0

Squawk of the day - Dec. 20, 2012

"Every American school needs armed security guards and teachers with carry permits. More gun control laws and gun bans will not prevent school shootings. Have drug laws and bans made illegal drugs unobtainable? Did Prohibition in the 1920s make alcohol unavailable?"

For more squawks, pick up a copy of today's Albany Herald.

To submit a squawk, Click here.

Comments

Sister_Ruby 1 year, 4 months ago

Squawker, you state the obvious lessons of 200 years of history. But half of the populace is not intelligent enough to realize that what you say is true beyond questioning.

4

Sherwood_Eagle_Alum 1 year, 4 months ago

No one thinks that gun control will prevent all gun-related crime. It is hypothesized that it will reduce gun-related crime and violent crime in general. The U.S. has one of the highest gun-related crimes per capita for any civilized country, and that is completely unacceptable. This stat no doubt is why the U.S. is also in the top 10 countries in overall crime per capita.

Easily available guns make it easier than it needs to be to commit a violent crime. It takes a different kind of criminal to use an object like a knife to commit a crime. It takes a different kind of individual to plan and implement explosives into their crime. A gun is easy to use and is not "up close and personal."

How many kids die from accidentally stabbing themselves or a friend to death with a knife? How many accidental deaths happen from explosives? Now how many accidental gun deaths happen?

I'm not sure why I am taking the time to type this out since most people on this site will not read or try to comprehend the content of what I am saying. Those individuals being the ones who believe it is their God-given right to own as many guns that they can amass no matter how irresponsible their hobby is.

1

rightasrain 1 year, 4 months ago

Sounds like something BiteMe would say.

0

terihdfxr1 1 year, 4 months ago

I agree with you 100%. I am a gun owner myself, and I believe in the right to bear arms. With that being said I firmly believe we need to ban all military style assault weapons from normal citizens. I realize criminals can get their hands on them but why make it easier for them? Furthermore I’m am disgusted at the responses I get from folks about it’s my rights to be able to own one, They attend that they are just enthusiast and it’s a hobby. So let me ask you this question. Is your Hobby or enthusiasm worth more than potentially saving a child’s, or other human beings life? That’s what you are saying when you use this excuse. The police trying to protect us do not use these weapons in everyday situations, yet the criminals they encounter have them. They aren’t purchasing them with their legal licenses; they are stealing them from people who purchased legally.

0

USTPC 1 year, 4 months ago

The problem with this argument is that part of the 2nd amendment is our ability to defend ourselves against a tyrannical government. That is pretty tough to do when as citizens all that is available to us is single shot weapons vs the governments 100-200-300 shot weapons. Instead of more gun control or outlawing AK47 or AR15 rifles how about we eliminate gun free zones, arm and train our citizens, and actually enforce the laws we have on the books?

1

Sherwood_Eagle_Alum 1 year, 4 months ago

Do you really think citizens being able to purchase assault weapons would make a difference against the government/military?

I don't think you put out the fire by throwing matchbooks on top of the flames.

0

Sherwood_Eagle_Alum 1 year, 4 months ago

I have no problem with single-action guns for hunting or skeet shooting. I don't hunt, nor do I shoot for fun, nor do I own a gun. When not in use, it must be kept in a locked safe/gun cabinet and unloaded.

I do have a problem with guns designed to fire multiple rounds very quickly. Those weapons belong on a battlefield with our service men and women. I don't care if your hobby is to collect assault weapons. An excuse of "it's a hobby" isn't good enough. You can't collect nuclear warheads and you shouldn't be able to own assault weapons.

1

alleebrin 1 year, 4 months ago

It all begins at home, I tell you! Parents are not responsible, therefore, their kids grow up to be irresponsible! I can't imagine my mom not being home when I got home from school! I subscribe to the premise that if weapons are banned only criminals will have weapons!!

0

VSU 1 year, 4 months ago

I agree there should be some type of gun control, particularly guns that fire multiple rounds like Sherwood is speaking of. There is no need for regular civilian citizens to have these type guns, but I would be 100% totally against citizens being banned from legally owning handguns etc. Better gun control indeed, but would also be better off if we had more responsible citizens. I am talking about the ones who carelessly leave guns in their vehicles where they get stolen a lot from vehicles (particularly from unlocked vehicles) and irresponsible adults who leave their guns within easy reach of young children who get ahold of them thinking they are toys. To those that accidently shoot themselves, if they don't know how to safely and properly handle a gun, they should not even have possession of one.

They also need to take a harder look at school bullying, it seems that a lot of these shootings are from troubled people who have been bullied a lot and they take their frustrations out on other students.

