0

Commonsense gun restrictions needed

There are common events in our life that should help to bring a sense of peace and order that we all need. Unfortunately, some common events cast fear and despair into our lives suddenly, such as the 9/11 attacks, Oklahoma bombing, Sandy Hook massacre (I refer as “the killing of babies”). Only one of these three events has been duplicated over and over again for quite a few years.

The common denominator in our mass shootings has been two items (besides the deranged male shooter) — high capacity magazines and military-style weapons. A woman in a long-term abusive relationship may accept the abuse without believing there is any recourse. Such also is the relationship of accepting the notion that ordinary citizens should be allowed to purchase magazines that hold over 30 or 100 rounds and then randomly massacre people. The notion that citizens have a right to purchase any style military weapon or purchase armor-piercing bullets is like accepting an abusive relationship. Most commonsense law enforcement officials don’t want anyone with armor-piercing bullets, regardless of how many constitutional amendments they interpret as a right.

We are a country of 300 million and within that is a group of about 6 million gun owners who believe in no restrictions on ownership of any type of weapon. If the gun makers create a laser gun for the public next week, these gun owners’ belief is, “It’s my right to own it.”

President Obama has taken a bold, sharp stand for universal background checks for all gun purchases, which over 80 percent of gun owners support. Common sense seems to have a great chance this year over the few that choose guns over people (in the case of Sandy Hook — guns over babies). I hope the majority of the public (who wants guns reforms) with the help of the president can return us to commonsense gun laws.

TONY WRIGHT

Albany

Comments

VSU 1 year, 11 months ago

If people are so concerned about babies, then quit aborting them. Obama supports abortion, so does he really care about babies? Guns over babies or abortion over babies? Take your pick, More babies have been killed by abortion than by guns.

0

waltspecht 1 year, 11 months ago

Basically you want to restrict the rights of about 60 million gun owners because of the actions of about ten people? Is that your plan? Do you really believe people bent on distruction will not find an alternative to a gun? Some far more painful a death than a death by firearm. One of the ways Perps used to hold up Subway Toll Booths was tto spray the attendant and booth down with gasoline or lighter fluid, then stand there with a charcoal lighter torch and ask for the money. Have you ever thought what would happen in a school, with a plain old garden sprayer full of gas? So if you want to regulate things, regulate them all.

0

QUIK 1 year, 11 months ago

To answer your first question, yes. To your second question, no. I am not aware of 'subway toll booths' being sprayed with lighter fluid during my living in New York City, Europe or elsewhere but its nice to know. You should make a list of items that are NOT regulated. You may find that most lawmakers don't have a problem restricting our "rights", like speed limits, seat belts, food ads, pollution controls, daycares, housing etc. Guns and ammo will not be the exception. Have a nice day.

0

B4it 1 year, 11 months ago

Tony, we already have many common sense gun laws. It is getting ridiculous to see a few commenters advocating the use of "common sense" when they are the ones who are not using it. Tony uses the example of a common denominator for a few of the mass killings being a specific weapon and magazine, but fails to use "common sense" to connect the killings with a mentally impaired person with a lack of respect for human life.

Anyone can quote a multitude of weapons and "things" that are used over and over in the tragic deaths of people (e.g. - rocks, hammers, axes, pistols, buses, cars, bombs, and gasoline). So to single out a specific weapon is just down right foolish and ignorant of the FACTS!

0

QUIK 1 year, 11 months ago

The fact that you decided to term me as foolish and ignorant MAY mean that you have a problem expressing yourself to those that disagree with you. Everyone that writes to the editor or comments on a writing are expressing MOSTLY an opinion (with some facts) and this is what we call an debate. So since you MAY not realize this I will try not to further myself with those type of people. Have a nice day.

0

Sister_Ruby 1 year, 11 months ago

Thank you for your decision not to further yourself. We appreciate it.

0

USTPC 1 year, 11 months ago

You mean the common sense of our POTUS who in October called bayonets antiquated and not used anymore (which of course is wrong because the Marines still use them) and then turned around last week and said any rifle with the capability of adding a bayonet should be illegal? That common sense?

How about the common sense that most of the features on the alleged "assault" rifles that are being used to argue a ban on them are cosmetic like the pistol grip?How about the fact that the same caliber rifle that does not "look" like an "assault" rifle will do the same amount of damage and kill just as easily is not on the ban list?

How about the common sense that what they are calling "assault" weapons by definition are really not assault weapons because true assault weapons are automatic not semi-automatic?

Finally, how about the common sense that in spite of the call for the ban of guns that look like assault weapons and magazines or clips that hold more than 10 bullets NOT ONE person involved in calling for the gun ban will state that had the proposed ban been in place prior to Sandy Hook that the Sandy Hook tragedy would not have occurred.

Do you know why? Because the gun ban would not have prevented the tragedy at Sandy Hook. They know it but they are still using the tragedy to try to ban some guns. Then the next tragedy they will want to ban more guns. Then the next tragedy they will want to ban more guns. And on and on and on.

This is not about saving lives this is about controlling people which is all the Socialist......I mean Democratic party is about .

0

Sign in to comment