Slugger O'Toole

Conversation, politics and stray insights

US Gun Control or why policy detail matters…

Thu 31 January 2013, 9:49am

P O’Neill with a great spot off Cspan on the gun control debate. It’s a snippet from the Senate Judiciary Committee:

O’Neill comments:

Senator Ted Cruz, Republican of Texas, thinks he has scored a massive point by showing that the Washington DC murder rate went up in the years after a gun ban was introduced. The Baltimore police chief Jim Johnson — an actual law enforcement official — points out that Northeastern cities experiencing this phenomenon were being swamped by unlicensed guns flooding in from outside.

It’s precisely in these is small ticket policy detail that the US may grind forward to finding some solution to the gun proliferation problem…

Share 'US Gun Control or why policy detail matters…' on Delicious Share 'US Gun Control or why policy detail matters…' on Digg Share 'US Gun Control or why policy detail matters…' on Facebook Share 'US Gun Control or why policy detail matters…' on Google+ Share 'US Gun Control or why policy detail matters…' on LinkedIn Share 'US Gun Control or why policy detail matters…' on Pinterest Share 'US Gun Control or why policy detail matters…' on reddit Share 'US Gun Control or why policy detail matters…' on StumbleUpon Share 'US Gun Control or why policy detail matters…' on Twitter Share 'US Gun Control or why policy detail matters…' on Add to Bookmarks Share 'US Gun Control or why policy detail matters…' on Email Share 'US Gun Control or why policy detail matters…' on Print Friendly

Comments (12)

  1. Kevsterino (profile) says:

    We haven’t agree what the problem is, Mick, and there lies the problem.

    What do you think?
    (Log in or register to judge or mark as offensive)
    Commend 0
  2. Kevsterino (profile) says:

    *agreed* damn my clumsy fingers!

    What do you think?
    (Log in or register to judge or mark as offensive)
    Commend 0
  3. tmitch57 (profile) says:

    Sen. Cruz, like many other members of Congress from both parties, is an ally of the National Rifle Association, which is today primarily a lobby representing gun manufacturers rather than hunters, target shooters, and other law-abiding gun owners. The measures being proposed by the Obama administration will not solve the problem of gun violence in America, but they will reduce it without intruding on the legitimate rights of law-abiding citizens. They will, however, cut into the profits of gun manufacturers who depend on legal sales at gun shows without background checks that end up in the hands of criminals. The NRA likes to pretend that these are all hobbyists. The NRA also likes to pretend that the definition of assault rifles is all a matter of “cosmetics” and appearance ignoring that these rifles are simply non-automatic civilian versions of assault rifles and that in the military lots of time is spent in training on single-shot firing at ranges and at rapid magazine changes and not at firing rifles on automatic.

    What do you think?
    (Log in or register to judge or mark as offensive)
    Commend 0
  4. Kevsterino (profile) says:

    One idea an old friend brought up last weekend would be very simple, wouldn’t cost much and leaves the 2nd Amendment intact. Put a trigger lock in the box with every gun. That would at least mitigate the problem of careless gun storage.

    As far as the whole “Assault Rifle” thing goes, too many people flapping their gums with no knowledge of how these things work.

    What do you think?
    (Log in or register to judge or mark as offensive)
    Commend 0
  5. Kevsterino,

    I remember a couple of years ago a US gun manufacturer said that they would be producing a gun which would have a fingerprint reading device of the trigger so that only a licensed owner could fire it. Did that ever happen?

    What do you think?
    (Log in or register to judge or mark as offensive)
    Commend 0
  6. Kevsterino (profile) says:

    Hey Joe (apologies to Jimi Hendrix),
    I don’t remember that idea coming from a manufacturer, but I do remember the idea. I think the key would be to keep the expense down, so as to enhance the chance it would be accepted. So far, I haven’t seen any guns with this feature. Last I heard, biometric stuff is pretty costly.

    What do you think?
    (Log in or register to judge or mark as offensive)
    Commend 0
  7. Greenflag (profile) says:

    tmitch57 ,

    ‘They will, however, cut into the profits of gun manufacturers who depend on legal sales at gun shows without background checks ‘

    And that’s all that matters for the NRA .Lesser profits for gun manufacturers means smaller donations for the NRA .

    It’s not about the Second Amendment and never was .

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/15/mark-kelly-gun-control_n_2479650.html?utm_hp_ref=gabrielle-giffords

    Gabrielle Giffords put it simply yesterday at the Senate hearing.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/30/gabrielle-giffords-notes-_n_2583873.html?utm_hp_ref=gabrielle-giffords

    What do you think?
    (Log in or register to judge or mark as offensive)
    Commend 0
  8. Mick Fealty (profile) says:

    Kev, what would you say the problem is?

    What do you think?
    (Log in or register to judge or mark as offensive)
    Commend 0
  9. Kevsterino (profile) says:

    Locking up people who use guns commit crimes would be a step most Americans would agree with. I would also favor locking them up if they don’t safeguard their firearms, but I don’t think enough education has been tried at this stage for that step.

    We need the NRA crazies to get out of the way before we can get anything reasonable passed. Demanding people behave responsibly with regard to firearms does no harm to 2nd Amendment rights.

    What do you think?
    (Log in or register to judge or mark as offensive)
    Commend 0
  10. Kevsterino (profile) says:

    The NRA takes much upon themselves, acting as if they spoke for every gun owner and gun carrier in the US. They don’t speak for me, and I am licensed in both regards.

    Mick, we have people who own very powerful guns who haven’t a clue how to safely fire them, store them and carry them. And there are millions of them. When you buy a car, you have to prove you can operate the thing competently within the law. Guns are at least as dangerous, but I know of no state that requires people to prove their proficiency with a gun. Stupid!

    What do you think?
    (Log in or register to judge or mark as offensive)
    Commend 0
  11. pauluk (profile) says:

    Mr Joe, James Bond got himself one of those!

    What do you think?
    (Log in or register to judge or mark as offensive)
    Commend 0
  12. Kevsterino (profile) says:

    Or “The Law Giver” from Judge Dredd

    What do you think?
    (Log in or register to judge or mark as offensive)
    Commend 0

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Copyright © 2003 - 2014 Slugger O'Toole Ltd. All rights reserved.
Powered by WordPress; produced by Puffbox.
69 queries. 0.375 seconds.