citylog
The E-
Edition:
CW
page
by page

Tumblr.jpg Google_Plus.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Home / Articles / News / Letters /  We Want Gun Control
Letters

We Want Gun Control

By City Weekly Readers
Posted // September 4,2013 -

It is a shame when the will of the American public is so clearly and brazenly thwarted, as in the case of the recent failure of the U.S. Senate to enact even modest—and overwhelmingly popular—expansion of background checks for gun purchases.

A ban on assault rifles, and large clip magazines like those used at the Newton, Conn., elementary school and the Aurora, Colo., movie theater mass killings was not even brought up for a vote, although these measures also have a large majority of public support. While a majority of the Senate actually voted for the background extension, because of an arbitrary rule, a 60-vote majority vote was required to pass it.

It is important to note that the vast majority of Americans support responsible limits to gun ownership, such as those previously mentioned. But the will of the NRA has overruled the will of the American people.

The problem is that the pro-gun lobby, led by the NRA, is well-funded, very vocal and maintains a strong and active lobbying presence in Washington, D.C. Senators and congressmen from most states know that if they back even moderate, common-sense gun reform, the NRA’s vast wealth, its bully pulpit of scare propaganda and hard-nosed lobbying will be used against them in the next election.

The majority of these representatives are willing to vote against the will of the majority of their constituents because they know that the silent majority is not well organized, not well funded and not actively lobbying for these common-sense solutions. But this is starting to change, thanks to the active lobbying efforts of relatives of the Newtown massacre and other awakened and outraged citizens.

The solution is for this majority to get more organized and more active in their lobbying efforts for reasonable gun reforms, such as those recommended by the current administration. And if our elected representatives don’t represent our stand on this issue, we need to elect ones who will.

Only then will the will of the people and common sense prevail.

WILLIAM E. FISHER
Salt Lake City

 
  • Currently 3.5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Post a comment
REPLY TO THIS COMMENT
Posted // September 5,2013 at 06:05

William,

pretty much everything you say is either wrong, biased, or an outright lie.  

The 'will of the public' was vindicated, not thwarted when the Senate voted down the pointless and stupid gun control bills before it this spring.  

In fact the margin of constituent calls and letters against these bills was 100-1 in many cases.  

It was the Democrats who ignored their constituents voices and instead blindly followed the administration's lead that you should be railing agsinst.  

Also, the 'vast majority' of America does NOT support new gun control laws.

Those 'studies' that show 80%, 90% support were funded by the gun control lobby simply to give them a talking point.  

Real polling companies like Gallup and Pew have found the country split right at 50/50, with half wanting more gun control laws and the rest wantig less.  

If you ever hear something higher than that 50%, you know for a fact you are being lied to or manipulated.  

You talk about the 'vast wealth' of the NRA. Sorry, but that doesn't fly.  

The NRA spent about $4 million in lobbying in all of 2012. Billionare Micheal Bloomberg spent $12 million just in April, supporting the Senate bills.  

In fact Bloomberg alone could fund the NRA's entire $200 million annual budget out of his own pocket for the next 125 years.  

And Bloomberg isn't the only billionare they depend on.  

The reason the NRA is effective is that they are a true, grassroots organization with more than 5 million members.  

NRA members elect officers directly, and as such the NRA's goals directly reflect their own.  

And for every member there are 10 others who feel the same way, but are not members yet.  

Finally, the bills themselves.  

You are pushing for so-called 'expanded background checks'.

What those bills really do though is elimiate private transfers of firearms to friends, family and aquantanices.  

This is no different than saying that anytime you sell a used car, you have to both go through the DMV.  

It's a ridiculous and perilous intrusion by the government on the private property rights of all US citizens.  

As for it's effectiveness, the Dept. of Justice reported in Fabuary that private transfers accounted for less than 4% of all firearms used in crimes.  

In other words, you would destroy the concept of private property in America in an attempt to reduce illegal firearms by, at most, 3. 8%.

