Time to Admit the "Gun Nuts" are Right - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 08-08-2007, 07:55 PM   #1
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
the iron horse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: in a glass of CheerWine
Posts: 3,251
Local Time: 05:08 PM
Time to Admit the "Gun Nuts" are Right

Time to admit the 'gun nuts' are right
By Keith C. Burris

Editorial page editor of the Journal Inquirer
Journal Inquirer
North-Central Connecticut's Hometown paper
August 3, 2007

<http://www.journalinquirer.com/site/...d=569380&rfi=8>http://www.journalinquirer.com/site/...d=569380&rfi=8



In the aftermath of the Petit family slayings in Cheshire, we all
reached for explanations: How do human beings sink this low? How could
this tragedy have been prevented? Why?

There are so many nagging questions. They all need to be asked. And
maybe some old arguments need to be hashed out again.

Why not a more stringent "three strikes and you're out" law in this
state? Connecticut's version is so weak that it's more like "30 strikes
and we'll think about it while you strike again."

Why not speed up the criminal trial process for repeat violent
offenders? Get them off the streets. It's been proposed many times. Most
people agree it should be done. It never happens.

Can't we better monitor the probation process?

Can't we do a better job of predicting -- figuring out which non-violent
criminals are about to turn violent?

Are home alarms really effective?

How about dogs?

But somehow all of these ideas pale before the barbarity of this
particular crime.

That is why one old question is worth asking again. It is this: What if
the Second Amendment is for real? Is it possible that it should be
revered, just like the First Amendment?

Sam Ervin said, "The Constitution should be taken like mountain whiskey
-- undiluted and untaxed." Maybe that applies to all of the Constitution.

Is it possible that the Second Amendment is not a quaint and antiquated
remnant of a world that will never return, but an idea as relevant and
sound today as when it was written?

Is it possible that we are not talking about the right of the government
to form a militia when there is no standing army, but the right of the
individual to defend himself, or herself, against both tyranny and
lawlessness? Maybe we are talking about the right of self-defense -- the
right of the individual to take up arms against a government that wants
to oppress, be it foreign or domestic. And the right of the individual
to defend himself against criminals, brutes, and barbarians when local
police seem unable to stop them.

Might the Second Amendment matter almost as much as the First?

I think the answer is yes.

And just like the First, the Second is practical, newly relevant, and
far wiser than the watered-down alternatives.

I don't think George Bush wants to impose martial law on his fellow
citizens. But he has diluted habeas corpus. And he has enlarged Big
Brother. You have to stop and think about a government that wants to
control the thoughts and behavior of its people.

Should such a government be permitted to disarm them as well?

And whereas the reform of the criminal justice system along some of the
lines suggested above (a real "three strikes" law and faster trials for
violent offenders) would not have saved the lives of Jennifer, and
Hayley, and Michaela Petit, a gun might have.

I don't say it would have.

I say it might have.

Had Dr. William Petit had access to a gun and known how to use it, he
might have been able to dispatch the two perpetrators, who were armed
with only an air gun and ropes.

Moreover, the three victims here were women.

What if Mrs. Hawke-Petit had been trained in the use of firearms?
Suppose she had been able to get to a gun after her husband was beaten
into unconsciousness by the invaders? Or when she was forced to take one
captor to the bank to fetch him money?

It's worth thinking about.

Women and children are now the major targets of predators in our
society. Government is not protecting them very well. Many professional
women who work in cities know this and take courses in self-defense. A
gun may be the only realistic self-defense against the sort of criminals
we are talking about here.

And if a few women took care of a few thugs in cases like this; if a few
stories like this one ended in a different way -- with a woman blowing
one of these brutes to kingdom come -- it might be a deterrent. Lives
upon lives might be spared.

A friend of mine said: "The gun nuts are back."

They are.

And they are right.

Mind you, we are talking about arming people who are trained and know
how to use a weapon.

No one should have a gun who has not been trained.

Just as one gets training in handling a boat, motorcycle, or car, one
must learn how to use and safely store a gun. (The National Rifle
Association maintains an extensive national network of programs in
firearms training and education.)

And, obviously, no one would be forced to own a gun.

A second caveat: Encouraging citizens to arm themselves is no "answer"
to crimes like the Petit murders.

An "answer" does not exist.

But it is one of several remedies when we are faced with palpable evil.

All possible remedies should be on the table:

-- Various reforms of the justice system, like a real three-strike-law
for predatory offenders.

-- Better psychological treatment for troubled youth.

-- Religious training, in both love and self-restraint, especially when
people are young.

-- Prison programs that both retain the hard core and educate the educable.

-- More and better home alarm systems.

-- More cops visible in more neighborhoods.

-- Dobermans.

All of these approaches have merit.

So does self-defense.

None of these options "fix" a society that can produce human beings who
torture and kill the defenseless for sport.

No one step or program can plug every hole in America's justice system,
or its soul.

But there are times when a gun in the hands of a potential victim may
save a life.

Let's admit -- since the murderers, and druggies, and psychos, and
thieves already have guns -- that arming the peaceful, law-abiding,
decent, and productive people, whether in a school, or a private home,
or on the way to a parked car, is an option that also has merit.
__________________

__________________
the iron horse is offline  
Old 08-08-2007, 08:34 PM   #2
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,662
Local Time: 04:08 PM
Keith needs to learn how to write.

