Is it safe?

Remember this line from the movie Marathon Man with Dustin Hoffman getting drilled?

Well, the answer is “No, it’s definitely not safe.”

I’m going to make this brief, because frankly, I feel as though I am preaching to the OffBeat choir.

Americans are not safe at concerts, festivals, shopping malls, schools or even church.

This country has been bamboozled and brainwashed by the weapons lobby into buying into the Second Amendment excuse for unfettered gun ownership and use. Please wake up, people. The NRA and its supporters exist solely to sell more weapons; it has nothing to do with the Second Amendment. It’s about money, pure and simple. And the weapons lobby donates to all of our gutless politicians. We’re getting drilled (and not in a good way!).

The massacre at a small country church that resulted in the cold-blooded murder of half the church’s congregation is just one in a long line of mass shootings in this country. No other country in the world even comes close to the violent gun deaths in the US.

It’s unacceptable. It’s ludicrous. It’s sickening.

You cannot blame it on a “mental health” issue. Remember the Las Vegas shooter? No apparent mental health issues there. At least none that anyone could perceive outwardly. But he had the weapons and the ammunition.

I am against gun ownership, and I can deal with people who hunt (certainly not my cup of tea), but any weapon that can shoot rapid-fire should be banned. This is to say nothing of the apparent cracks in the so-called safety system that allowed a mentally ill person to even possess a gun.

And those “stand your ground” laws in various states? Not acceptable.

We have stricter laws in the country regarding getting a drivers license than we do to own a gun.

What in the world is it going to take before we demand that this madness be stopped?

Until we can institute common-sense weapons and ammunition control, and make sure that enforcement has some teeth: the blood of innocents is on our hands.

  • Freodo

    Then it’s definitely not safe being treated by doctors in the United states. Doctors KILL over 100k of their patients a year by making mistakes. You won’t hear that though. Doesn’t fit the liberal agenda of NO GUNS for anyone but themselves. Whether you can understand this or not, guns do saves nearly 1 million people being used for self defense. Many times without a shot ever being fired. So enjoy your fantasy because that’s what it is. And look up rubber band and trigger and ban rubber bands too.

  • ramrodd

    The NRA has been selling out the American gun owner for over 100 years. They actively supported the NFA in 1934, the Gun Control Act in 1968 and the oppositely named Firearm Owners’ Protection Act of 1986 (FOPA) which removed the right of Americans to purchase new automatic or AOW weapons, a clear violation of the Second Amendment.

    All of this was done with the cooperation of the sellout Progressive owned and run Republican Party as well.

  • ramrodd

    There are over 370 “mental disorders” listed in the latest version of the DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders.) The list includes “Tobacco Addiction Disorder” among other equally mundane and ridiculous so-called “mental illnesses.”

    If the DSM is the standard by which politicians wishes to remove our rights to own guns, then I’d guess 90% of the American people could probably be classified with a mental disorder of one kind or another.


  • ramrodd

    Shall NOT Be Infringed

  • I completely agree with Jan.

    Guns owners are disrespectful of authority. A failure to rely on authorities is an invariable sign of improper and overly independent attitudes. The mere fact that they gather together to talk about guns at gun shops, gun shows, shooting ranges, and on the internet means that they have some plot going against us normal people. A gun owner has no right to associate with another gun owner.

    Therefore, to help ensure our right to happiness and safety we must ban and seize all guns from private hands, and forbid NRA-based criticism towards people who are only trying to help. Searching the homes of all NRA members for any guns and pro-gun literature will go a long way towards reducing crime.

    Common sense requires only uniformed soldiers, police, and other agents of the state have access to firearms, and think of all the money we can save by just taking away the guns from private owners and giving them to the military and police. No person should be able to challenge this by writing to Congress or the President. If they do they should be forced in court to admit to it and then fined a hundred million dollars for each time. Subjecting them to torture will probably change their minds.

    Making it mandatory that church ministers preach against guns or else they can’t get licensed will certainly encourage the church folk to have the correct belief about guns.

    We should hold a nation-wide vote against guns but gun-owners cannot be allowed to participate. They are too biased.

