Yabberz for AndroidDownload
219

      Guns: Can We Find Consensus?

      3 years ago

      Click to confirm you are 18 yrs of age or older and open

      Click to confirm you want to see post

      Guns: Can We Find Consensus?

      "Thoughts And Prayers" Are Not Enough



      By Ray Cunneff

      October 2, 2015


      We go through the same circular exercise every time there is one of these mass shootings – the initial shock and horror, empty platitudes about "thoughts and prayers", a period of grief followed by outrage, a polarized skirmish over possible remedies, and finally a grudging acceptance of the current political reality that nothing can be done.

      The news cycle moves on until the next atrocity.

      In our present hyper-partisan political climate, especially on the hot-button issue of gun violence in America, in which anger overwhelms reason, there seems very little effort to find consensus. But are there some things that most of us can agree upon?

      No sooner than you ask such a question that you must acknowledge a couple of things. First, that there is no single solution to gun violence and second, that there are some who do not want to even have that conversation, who not only do not want universal background checks or any new restrictions of gun ownership, but want all existing restrictions eliminated. Their only answer to gun violence is more guns. Hopefully, that is a small minority.

      If the majority of us really want to address this issue, perhaps we need to approach it differently. We need to take off the table the argument that regulation will lead to confiscation. We need to stipulate that the 2nd Amendment guarantees law-abiding citizens have – for purposes of hunting, target-shooting and self-defense – the right to own and lawfully use firearms. And we need to define, in the clearest possible terms, what that means… and does not mean.

      If such at definition can be reached by consensus, we can then consider its corollary, those weapons and munitions that do not meet that definition. Guns and ammunition that cannot be considered legitimate for the purposes of hunting, target-shooting and self-defense, could then be restricted for sale to the general public. That would remove from the market only the deadliest war-weapons and ammunition designed solely for the purpose of quickly and efficiently killing people.

      Those assembling arsenals in preparation for civil insurrection, domestic terrorists, those arming themselves for revenge and grievance killings, the weapons manufacturers, lobbyists and their political supporters would howl in protest, but their outrage might actually be blunted by true majority consensus.


      more
      20
          3 years ago

          Click to confirm you are 18 yrs of age or older and open

          Click to confirm you want to see post

          An emotion that we are under siege? That's more than an emotional response, that's also a 'flight or fight' logical response to a society that's gone insane in its addiction to guns. Beyond the 2nd Amendment, we have the right to be secure.

          more less
          10
              Ray Cunneff
              3 years ago

              Click to confirm you are 18 yrs of age or older and open

              Click to confirm you want to see post

              I believe the majority would vote in favor of: gun permits after a criminal and mental background check. I think a vote to outlaw guns would fail.

              more less
              10
                  Katiebugz
                  3 years ago

                  Click to confirm you are 18 yrs of age or older and open

                  Click to confirm you want to see post

                  To outlaw guns would fail. But you can always go to the local street supply, no credit no problem, just cash. Street level gun sales, trade, illegal and thriving. Don't need no regs, proof of ID, back ground, just cash. However it helps to know someone in the trade,one trade one time....

                  more less
                  30
                      Katiebugz
                      3 years ago

                      Click to confirm you are 18 yrs of age or older and open

                      Click to confirm you want to see post

                      A vote to "outlaw guns" would undoubtedly fail. But no one's asking for that. What many are asking for are common-sense ways to reduce the possibility of guns in the hands of people who should not have them.

                      more less
                      10
                          Ray Cunneff
                          3 years ago

                          Click to confirm you are 18 yrs of age or older and open

                          Click to confirm you want to see post

                          I have stated many times I am all for mental and criminal background checks. I have a permit to purchase and conceal carry. My State, NC, requires permits to purchase and background check for mental and criminal issues. It took a little longer but I was not in a hurry. I think as they work out bugs it will become faster. If it saves a life then I am all for it. Waiting did not take away my right to own or carry a gun. Criminals and mentally ill at risk for harm would not get a gun and I think that is great. Maybe people need to follow NC laws.

                          Some on this thread seem to think an out law of guns are needed. I disagree.

                          more less
                          0
                              Ray Cunneff
                              3 years ago

                              Click to confirm you are 18 yrs of age or older and open

                              Click to confirm you want to see post

                              Russian BETAB-500 bunker buster. Ivan doesn't target hospitals. Obama and friends say goodbye to your ISIS buddies, you can't protect them anymore.

                              more less
                              10
                                  Ray Cunneff
                                  3 years ago

                                  Click to confirm you are 18 yrs of age or older and open

                                  Click to confirm you want to see post

                                  I'm talking about Hillary's server. The Russians had a tap on it from day one. Explains why Ivan has been 3 steps ahead of us in Syria the whole time. Info is already dripping past US filters. Of course, Americans are like husbands; Always the last to know.


                                  more less
                                  0
                                      Rastus
                                      3 years ago

                                      Click to confirm you are 18 yrs of age or older and open

                                      Click to confirm you want to see post

                                      Sorry if I do not take the word of a traitor, Snowden. had he really cared he would have taken concerns to the top not the to Russia.


                                      On Hillary.. facts are: It was malware and she did not open the email so no hack.