1

URWrongAgain 1 year, 4 months ago

I agree with everything you say sir...or madam. I know we had our back and forth on this.and although it hurts, I have to give respect and props where they are due. Your arguments and reasoning are the ones I agree with on this issue.

It's not just about gun control (although I wholeheartedly support it in some form) when it comes to guns, but it should also mean we discuss safety, training, and how we go about securing/storing weapons if we own them.,

0

VSU 1 year, 4 months ago

Thank You! Glad there is something we can agree on. :)

0

chinaberry25 1 year, 4 months ago

There are many things that are wrong with our society. Guns are only one major problem. Our children are exposed to too much violence in all walks of life. Fight clubs, internet violence, dog fighting, video games, on and on. It is not just one factor. Mental health has had cuts over the years because they could. It is time to wake up America and take control back. Look at the scandals in DCSS alone. These have been given a handshake when nothing is done. If your child is receiving this abuse, the will expect it to be okay. All of these things add up to future problems and the government does nothing. Or maybe we are expecting too much to expect the government to clean up our lives. It is up to us to man up and clean up our families. We keep voting these individuals into office so we must think they are doing an okay job.

0

USTPC 1 year, 4 months ago

Guns are not the problem, people are.

1

RedEric 1 year, 4 months ago

The intent of the second amendment was to prevent the government from taking complete control of us. We were to be able to defend our freedom. Free men had that as a responsibility. We have so few freedoms left it hardly seems worth the trouble. However, when smug self righteous people include contempt for those who might disagree with them in their argument it weakens the argument. This freedom must remain unabridged. If we lose this one the remaining few will quickly be lost.

3

PatrickY2K 1 year, 4 months ago

No one has suggested the repeal of the Second Amendment (that sounds like something Sarah Palin would say), but please tell us which freedoms you no longer have. Can you name three?

0

RedEric 1 year, 4 months ago

Eminent domain, income taxes, military draft, self protection, personal choice control laws, environmental laws. Those are general and cover a lot of specifics. So do you really think a little more control would be OK? If a law is written for assault weapons, a quick trip to th Supremes would result in all guns defined as assault weapons.

0

free_ur_mind 1 year, 4 months ago

Another overreaction. There will always be some type of government restraint on citizens, otherwise we'd live in a lawless, chaotic society. Imagine if we could steal, rob, and rape without any interference from governmental agencies, such as the police. Can't we find common ground and use common sense in banning certain weapons that don't impact hunters or private citizens protecting their home?

0

RedEric 1 year, 4 months ago

Are you talking about the lawless, chaotic society where we robbed and raped each other constantly in the early 1800s? NO, because we were then a nation of personal responsibility. If you wronged me, I had the right to a remedy. I had to show restraint for satisfaction of that wrong, but it was my right. Then we became a nation of laws and That is when the government interfered with our lives. Our government no longer fears the people and it is natural for it to grow.

0

free_ur_mind 1 year, 4 months ago

For one, that was different time. I imagine there was a lot of lawless activity then, but you didn't have a media there present to report on it.

0

waltspecht 1 year, 4 months ago

Why not simply address the real problem? Use a gun in a criminal manner and you go to jail for ten years. Oh, I forgot. That is already on the books as a Federal Law. When is the last time you can remember it being imposed here? Richmond Virginia got the Feds to use the law for a while, and criminals reverted to knives and attack dogs to avoid the mandatory ten. I believe that program has stopped, it was unfairly applied to the targeted area. So let us make it real easy. Use a gun in a crime, or be in illegal possession of one, and it is a mandatory 25 the first time and death the second time. Make sure we have the prison space and ruthlessly enforce the law. I believe gun crime would decrease considerably.

0

fcarroll 1 year, 4 months ago

What did McVey use in April 1995 when he killed 163, a gun, NO he made a bomb out of fertilizer, a gun did not do the damage he did. A person driving a Ford hits a school bus killing all on the bus, are we gonna outlaw the Ford, no because it was the driver who is at fault. If several people break into your home, do you thing one of them will wait for you to reload your single shot gun so you can shoot the next, no i don't think so. And RedEric, i agree with you, our freedom of anything will soon be lost.

2

Sister_Ruby 1 year, 4 months ago

Y'all need to go see the new remake of "Red Dawn". Then come on back here and comment about everybody turning in their guns to Obama.

3

alleebrin 1 year, 4 months ago

Hey, that's what Hitler did! He was very charming, a very smooth orator. He convinced the people he knew what was good for them, stripped them of their goods and dignity and then shipped them off to the gas chambers under the allusion he was giving them work at the other end. People are much too gullible!

1

B4it 1 year, 4 months ago

Fcarroll is correct with the above analysis. We need rational and factual thinking to solve these issues. Just look at the events in Syria and Egypt. You see so many in the streets throwing rocks at their aggressors because many of them do not have the weapons to defend themselves from their tyrants. Their governments use tanks and planes and automatic weapons to shoot them down.

