Tuesday, April 02, 2013

The Yin and Yang of gun laws in America. Connecticut introduces strictest gun laws in the nation while city in Georgia mandates everybody own one.

Courtesy of the AP:  

Connecticut lawmakers have announced a deal on what they called some of the toughest gun laws in the country that were proposed after the December mass shooting in the state, including a ban on new high-capacity ammunition magazines like the one in the massacre that left 20 children and six educators dead. 

The proposal also called for background checks for private gun sales and a new registry for existing magazines that carry 10 or more bullets, something of a compromise for parents of Newtown victims who had wanted an outright ban on them, while legislators had proposed grandfathering them into the law. 

The package also creates what lawmakers said is the nation's first statewide dangerous weapon offender registry, immediate universal background checks for all firearms sales and expansion of Connecticut's assault weapons ban. 

A new state-issued eligibility certificate would be needed to purchase any rifle, shotgun or ammunition under the legislation. To get the certificate, a buyer would need to be fingerprinted, take a firearms training course and undergo a national criminal background check and involuntary commitment or voluntary admission check. 

The deal is "the most comprehensive package in the country because of its breadth," said Senate Minority Leader John McKinney, a Fairfield Republican whose district includes Newtown.

Now, you see THAT is how to address the issue of gun violence in this country! Good for Connecticut!

However virtually the same time that Connecticut was leading the way on responsible gun ownership, a little town in Georgia seems adamant to encourage even MORE gun deaths.

This also from the AP: 

Backers of a newly adopted ordinance requiring gun ownership in a small north Georgia town acknowledge they were largely seeking to make a point about gun rights. 

The ordinance in the city of Nelson — population 1,300 — was approved Monday night and goes into effect in 10 days. However, it contains no penalties and exempts anyone who objects, convicted felons and those with certain mental and physical disabilities. 

City Councilman Duane Cronic, who sponsored the measure, said he knows the ordinance won't be enforced but he still believes it will make the town safer. 

Wait they aren't even going to enforce it? So what's the point?

Another purpose, according to the city council's agenda, is "opposition of any future attempt by the federal government to confiscate personal firearms." 

Aha, so essentially it is just a giant middle finger to the Obama administration.What a delightful use of the people's time and resources.

Of course in the meantime there will undoubtedly be residents of this town that will feel encouraged to purchase a weapon, some perhaps for the first time, so I am confident the town can looked forward to more reports of accidental shootings and incidents of domestic violence in the relatively near future.

And of course this attitude goes hand in hand with the recommendations coming today from the NRA's "School Shield Program: "

The National School Shield program would give schools the opportunity to designate certain personnel as licensed and trained firearm carriers. While many schools are deemed gun-free zones, Hutchinson made the case that arming school officials is one of the only ways to make sure teachers can protect their students in time. 

Yes because more guns in a school setting equals more safety for its students. Brilliant logic.

And people wonder why we need to pass comprehensive gun control laws.

21 comments:

  1. Anonymous2:36 PM

    it's all political posturing.

    however, I won't ever own a gun and here's why. I suffer from clinical deperession. I know what it feels like to be in such total despair that all I want to do is end the pain.

    These desperate times do pass and now I know that but I do believe I should never ever own a gun.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous3:50 PM

      I understand that. I'd be dead and gone many times over if I had had a gun during the deepest of my depressive episodes in search of relief from the horrific emotional/physical/spiritual/psychological pain and extreme brain chemical imbalance.

      Serotonin is a key 'feel good' chemical that your brain MUST have to function in a healthy way. It also is the chemical to do with the desire to survive. When you are depleted of your serotonin, you become less focused on survival and more focused on a desperate solution to stop the pain of the depression that hits.

      It's not that you WANT to die, or even kill yourself. It's that you just want the pain to stop and you are so far removed from who you are that it is difficult to see a reason to go on and if that becomes so intolerable, suicidal thoughts become utterly obsessive and a gun nearby would be a very, very, VERY bad idea...

      Delete
  2. No law can force me to own a gun. Not even if they are giving them away for free. Not even if they are paying me to take the gun. (Well, I might take it and then immediately turn around and sell it. )

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous3:44 PM

      What if one has a strong religious and/or philosophical belief in the sanctity of life? Does no one in this Georgian town believe that life is sacred, beyond birth that is?
      Beaglemom

      Delete
  3. Anonymous2:52 PM

    I was born in Connecticut and while I have lived all over the country including Alaska I'm back in Connecticut and proud to be a Nutmeger!

