn says:

    Video games had nothing to do with it. They will only repeal those stand your ground laws when gang members start using them to get away with murder.

  5. ed nelson says:

    Don’t forget to include knives there… ! Three were stabbed, so they say.

    That guy didn’t seem like a madman in the vid, but a sociopath, pretty much. That is the believable part, making movies FC’s Sakes!

    • The choice to do a mass shooting was done due to access to a gun. The choice to chase and shoot Trayvon in his own backyard was done with access to a gun instead of calling the police, the choice to meet Renisha McBride at gunpoint instead of calling the police was because of access to a gun, choice to trap and shoot teenagers instead of letting the police handle it was due to the assailant’s access to a gun, the choice to confront a drunk neighbor over loud music was made with a gun in hand, the choice to argue with Jordan Davis’s car group was due to access to a gun… get it.

      Having access to a gun changes peoples choices and I would never claim that is true with a knife.

  6. kenteoth says:

    I still believe people need protection in their homes, but people do not need to ride around with weapons in public. The drug pushers with guns need their rights taken away and fools with mental issues do not need guns and neither do neighborhood watch guards that were told to not carry a gun while on duty

  7. towerflower says:

    The History of the USA is based on the right to keep our arms. It started when the British marched into Lexington and Concord to take away the guns of it’s citizens. The actions of the average person that day drove the greatest army in the world retreating back to Boston.

    I support the 2nd Amendment but I also feel they need to loosen up HIPA laws in regards to mental health reporting for firearm purchases. It is painfully obvious from this last shooting that the man should never have been able to purchase a firearm but the law said he could because he was never committed or declared incompetent by a judge, but he didn’t just use a firearm in his rampage, half of the people who died, died from stab wounds and several were injured by his car when he also used that as a weapon. I feel that the minute someone is prescribed mind altering drugs that they should immediately go on a list to prevent them from purchasing a firearm and they should remain there until fully cleared by a panel of mental health specialists.

    I do believe that the SYG law needs rewriting. It is too easy to get away with murder. While I support the concept of the law–being able to protect yourself while away from your home–the part of only needing a fear of harm needs to go. There should be clear proof as to the fear, ie gun, knife, etc. Someone who is shot from behind is clearly not presenting fear of death to the shooter.

    • crazy1946 says:

      towerflower, I hope you don’t mind, but I’m going to post the link that you left on Xena’s blog here…

      I spent about four hours actually reading this young man’s words, and I am glad I did. If one were to read his words and not watch his video, you would have a much better idea of what he faced as he was developing in life. He had a father that was spineless, a mother that gave too much, and a step mother that was cruel at best. I would say by the time he was 12 years old, his course was pretty well set… His words actually outline his mental instability quite well… I would suggest that if anyone is truly curious about what the cause of this incident was, read the link…

    • crazy1946 says:

      Read this link for the truth about why the war for independence started. Or one can use the NRA’s version that tells you that the taking of guns was the reason… It would seem that too many people wish to re-write history to favor their version of events.. I simply cannot understand why so many people feel the need to use fear and lies to sell their version of what they want for our nation… The bad part of that method is that it has turned many people totally against a nation full of guns and wanna be gun slingers…

      http://www.let.rug.nl/usa/essays/before-1800/was-the-american-revolution-a-revolution/background-history-and-the-beginning-of-the-revolution.php

      Feel free to point me to a valid non political historical site that states this nation was founded because of the British taking guns away…

  8. Porn and video games , absent parents and their self involved lives had more to do with this particular incident. I suspect there was some religious indoctrination that affected this very confused young man. On average, there are thirty thousand gun deaths each year in the U.S. half of which are suicides. Guns don’t kill people, people kill people. There will be thirty thousand next year as well, unless of-course the people are willing to give up their right to bear arms, and then there will be millions of deaths due to the Police State that will have no adversary to stop or slow their predilection for Democide.

    • towerflower says:

      In 2010, last CDC report, there were 31,672 deaths from firearms. 19,392 were from suicide which makes up 61 percent, 11,078 were from homicides or 34 percent the rest were accidental (hunting accidents or thinking the gun was unloaded, etc) or unconfirmed as to their category. In that same year there were 10,228 deaths due to drunk driving or 31 percent of all traffic deaths. I put that up so we can see the numbers are just about the same for gun deaths by homicide and deaths by drunk drivers, yet most of the outrage publicly is on the guns.

      • Thank you for that comment and info. Yes the gun issue is ages old, and dis arming the public will not result in stopping violence. It will only give the Government the illegitimate power it craves.

        • I question whether keeping guns to fight the government is a good idea.

          I believe the pen is more powerful than the sword and nothing is more powerful than an idea whose time has come.

          • towerflower says:

            It was the basis of what became our country. If the British had been successful in removing the firearms we might still be British today.