So think long and hard before advocating taking guns away from our citizens. We must focus on solving the root problems that are causing these mass senseless killings.

0

Black_Falcon 1 year, 4 months ago

This commentary sums up my thoughts on gun control...

As keenly interested as I am in preventing the next mass public shooting, I see little reason to find comfort in gun control.

Consider the high school rampage in Columbine, Colo. The year was 1999, amid a decade-long ban on “assault weapons,” those firearms defined by nothing more than the minds of legislators who drafted the ban on them. (Indeed, the main characteristic common to the weapons banned then seems to be the likelihood one might have seen a similar weapon in a shoot-em-up, kill-em-up movie — an implicit nod to the overriding impact of our entertainment culture.)

One of the Columbine killers was armed with a pump-action shotgun (not exactly a semiautomatic weapon) he fired 25 times. He also fired 96 rounds from a 9-mm carbine while using 10-round magazines — the limit of choice for those who say 30-round magazines are the problem.

When New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg introduced his ban on sugary soft drinks larger than 16 oz., most observers recognized the folly of limiting the size of one drink when a person could simply buy two or more of them. Does no one else find it similarly illogical to think a person bent on mass murder won’t just carry multiple weapons with smaller mags, or that lives will be saved in the few seconds it would take an experienced gun handler to change magazines?

I raise these objections not to defend specific weapons or magazines with any number of bullets. Neither I nor anyone I know owns an “assault weapon” (as far as I know), and I have no particular affinity for bullets that come in sets of 20 or 30 or 40 rather than 10. While I generally support gun-ownership rights, I’m open to practical suggestions that can reasonably square with the Second Amendment.

Nor do I think the situation is hopeless, or as good as it gets. I do think we can make our communities safer. But I think the most effective solutions will be less comfortable — such as asking when it’s OK to invade the privacy of those who are dangerously mentally ill — and more expensive — such as ensuring there are armed guards or designated weapons-carrying citizens even at schools and other “gun-free zones” — than merely banning particular weapons and ammunition.

The lives of innocents deserve the fullness of our thought and attention, not old ideas that have been sitting on the shelf, waiting for a crisis.

– By Kyle Wingfield

0

sad_for_albany 1 year, 4 months ago

I think government is a big part of the problem. We as parents and neighbors need to fix this problem. We need to monitor our children. My children had video games, but the game console was in the living room and we knew what games our kids played and how long they played. Shoot them up games were not allowed in our house. That's called parenting. If our kids are having trouble, get them the help they need. Alot of parents want to believe their kids would not do something like that but most of them don't even know who their kids are because they leave them alone in their rooms doing God knows what. It is a very worthy sacrifice to be a parent. There are lots of movies I missed when my kids were at home, alot of dinners we didn't go to until we knew our children wouldn't ruin the evening for eveyone. Now you see people taking newborns and little children to "Adult" movies because they didn't want to miss the movie. Give me a break. And we wonder why people are so mean.

0

Jimboob 1 year, 4 months ago

As you can see from reading the board this morning, there is a broad spectrum of feelings about this. B4it shows there can be an intelligent debate in this country... Unfortunately it won't happen in our congress. Too much money and too many "special interest groups" to have that discussion.

0

USTPC 1 year, 4 months ago

Those on here advocating more gun control and banning certain weapons need to consider the fact that every massacre that has taken place has been in a gun free zone. That in and of itself should tell you something. The "crazies" are smart enough not to attack some place where a gun may be turned on them. The cities with the highest gun deaths/murders are the same cities with the highest level of gun control on LAW ABIDING citizens - Chicago, Washington DC, New York. That again should tell you something - Crime rates and murders are going to occur where the criminal has a minimal chance of being killed or injured himself. The solution is pretty clear...arm and train your citizens to use a gun, eliminate the gun free zones, let law abiding citizens own the weapons of their choice and you would see murder and violent crime go down.

0

Oldguy 1 year, 4 months ago

Ban assault type guns, what do you do about the millions already in circulation ? This country was built on guns. If no guns in civilian hands we would now have a British flag flying over our country. I have to admit that The Civil War was an American disaster but guns did not start it people started it and chose to use guns. Without guns many of us would not exist as our ancestors would have been killed off by starvation, Indians, predators, etc. Make the penalties extreme if a gun is used in a crime or theft of a gun. Georgia has a Carry Permit that can be attained by any qualifying Georgia resident. When I venture to Albany I carry a gun, hopefully I will never have the need to use it but it could save my life or the lives of others if I do. The saying "Guns do not kill people, people do." is very true.

