To People Calling For More Gun Control In The Wake of The Tragic Arizona Shootings

Being that I'm a left wing, liberal, democratic party district leader, labor and human rights activist, folks are often surprised, and taken aback by my staunch support of the 2nd Amendment

My good friend Josh, an ardent supporter of gun control, wrote me in response to the recent tragic shootings in Arizona

"Don’t you agree it’s too easy for too many people to get guns who shouldn't’t have them?  Not to mention the Mexican drug cartels, who get their guns here."

I replied: Yes, unfortunately, there are no gun control laws nor regulations in Arizona. If they had the New York, or even the way less stringent than N.Y., Florida statutes, the shooter there would not have been able to legally purchase a firearm because the Army judged him to be medically unfit due to mental deficiency when he tried to enlist.

I'm not against gun control laws that keep felons and the mentally ill from legally purchasing guns. Arizona clearly needs some.

I'm against making laws that restrict law abiding citizens from arming for protection, hunting, collecting, and shooting sports. I'm also against making laws and then not enforcing them.

There should be a national statute that requires the same hands-on firearm safety and shooting classes, proof of safe firearm storage, and strict enforcement of serious penalties for committing a crime while armed, nationwide.

Josh wrote back: "That’s really odd – I completely agree with you.  Has one of us changed our thinking?  Anyway, please, in your spare time, tell the NRA to wise up and back a law as you describe."

I Responded: Both the NRA and I have always felt, said, and supported this position.

The NRA has asked Congress time and again to create national legislation that protects the right to bear arms for protection, hunting, collecting, and shooting sports, while requiring gun safety training and prevention of felons and the mentally unfit from owning firearms.

We continue to support increased penalties for misuse of firearms and mandatory prison time for the use of guns in the commission of a crime.

Nothing new here.

Josh replied: "There’s a disconnect somewhere. If it were that simple it would have been done."

I responded: Joshola my friend, it is the same disconnect that lies behind most problems:

Money, Money, Money.

The people with the money that run the world want to keep it. So, rather than actually solve problems, at great expense, they only need to seem to solve problems to keep their puppets in power. Perception is reality after all

If we want to actually stop gun violence and really want to reduce crime, in New York for example, we need to enforce the current laws that provide stiff jail terms for illegal gun possession and use.

Of course,if we did that, we would also have to build more jails, court houses, and schools; hire more prison guards, social workers, public defenders, district attorneys, judges, police, and teachers, etc. We would have to provide funding for education and rehabilitation, create job opportunities, and more.

This costs big dollars, which would require raising taxes. In the midst of this huge economic crisis, the wealthy and powerful forced us to pass a tax cut for the same rich and powerful people who provide both the democrats and republicans with the cash to run for office.

The powers that be are clearly not interested is paying the price required to really reduce crime.

So, rather than wanting to actually solve problems like crime and gun violence by both punishing criminals and reducing societal causes of crime, like hunger, ignorance, racism, unemployment, etc, it is far more cost effective for them to have their bought and paid for law makers pass crime bills and gun control laws that have no chance of actually reducing crime, gun related or otherwise.

It is, in fact, that simple

Bob D

An interesting letter in Shooter Magazine this week, from which I quote: "If you consider that there has been an average of 160,000 troops in the Iraq Theater of operations during the past 22 months, and a total of 2112 deaths, that gives a firearm death rate of 60 per 100,000 soldiers."

The firearm related death rate in Washington, D.C. is 80.6 per 100,000 for the same period."

"This means you are about 25 percent more likely to be shot and killed in the U.S. Capital, which has some of the strictest gun control laws in the World, than you are in Iraq."

Conclusion: The U.S. should consider pulling out of Washington, D.C