    People who don’t like all this prove they are on the side of the killers with the guns and should be put in jail along side all the gangbangers and other gun nuts. Letting them sit in jail for a few years before they are charged will give the government plenty of time to find something wrong in their lives. Anything they say, write, or express should be held against them to prove their guilt.

    We should bring all of them here to Chicago to be tried by Mayor Rahmfather as judge, and we should allow only mothers who have lost children to gunfire to be on the juries. Any attorney who tries to defend them should be arrested also. If we don’t get the right verdict the first time we can just keep trying them until we do.

    No woman needs to protect herself from rape, assault or murder and should just leave crime prevention to the Police who are properly equipped to investigate following the crime’s completion. Women using a gun in self-defense interferes with and makes the attempted crime a “non-event,” which unnecessarily complicates the Police investigation. Any woman who does this should be put in jail for interfering with an investigation.

    If someone still really, really thinks they have a need for a gun in their home for protection then the Army should just force them to host and feed some armed soldiers.

    Those who claim that the 2nd amendment was given to us because we might someday need guns to use against an oppressive government forget that our Constitution has strong internal safeguards to protect our freedoms. So there!

    Long live our Constitution!

  • jsmith5893

    Re: “the Second Amendment excuse… can deal with people who hunt”

    The Second Amendment is not about hunting, target shooting or home defense. Its purpose is clearly stated in the preamble to the Bill of Rights – specifically “The convention of a number of states having at the time of their adopting of the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse, of its powers that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added”. Note that when the Second Amendment was written, every weapon was a weapon of war, there were no restrictions on the private ownership of weapons and the militia was equally matched with the regulars. After all, if they weren’t equally matched, it would be pretty hard to deter or prevent a “misconstruction or abuse, of the government’s powers” – so in reality, the citizen militia of today should have the same firearms as the current US military. Unfortunately we are no longer equally matched because we have let our gun rights be eroded by buying into this notion if we just compromise to accommodate the people who – for whatever reason – don’t like guns they will quit trying to take away our gun rights. The problem is history has shown that no matter how much we compromise, it’s never enough so we need to stop compromising.

  • jsmith5893

    Re: ” We have stricter laws in the country regarding getting a drivers license than we do to own a gun”

    Not true. You don’t need a NICS background check to get a driver’s license and in some states you don’t even need to be an American citizen.

  • jsmith5893

    Re: ” common-sense”

    In 1934, 1938, 1968, 1986, 1988, 1990, 1993 and 1994 I suspect similar arguments were made for “common sense” when more restrictive gun laws were passed. Since all of the regulations derived from these laws are apparently not enough, maybe you can understand the reluctance of gun owners to entertain the idea of quietly accepting a new barrage. The problem is the real agenda of the people who are leading the charge for more gun control is to ban all guns except for the government and governments (unlike individuals) have the track record for killing people that don’t agree with them. The reality is implementing expanded background checks or banning semi-automatic rifles (like the AR) or standard capacity magazines has nothing to do with keeping the people safe – it’s about using a horrific crimes like Sandy Hook to whip lawmakers into an emotional frenzy to goad them into quickly advancing the agenda of gun control irrespective of any facts in more incremental “progressive” steps in order to set a new baseline and move the goal posts to the point where an unscrupulous government would have the option to do what ever they please.

  • jsmith5893

    Re: ” make sure that enforcement has some teeth”

    You could start by enforcing the laws already on the books and quit allowing people who use or possess a gun illegally to plea bargain away the illegal firearms offense. The feds are one of the worst offenders. Straw purchases and lying on the 4473 form you have to fill out for a background check to purchase a firearm is a felony punishable by 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine – yet in 2010 76142 people failed the background check, 4732 were deemed worthy of prosecution and only 62 were prosecuted. Another thing you could do since most of the gun homicides are caused by gangs or repeat offenders is to advocate for a law that would impose a mandatory death sentence on any recidivist with a violent criminal history that uses a firearm to commit a crime regardless of childhood upbringing, economic impoverishment, mental health, age, IQ, ethnicity, $ex or gender identity.

  • Frank Clarke

    Let me give you the Executive Summary of the thinking of most of America’s gun owners regarding the need for more gun control:

    No. In fact, “Oh Hell No”.

    Here’s why I say that:

    CT passed a draconian “assault weapon” registration law in 2013. By the deadline for registration, Jan 1, 2014, approximately 48,000 of the estimated 370,000 covered firearms (<15%) and 37,000 of the estimated 4 million "high capacity magazines" (<1%) had been registered.

    85% of heretofore-otherwise-law-abiding CT gun owners just gave CT the finger. If the state is going to make them felons, then by God they're going to be the very best felons anywhere.

    NYS did the same thing with the risibly misnamed NYSAFE Act and their compliance rate is thought to be under 10%.

    WA passed a law mandating universal background checks for all "transfers" (not just sales). Two months later a WA gun-owners organization held a widely-advertised "no BGC gun show" and broke the law on several thousand occasions with police standing there observing but making no arrests.

    The game is over; thank you for playing. No one can or will enforce these laws for fear of touching off a new civil war. And make no mistake: the next civil war will be a 4GW conflict. No ranks of soldiers firing at ranks of soldiers; the targets in 4GW are senators, cabinet members, CEOs, publishers, and support staff for all of those.

    I'm absolutely positive you don't want to go there. I know I don't.

  • jsmith5893

    Re: ” No other country in the world even comes close to the violent gun deaths in the US”

    Not true. There are 17 countries “in the world” that have higher firearm homicide rates per capita than the US. Even if you use the favorite anti-gun adjectives of “developed” or “industrialized” the US is still not number one.

  • jsmith5893

    Re: “You cannot blame it on a “mental health” issue…. but any weapon that can shoot rapid-fire should be banned”

    You can’t blame it on the “rapid-fire” gun either. The first semi-automatic handgun was invented in the late 1800’s and the most popular version went into production in 1911. It is also noted the so-called evil “assault rifles” with standard capacity 30 round magazines are not new technology. A harbinger was invented in 1890 and the current versions evolved and were mass produced in the late 1940’s and have always been available to the public (note the “47” in AK-47 stands for 1947, the year the firearm went into production). As a matter of fact fully automatic versions (i.e. machine guns), which are true military grade rifles, were readily available to the general public until 1986 and background checks on firearm transfers weren’t required until 1994 – yet nobody talks about mass shootings with any version (semi-automatic or automatic) of these guns during the 40’s, 50’s, 60’s, and 70’s so it’s a relatively new phenomenon and logic would indicate it’s being caused by something else.

    Note also that the worst mass killing in a US school occurred on May 18, 1927 in the Bath schoolhouse in Michigan where the killer used dynamite. And rather than immediately rush in an emotional tizzy to pass new laws to restrict the sale of dynamite, cooler heads prevailed and it took 43 years until October 15, 1970 when the law was changed. Up until that date anyone over 21 could walk into a hardware store or farm coop and buy dynamite and blasting caps

  • jsmith5893

    Re: “What in the world is it going to take before we demand that this madness be stopped?”

    According to the CDC in 2014 there were about 10945 people murdered by firearms in the US which works out to about 29 people per day. These are the “word doctored” figures the news media and anti-gun folks like to publicize because people relate to the magnitude of those numbers and it sounds like a lot of people until you realize this is out of a population of 320 million Americans. In that context, it works out to about 1 person out of every 29,000 people being murdered by a firearm. Dwell on the magnitude of your individual significance next time you are in a stadium with 29,000 people. To me, 1 in 29,000 is an acceptable cost to help ensure the security of a free state and the right to own a firearm that has harmed no one. It is also estimated there are 109 million gun owners in the US which means on any given day 108,999,971 gun owners didn’t kill anyone yet because the news media magnifies these relatively isolated and infrequent events to the level of an epidemic, the anti-gun folks answer is to take the guns away from people who harmed no one. The number of homicides with a firearm will never be zero. So given the fact that deranged individuals and murderers are an intrinsic part of the human race and we currently live in a free society, what number of illegal firearm homicides would ever be acceptable to you to the point you would say “we don’t need any more restrictions on the private ownership of firearms”?

  • Jonah Hirsh

    Question: Why should the 99.9% of us who aren’t violent criminals surrender our rights because of the acts of those who are?

    Answer: We shouldn’t, and we WON’T.

    Move on.

  • fsilber

    I blame it on people’s misguided notion that their guns don’t belong in holy places.