Isn't this the same exact argument we hear over and over from the pro-gun side? I see nothing new. I see the same exact tunnel vision logic and misinformation.
__________________

__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 08-08-2007, 10:43 PM   #3
Blue Crack Addict
 
unico's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Rage Ave.
Posts: 18,747
Local Time: 05:08 PM
are you fucking kidding me? how about asking "how is it that murderers, druggies, psychos and thieves" are able to get guns anyway?
__________________
unico is offline  
Old 08-08-2007, 11:07 PM   #4
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,662
Local Time: 04:08 PM
No, no, no we don't try and FIX problems we just punish and feed the problems. It's the American way.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 08-08-2007, 11:27 PM   #5
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,277
Local Time: 05:08 PM
I want to live in a world where every man, woman and child is armed. I know I'd feel a hell of a lot safer if everyone around me was packing. Especially people who can't aim all that well.
__________________
anitram is online now  
Old 08-09-2007, 12:00 AM   #6
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,334
Local Time: 02:08 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by anitram
I know I'd feel a hell of a lot safer if everyone around me was packing. Especially people who can't aim all that well.
Or those who dislike you because of the color of your skin, the church in which your worship, who you've chosen to marry, etc.
__________________
martha is offline  
Old 08-09-2007, 05:57 AM   #7
LJT
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
LJT's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Belfast
Posts: 5,039
Local Time: 11:08 PM
The Sunday Times Magazine here had a feature with a photographer who had photographed ordinary American families with their guns...it disturbed me a bit to see teenagers holding shotguns, or a young 20 odd year old displaying his personal selection of 17 weapons or whatever it was...how many guns do you require for self defence?

Why is the constitution to be so revered along with the founding fathers? Great and worthy ambitions and ideals...it does not mean they are inerrant...
__________________
LJT is offline  
Old 08-09-2007, 07:27 AM   #8
Jesus Online
 
Angela Harlem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: a glass castle
Posts: 30,163
Local Time: 09:08 AM
Fuck that. Honestly.
__________________
<a href=http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v196/angelaharlem/thPaul_Roos28.jpg target=_blank>http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...aul_Roos28.jpg</a>
Angela Harlem is offline  
Old 08-09-2007, 07:53 AM   #9
LJT
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
LJT's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Belfast
Posts: 5,039
Local Time: 11:08 PM
Quote:
-- Religious training, in both love and self-restraint, especially when
people are young.
Like that is going to work...religion won't solve gun crime...it must be all those atheists committing the crimes.
__________________
LJT is offline  
Old 08-09-2007, 09:34 AM   #10
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,334
Local Time: 02:08 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by LJT

Why is the constitution to be so revered along with the founding fathers? Great and worthy ambitions and ideals...it does not mean they are inerrant...
Many of the same families who worship that part of the Constitution have no problem allowing their government to completely ignore the rest of it.
__________________
martha is offline  
Old 08-09-2007, 09:40 AM   #11
Refugee
 
toscano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,032
Local Time: 03:08 PM
The argument I always hear is about registering guns somehow taking away a civil liberty.

Yet, these same goons will happily get themselves photographed, printed, prove they are competent, and undergo a check in order to own another dangerous weapon. Their car. Makes no sense to me, just prove you are competent to use it, be willing to register it/them, undergo a check to make sure you haven't abused owning it, etc and you can own as many guns as you want for all I care.

Eliminating the right to own a gun is an answer much the same way prohibition wsa an answer to alcohol abuse
__________________
toscano is offline  
Old 08-09-2007, 10:48 AM   #12
Blue Crack Addict
 
Varitek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: on borderland we run
Posts: 16,861
Local Time: 05:08 PM
So if he wants women and children, who are apparently increasingly vulnerable to crime, to all have guns and be trained to use them, what does he propose? A government sponsored gun-ed program in schools to teach our little girls and boys proper safety techniques? Without the focus on abstinence, of course.
__________________
Varitek is offline  
Old 08-09-2007, 10:52 AM   #13
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Vincent Vega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Berlin
Posts: 6,615
Local Time: 11:08 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by LJT


Like that is going to work...religion won't solve gun crime...it must be all those atheists committing the crimes.
Or they make religious people comitting crimes, like the father who shot his 19-year old son because he wasn't religous enough.
__________________
Vincent Vega is offline  
Old 08-09-2007, 11:00 AM   #14
Blue Crack Addict
 
joyfulgirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 16,615
Local Time: 03:08 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Vincent Vega


Or they make religious people comitting crimes, like the father who shot his 19-year old son because he wasn't religous enough.
and the minister's wife who shot her husband because he was allegedly abusive when he wasn't preaching the gospel of Jesus
__________________
joyfulgirl is offline  
Old 08-09-2007, 11:22 AM   #15
Blue Crack Supplier
 
elevated_u2_fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: I'm here 'cus I don't want to go home
Posts: 31,692
Local Time: 05:08 PM
The NRA relies on three basic selling points which they lobby from every possible angle:

1- The right to bare arms. The constitution says I am allowed to own 57 firearms so I am going to, no matter the cost.

2- Hunting. I have to provide for my family by eviscerating a squirrel with an Uzi.

3- Fear. There is a chance a maniac could break into your house and torture and kill you and your family. Or what if there is a terrorist attack or we are invaded by an enemy force? You had better protect yourself with a stockpile of guns and ammo.

Fear has always and will always be the biggest motivation for "regular people" to own firearms.
__________________

__________________
elevated_u2_fan is online now  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:08 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com