    Someone once suggested we be called Connecticuties but, at least in my case, simply not a good fit.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous2:58 PM

    Several Newtown parents waited for the Connecticut legislators before the vote and passed out photos of their slain children. The legislators were visibly shaken and many cried. I really think it helped pass the laws. Check out the article.

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-01/connecticut-lawmakers-said-to-reach-deal-to-curb-firearms.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous3:46 PM

      I think that all members of Congress should have to look at the morgue photos of the Newtown victims and listen to the head state pathologist who was in charge of the autopsies. All members.
      Beaglemom

      Delete
  5. Leland3:03 PM

    As I understand the NRA proposal, they are basically wanting to turn our schools essentially into prisons for the students. I mean, what else are you going to call it when there are armed guards, locked doors and high fences with razor wire on top?

    Really good learning environment.

    NOT!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anonymous3:15 PM

    I wonder if any of the proponents of this must buy a gun rule were also the ones screaming that Obamacare was unconstitutional because never before in the history of the world was anyone forced to buy anything just because they were alive and a member of society. FREEDUMB!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Anonymous3:31 PM

    Embarrassed to be from Georgia, AGAIN...

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anonymous3:56 PM

    O/T but GREAT NEWS!

    As Rachel Maddow Grows, Fox News Loses 34% of Their Young Viewers

    Fox News lost 34% of their young primetime viewers during the first quarter of 2013, but over at MSNBC, Rachel Maddow’s young viewership continues to grow.

    Fox News continues to be overall cable news ratings leader, but young people can’t seem to run from the network’s primetime lineup fast enough. According to TVNewser, “‘The O’Reilly Factor’ is flat in Total Viewers and down -26% in the demo. (Note: percentages are based on a blend of Live +7 and Live +3 data.) ‘Hannity’ is down -5% and -28%, while ‘On the Record” is down -13% and -35%, respectively.’” (This is once again a reminder of just how totally screwed Fox News would be without Bill O’Reilly. Bill-O is carrying Fox’s primetime lineup.)

    Over at MSNBC, the picture was quite different. If you want to know why Ed Schultz was pushed out of primetime, the answer can be found in the fact that The Ed Show was down 11% in total viewers, and 4% with viewers age 25-54. If you want to know where some of those younger viewers who have turned off Fox News have ended up, a good guess might be The Rachel Maddow Show. Despite being down 3% in total viewers, Madow is up 5% with viewers age 25-54. ”The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell” was up +2% total viewers and flat with younger viewers age 25-54.

    Younger viewers (as defined by the ratings as viewers age 25-54) aren’t into the Fox News style of broadcasting. They are more about the irony and quirkiness that can be found on both Maddow’s show and Jon Stewart’s The Daily Show. There is also a generational element to this shift as well. Bill O’Reilly is 63. Greta Van Susteren is 58. Sean Hannity is 51. Those Fox News anchors are too busy playing to their older audience to even bother with thinking about younger viewers.

    http://www.politicususa.com/rachel-maddow-grows-fox-news-loses-34-young-viewers.html

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anonymous3:57 PM

    Guns. To me they are only for people that need to hunt for their meals, otherwise, why bother?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Anonymous4:05 PM

    Banning high capacity semi autos which are rarely used in shootings or other crimes is equal to banning jet airliners for travel because when they do rarely crash a whole lot of people die at once. Statistically, jets are way safer than cars, and statistically semi auto rifles are the least likely weapon to kill someone. But people who are afraid of guns fixate on them because of fear, not facts. The same as a person who has a fear of flying won't board a jet, but will drive a car every day which is way more likely to kill them. But they FEEL safer in a car even tho they aren't.

    That's an example of why you shouldn't make decisions based on feelings.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous4:25 PM

      Airliners and Cars are both designed for peaceful useful purposes.

      Why can't you understand that the only purpose of a semi auto rifle with large capacity magazine is to kill a large number of people.

      If you own one I feel sorry for you.



      Delete
    2. Anonymous5:53 PM

      "That's an example of why you shouldn't make decisions based on feelings. "

      Got it in one. Let's go get drunk together before the tar and feathers folk arrive.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous7:47 PM

      @4:25

      Nope I don't own one. But banning them isn't going to end crime or murder or even lower the gun death rate.

      As for airlines and cars being designed for peaceful useful purposes, just remember, the road to Hell is paved with good intentions. High fructose corn syrup fits the peaceful useful purposes bill of sale, but it is the cause of more bad health than any substance besides cigarettes and alcohol. (two perfectly legal but deadly substances in their own right)

      And those peaceful useful planes? Also used to deliver more destruction and death than any piece of man made equipment in history. But wait until they ramp up the drone wars and that may change. Of course drones are just small useful planes technically.

      Delete
  11. Anonymous5:47 PM

    I will never support the invasion of privacy that is required to search one's medical history for instances of psychiatric hospitalization. Never. Seeking psychiatric treatment is the only pro-health decision that penalizes the individual and leads some people to believe that a psychiatric patient is by definition a threat even in the absence of any behavior to support that belief.

    Do all the gun control legislation you want, check my criminal background back to the day I was born. But hands off my medical history.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Anonymous6:29 PM

    ‘For Those Who Say I’m A Hypocrite…’ Jim Carrey Responds To Critics With Defiant Blog Post

    I Never Wanted to Take Your Guns Away

    I disagree wholeheartedly with those who say that there are just too many guns out there to control and that more gun laws won't make a difference. Change must start someplace. I'm pretty sure that no worthwhile endeavor has ever been accomplished without a beginning and reducing gun violence in America is a worthwhile endeavor.

    These mass shootings and daily body counts on your local news are terrible tragedies. The utter devastation that must be endured by the victims' families is unfathomable. These horrific events are also an invitation for us to become more civilized and to deal with our addiction and entitlement to violence. Not to shut our eyes and ears and scream at those with a different opinion than ours to "fuck off and go back to Canada." I will gladly go back and visit Canada as I have many friends and loved ones there. I am so proud of that country and everything it's given to me, but I am also a naturalized American citizen and I have been bringing as much joy as I can to people in this country for 30 years. I care deeply about our future and I feel it's my duty as a citizen to do everything in my power to make this a better place.

    For those who say I'm a hypocrite because I have an armed bodyguard, lets make one thing clear: No one in my employ is allowed to carry a large magazine and NO ONE IS ASKING ANYONE TO GIVE UP THEIR RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS, though it is in the vested interests of those who profit by gun sales to make it seem so. It's just the type of arms, the easy access and the means with which to cause massive devastation to good and innocent people that I hope we can limit. It's the quality of mercy, the tiniest spark of empathy that I know lives in every one of us that I wish to ignite in you.

    And to the bullies who will try to marginalize and discredit me by saying, "Shut up, you're just an actor," while they brag about what a great president the ACTOR Ronald Reagan was, who threaten me with the demise of my acting career and much worse, I say SO BE IT! How shallow do they think I am? I would trade my money, my fame, my reputation and legacy if there were the slightest chance of preventing the anguish of another Columbine, Virginia Tech, Aurora, or Sandy Hook Elementary School. I ask you, truly, what manner of human being would not?

    I have been aghast at the level of hatred heaped upon me, my family and the people I work with over a mere difference of opinion on this issue. Perhaps my words were a bit harsh at the onset, but calling someone a "Motherfucker" is far different than wishing them to die. It is shocking to see this concerted effort to brutally intimidate anyone who speaks of a compassionate compromise.

    These thugs, though menacing, are a minority but they will have their way if good people don't step forward now and make a difference. Every American has the right to speak their mind. Every American has the right to bear arms. But it is up to every American to draw the line when it comes to the type of guns that are considered a reasonable means of self-defense.

    No one is allowed to own a bazooka. In a movie theater an assault rifle with a 100-round drum magazine can cause just as much damage.

    So don't just sit there and do nothing. Contact your representatives and let them know that their jobs depend upon change. It won't always be someone else's kids in the line of fire.

    The time is now. LET YOUR HEART BE HEARD.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jim-carrey/the-quality-of-mercy-gun-control_b_3002001.html

    ReplyDelete
  13. Anita Winecooler7:25 PM

    Good for Connecticut, someone's got to set the right example. I don't mind having my background and medical records checked, I have nothing to hide and it's a minor inconvenience. We neer id to get allergy medication that used to be sold over the counter, and when we need to board a plane, we need to go through scanners, remove our shoes and a few lucky ones get patted down. Any regulation that protects or saves people is worth the inconvenience.

    ReplyDelete
  14. lwtjb7:28 PM

    OK, so suppose we follow the NRA and install guns in schools. Then suppose someone like the fellow in CT comes in shootiing. With me now? So when the trained school shooters start shooting at the intruding shooter, where are the children? In the middle of a fire fight? How does that make them safer? Seems like there will be more bullets flying rather than less.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Anonymous5:09 AM

    That's an immense responsibility that township is unprepared for. The liability is so great, it'd be a fiscal disaster with all the lawsuits, not to mention blood on their hands even if accidental discharges only result in flesh wounds.

    I hope the free hand of the market, (in the form of insurance and restitution) will bitch-slap these stupid assholes. Keep your guns, but don't force one on all of us.

    ReplyDelete

Don't feed the trolls!
It just goes directly to their thighs.