Talk about throwing the baby out with the bathwater.  

Add in the fact that the administration even admits that the only way these 'expanded' checks would work would be in conjunction with mandatory registration, and you can see the gun control lobby's true reason for pushing these laws.  

Finally, you frequently use the phrase 'common sense'. I don't think you really understand what it means though.  

There is no scientific, peer-reviewed studies that support any gun control proposal. There is no peer-reviewed data, no verifiable evidence of effectiveness.  

The gun control industry uses the terms 'reasonable' and 'common sense' like paint, to cover over their flawed logic and fallicies.  

It's common sense that criminals, by definition, will ignore laws that get in their way.

Yet they say 'common sense' is to pass laws that turn otherwise law abiding citizens into criminals.  

It's reasonable to expect that an armed victim would deter a potential attacker.  

Yet they say 'reasonable' people should never be able to resist, and should instead ask their attacker to wait while they call 911 and wait for the police.  

Gun control at it's core is neither reasonable nor common sense.  

It is a political agenda driven from the top through astroturf groups.

It has nothing to do with public safety, and everything to do with controlling the populace and government itself.  

 

 

 

REPLY TO THIS COMMENT
Posted // September 4,2013 at 22:50

\

Gun control failed because 90% of the people do not want it. It is not the NRA that stoppped it. Sure we did our part, but even more non NRA members stepped up.  

\

You are simply out numbered.

\

 

 

REPLY TO THIS COMMENT
Posted // September 4,2013 at 21:49

To a non-gun owner "common sense" is an oversimplified misnomer that fails to adress the key issues.  

The esiest one to point out is the idea of banning "assault weapons". The author had used the term "assault rifle" though you may find it pedantic, they define two very different kinds of guns.

Assault Rifles are banned more or less by cost prohibitation. As you can own a machine gun legally, but the cost involved is beyond the means of even most middle class incomes.

The proposed ban on "Assault weapons" was not banning any guns by how fast they could fire, or the power of the bullet. It would characterize a gun an "assault weapon" by the addition of certain features. Like, a pistol grip, an adjustable or folding stock, or specific muzzle shapes. None of these would effect the shooting function of the weapons. Meaning you could have a gun that fires as fast as an AR-15, fires the same bullet as an AR-15, so long as it had a traditional rifle stock. So, same bullets, same speed. What have you banned? At that point you are banning a symbol. Making legislation on the way you hold a rifle is not what I would call "common sense" 

Then backgournd checks. .  

Seems like a great idea, but we have had a very neglected background check system on the books for over 20 years. With enforcement currently being spotty at best, how do we expect that we can enforce this with transfers happening in private homes? Meaning we ether up enforcement to the point that feds are knocking door to door, or we have a whole new host of laws that make something already illegal, slightly more illegal. As selling a gun to someone who can't legally buy one is already a crime. Not to mention that I don't agree to bills I cannot review. Several amendments to the background check bill where made in the closing hours that where not up for public review. So, how can I agree to something I am not allowed to read first? How is that common sense? 

I do not honestly think that over 50% of all US residence support the current adaptations of the proposed bills. I feel that the polling data is vague. As if I was asked "do you support background checks" is a very different question than "do you support the current background check bill in congress". Post Sandy hook, most people where emotional, and impulsive. A simple question like "should criminals be allowed to buy guns" would clearly be answered with a "no". This does not reflect the attitude of the majority regarding a specific piece of legislation, this simply represents curtailed emotions to represent cherry picked data.  

Not to say the the majority should be allowed to vote the rights of the minority away. The right to own a gun is a civil right. Anything that could regulate, or manage that right needs serious scrutiny. As rights are simply not subject to popular vote. The idea of having a bill of rights was to make sure the government would not interfere with those rights. Legislation by mob sure is not the common sense people keep trying to sell you on.  

 

REPLY TO THIS COMMENT
Posted // September 4,2013 at 20:57

Thank you for your words and courage William!   

 

 
 
Close
Close
Close