0

alleebrin 1 year, 4 months ago

What to do with the guns in circulation? The government collects them, supposedly, and has a meltdown and bonfire - just like in Australia, I believe! Or, they might ship them to Mexico, who knows!

0

Cartman 1 year, 4 months ago

There are about 310 million firearms in American civilian hands. 10-30 million assault rifles in American civilian hands. 5-10 million of these are AR-15 types.

When was the last armed robbery in Albany where the bad guy had an assault rifle?

What impact do this think banning them will really have on crime? My guess is approximately zero.

0

free_ur_mind 1 year, 4 months ago

What societal benefit do assault weapons have for Americans? Maybe you can clarify that for me.

0

The_Dude 1 year, 4 months ago

Controlling the hog population for one. We would be overrun with feral pigs if not for semi-auto ARs that can take out several at a time.

0

free_ur_mind 1 year, 4 months ago

Would have never thought of that one... :)

0

Sherwood_Eagle_Alum 1 year, 3 months ago

So is the hog population more important than safety for our citizens?

How many of these weapons are actually being used to control feral pigs?

0

Cartman 1 year, 4 months ago

It arms the population. And not just for hunting and self-defense. It gives us the ability to resist a corrupt government with fearsome and lethal force. The 2nd Amendment doesn't grant you the power to bear arms. The right to defend ones families and ourselves against aggressors and tyrannts; to worship God as they see fit; and to pursue happiness is endowed by our creator. Our constitutional forefathers wrote the Bill of Rights to specifically recognize that right and guarantee this right to bear arms "would not be infringed".

They trusted the American people to protect themselves against foreign enemies and against a tyrannical government should the experiment of American democracy ever fail. It is the ultimate "check and balance".

The guns are not the problem. We've had them in civilian hands for over 200 years. We've had civilian semi-auto rifles and 20 round mags for the past 60+ years.

0

waltspecht 1 year, 4 months ago

Just curious, where did you get those numbers? Seems awful high in comparison to published BATFE numbers.

0

Bulldawg 1 year, 4 months ago

I bet if the shooter used a Browning auto 5 for example or a pump shotgun, people would want to ban semi auto and pump shotguns. Assault type wepons are not the problem, its the person holding the weapon that is the problem. Crimminals will get guns no matter what the gun laws are at the time. I have several guns, and I store them in a safe manner, and I have never had any issues with my friends that do not own firearms. I also have assault style weapons as well. I say to each their own.

0

Jimboob 1 year, 4 months ago

You are right! We don't need to ban guns... We need to ban people. Maybe not all people, just the crazy people. Or maybe just the crazy people who have access to guns. How hard can that be?

0

VSU 1 year, 4 months ago

First you need to determine who the crazy people are. Some of these sicko's act normal in public in everyday life, then suddenly they go out and commit their dirty deeds. True some have a history of mental health, but then you have those that lose their job, go mad and go postal on their former fellow employees. Things like this could happen at any given moment.

0

FryarTuk 1 year, 4 months ago

Bible schooler has made salient, reasonable points on gun control, notwithstanding the ability of bloggers' comprehending and oversight of his unpolished attempt to insult. I wonder how anyone could have possibly prevented the massacre of the precious children and teachers in the CT school. The mother of the assailant was a responsible teacher who had taught her son gun use and one might assume gun safety. She was careless and culpable if she knew the depth of his disturbance. She paid the full measure. If bible schooler, is suggesting it's time to address certain issues about gun accessibility I concur. The idea of 11 bullets pumped into a 6 year old's small body is sickening and even if it is an incomplete move banning the possession, sell, manufacturing and shipping of rapid fire and multiple bullet magazines should be undertaken immediately. There is no argument or wisdom, constitutionally based or otherwise justifying further delay. Let the point be pressed.

0

Abytaxpayer 1 year, 4 months ago

Fryar I do not disagree with you but I have to ask this question, why stop with gun control? While everyone including myself is sickened by the death of so many children, no one is looking at the dangers to rest of the children. More children are killed each year playing football than are wounded or killed by guns. Why do we risk the health of our children when we know the risk? Do we just say well it won't happen to my kids and then acted surprised when they are injured or killed for the sake of a game of violence? How is the risk of injury and even death worth the cost? The Romans had their gladiators and we have football, I guess we have come a long way because our kids have better padding and helmets?

0

free_ur_mind 1 year, 4 months ago

@ Cartman, if you think you need assault weapons to protect your home, then I don't know where you live. Another overreaction to a problem that mostly impacts poor neighborhoods. There are very few murders in affluent or middle class neighborhoods, but you wouldn't know that when watching the news. A simple handgun will suffice.

0

FryarTuk 1 year, 4 months ago

Of course, we are not talking about gun control. We are really talking about assault weaponry control. Let the point be pressed.

0

Sign in to comment