          • TJ says:

            Not to offend but I think that is naïve and something that only people born in comfortable western countries believe. The pen only works when citizens have some way to fight against their government and protect themselves as a backup. Kings, dictators, and totalitarian states for most of human history shown swords or weapons are more powerful. Pens don’t matter if everyone who wants to write something is killed. Saddam, Stalin in USSR, and Hitler in the Nazi period of Germany were not defeated by pens. Pens sure are not beating Castro in Cuba, Kim in North Korea, or any of the African dictators

      • crazy1946 says:

        towerflower, While I do understand your position in regards to possession of fire arms, your comparison of intoxicated drivers causing deaths to individuals willfully committing murder with a firearm disingenuous at best. While both acts are abhorrent, in too many cases the death caused by the possessor of the fire arm is not an accident. It is too bad that people that have a fixation on guns have to come up with such invalid statistics to justify their ownership of weapons that were simply designed to do one thing, that is kill. Can you honestly tell me that you think that the “drunk” driver set out to massacre people with a car, like we have recently seen so many people do with a gun? I agree that under the popular interoperation of the 2nd Amendment, you have the right to own and possess a weapon of mass destruction, however does not the victim of said weapon have an equal right of life? If you were given a choice, would you rather have a gun or keep living? I would suggest the right to life trumps your alleged right to own a weapon…

        • towerflower says:

          I used another illegal act to compare. A drunk driver also makes a willful choice. No one forced them to drink to excess, no one made them get behind the wheel of a car, they also had choices, don’t drink, have a safe driver, call a cab, etc. The choice that they make can also take out an entire family, but not several dozens at a time. Those killed by a drunk driver, do they not also have a right to keep living? To not have their lives cut short by an illegal act? Yet society seems to “accept” these deaths more.

          Owning a firearm comes with a great deal of responsibility, just like owning a car does. I don’t agree with a great deal of stories out there…..I feel that fogen was an irresponsible gun owner and with the anger issues that he has should not have been able to have a CCL. I feel that they need to change HIPA laws in relation to gun ownership and mental health. I also think that if a person is on a drug that list paranoia, anger as side effects then they shouldn’t be able to purchase a firearm while during the duration that they take the drugs.

          What happened in CA is tragic and senseless. Even if every gun had been outlawed do you think that the depraved mind of the shooter/stabber/and driver of a car as a weapon would make a difference? A lot of people talk about VA Tech as being the deadliest school shooting, but the deadliest school tragedy was in Bath, MI and was done with a bomb. The type of shootings like VA tech, Sandy Hook, and now CA all had a common thread of mental illness, something that increased when laws dealing with mental illness was changed in the 80’s. Maybe we should be questioning if the rights of some mentally disturbed persons takes precedent over our own rights.

          • crazy1946 says:

            towerflower, amongst the few things that I have learned down through my life is that you can not change the spots on a leopard and you can’t change the thought pattern of gun lover’s. IMO, your arguments are not based on reason, but instead on the passion you have about keeping your prized possessions (aka guns) and the right to kill that is inherent with such possessions. Your argument that cars kill is true on the surface, but if you consider the designed purpose of an auto is not to take a life (human or otherwise), and the sole purpose of a gun (by design) is the taking of life, then your points are invalid at best… I might suggest that if you folks who are madly in love with your iron lovers wish to keep them, that you start trying to come up with a reasonable compromise, before you force those that are able to reason without the need to kill, to resolve the problem in a way that you will not like… I might add, IMO the right to life has priority over any other right given in the Constitution… that right was here many thousands of years before this country was even thought of, and hopefully will be here many years after this county has ceased to exist…
            I will now go back to my silent mode before I offend too many more people. Have a good day…

          • towerflower says:

            crazy….I respect your opinion and not offended, just like I hope I didn’t offend you. I will always keep an open mind and read and think about the opinions of other.

            Just for the record, I own a firearm not because the Constitution says I can but because I enjoy the sport of target shooting. I have been involved in the sport since I was about 11. I don’t hunt but I respect the right of those that do enjoy to hunt. I also teach gun safety and marksmanship. I know that my opinion is not popular with many.

          • crazy1946 says:

            towerflower, Trust me, you have not offended me and I hope that the same can be said by you. We disagree on an important issue, however that does not mean that we can’t find common ground to resolve our differences. Actually in all honesty, it is unlikely that we could resolve the issue on our own, but that should not stop either one of us from stating their opinion. I was raised on a farm, and the use of weapons (22 rifle) was one of the ways we provided much needed food for the table, so I am not actually against the use of firearms as I am against the massive push that the NRA has used to attempt to arm each and every person in this nation. At some point something will have to be done to curtail this massive push to arms, and as I said earlier, it would be better for the people who feel the need to be armed to lead the way to change, that is if you actually wish to keep your guns… Have a great day, and now it is time for me to once again go back into my silent mode….

          • Yep, there is no reason why people cannot agree to disagree on some subjects while agreeing about other matters.

            That’s what mature adults do.

          • J4TMinATL says:

            Towerflower, I encourage you to read my comment at the end of the comments.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: