Quote:
Originally Posted by techweenie
Jeff, I don't lump you with the 'gun nuts.' And I'm a gun owner myself. I'm disgusted by just about everything the NRA does, as well as the comments of the apologists for the 'gun nuts,' one of which I heard on the radio not more than 60 minutes ago on our local loony right station. They were all excited that the state AG is confiscating people's guns -- after they are convicted as felons.
Sorry, the position that everyone should be armed is ludicrous. The notion that we should tolerate the highest rate of murder in the 'civilized' world is ludicrous.
My position is that what we have now isn't working.
One more thing: as to enforcing existing laws, that's what was happening with the Chicago area gun shop that a huge number of crimes were tracked back to. But gun groups protested the enforcement of those laws, and in the discussion here, so did the 'gun nuts.'
|
Agreed on all points. What we are doing today certainly is not working. You are spot on concerning our murder rates; we are not just a percentage or two higher than the norm, we are factors higher. I see those murder rates as the perverbial "canary in the mineshaft", clearly indicating very deeply rooted social ills. A "root cause analysis" of those ills does not lead me to guns, however.
Unfortunatley it leads some to guns, but I think they arrive there dishonestly. I think they have an innate fear of guns, a desire to succeed politically, and are cynical enough to understand others share their fear and will support them if the "do something" about the problem. While a wholly inneffective approach, it remains a very visible approach, sure to garner support in the target circles. Throw the evil NRA in there as the poster child for everything that is wrong with gun ownership, and the money just comes a'rollin' on in.
I'm a life member in the NRA. That does not mean I agree with everything they do. The Chicago case was an embarrasment. On the one hand, the NRA is one of the most strident supporters of punishing (and severely) those who abuse their gun rights. On the other, they have their own villains that are sure to whip members up into a frenzy; the BATF and liberals. At times, like in Chicago, the NRA goes to far in its "no quarter" approach. They prefer to err on the side of the evil, over-zealous BATF persecuting "innocent" gun dealers/owners in some evil liberal wrought master plan to dissarm all of us. It gets
their donations a'rollin'.
Obviously, I support the NRA and its approach as a whole. They do champion
effective law, such as "three stikes you're out", mandatory additional sentencing with no parole for gun crime, etc. These have proven to work in the jurisdictions in which they have been enacted. Layer upon layer of additional gun law has not. We have several decades of data on which to draw to base those conclusions, and they are inescapable. The one approach - tougher enforcement and punishment - begins to dig to the root cause. It has a long ways to go, granted, but at least it's showing demonstratable results. The other approach has not.