                                      more less
                                      0
                                          Rastus
                                          3 years ago

                                          Click to confirm you are 18 yrs of age or older and open

                                          Click to confirm you want to see post

                                          He should have stayed and fought for his convictions. He could have sat down with the media if he wanted to be a whistle blower. Instead he ran and turned info over to the enemy.... he showed his real color and they were not of the red, white and blue kind. It was yellow.

                                          more less
                                          30
                                              Rastus
                                              3 years ago

                                              Click to confirm you are 18 yrs of age or older and open

                                              Click to confirm you want to see post

                                              I don't know what you imagine is on Hillary's server that would make her or anyone "ISIS buddies". As for Syria, the reason the U.S. has been reluctant to arm "Syrian rebels" is that it was almost impossible to find true "friendlies" among the many different groups opposing Assad.

                                              There really is no cohesive "rebel army". Weapons that we might supply one or more rebel groups could easily be turned on us once ISIS had been routed.

                                              You'll recall that, in Afghanistan, the U.S. armed and supported the Mujahideen in their resistance to the Soviet Union (Russia) only to have them become the Taliban once the Russians pulled out.

                                              The enemy of our enemy is not necessarily our friend.


                                              more less
                                              10
                                                  Ray Cunneff
                                                  3 years ago

                                                  Click to confirm you are 18 yrs of age or older and open

                                                  Click to confirm you want to see post

                                                  America prides itself, and is recognized globally, as among the places where "rule of law" is supreme. The Bill of Rights in the constitution protects each and every American from abuse, even by government. Police response is among the quickest on the the planet. There is the local, State and Federal law enforcement. There is also the National Guard for larger threats.


                                                  Why on earth would anyone need an arsenal for protection?! America's law enforcement and security apparatus is so robust. Anyone of you forget what 911 is for?!


                                                  If anything, a homeowner only need a gun for protection against home invasion by neighborhood thugs or petty criminals. And also for hunting and target practice. Between the police--which is just a 911 call away--and the Bill of Rights enshrined in the constitution what more protection does anyone need?!


                                                  With the overabundance of guns, now deranged citizens are competing with real criminals in causing heavy fatalities in communities and also competes for police response and attention.


                                                  When America curbs the capacity of deranged individuals to inflict mass shootings (the UCC shooter brought with him 7 guns during his attack) homicide, murder and suicide through gun control, police will have more time to focus on going after real criminals.

                                                  more less
                                                  0
                                                      EF Hidalgo
                                                      3 years ago

                                                      Click to confirm you are 18 yrs of age or older and open

                                                      Click to confirm you want to see post

                                                      Police are not always that fast. An attempt of a home invasion at my home from those outside my area, police were called but I had to fire at first guy. Luckily I was able to purposely fire beside the guy and he and his buddies ran. Cops were a little late. People do have the right to protect themselves, target shoot, hunt, collect guns etc but they do not have the right to kill humans or animals for fun. I ll keep my guns TYVM. Cops are rarely just around the corner. I have AR, AK, many shot guns and many hand guns...all registered legally. I see no reason that as a law abiding citizen with a background check for mental and criminal review should give up guns if they check out. NC checks and I have no problem with that if it saves a single life.

                                                      more less
                                                      10
                                                          EF Hidalgo
                                                          3 years ago

                                                          Click to confirm you are 18 yrs of age or older and open

                                                          Click to confirm you want to see post

                                                          Because the crazies think they need to build arsenals to fight America's military and law enforcement in some "Red Dawn" fantasy resistance of government "tyranny".

                                                          more less
                                                          5
                                                              Ray Cunneff
                                                              3 years ago

                                                              Click to confirm you are 18 yrs of age or older and open

                                                              Click to confirm you want to see post

                                                              The 2nd wasn't written to gaurantee a right to hunt or sport shoot. It wasn't even primarily to gaurantee a right to self defense, though that fits in it. It was written to gaurantee a right for the militia - all able bodied men at the time, though now it would include women - to posses arms and train with them sufficient to prevent this government or another from subjugating them.


                                                              At the time it was common, and expected, that ordinary people would own everything from knives, swords and tomahawks (common military weapons of the time also used for self defense), muskets and rifles (the most common military arms), all the way to cannon. Private individuals owned ships with multiple cannon.


                                                              Our government has re-interpreted it and gutted it to anunbelievable extent. It should gaurantee the right to own fully automatic M-16s (the modern military rifle), AT4s (modern bazookas) and guided missiles - the weapons that would be needed to repel an invasion. Weapons that our tax dollars are used to give to 3rd world goat herders but that you and I are not trusted to own. Instead our government, those that we elect who supposedly answer to us, try to claim it "might" protect grandpas bird gun, provided it doesn't look too scary.


                                                              Pistols are of little military use. But they are usefull insofar as they allow people to protect themselves long enough to retreat or get to more effective weapons. That's why they are considered under the 2nd, as well as under the 9th (which is what self defense falls under).

                                                              more less
                                                              0

                                                                  Click to confirm you are 18 yrs of age or older and open

                                                                  Click to confirm you want to see post

                                                                  Yabberz Search

                                                                  Topics Found

                                                                  Members

                                                                  Posts

                                                                  Load More Posts
                                                                  Hi There,

                                                                  Do you want to quickly add followers, meet new friends, or simply connect with existing contacts to discuss the news?

                                                                  Do you have an email group that shares news items?

                                                                  It's now super easy and rewarding to find and add friends on Yabberz.

                                                                  This post has either already been PowerShared, not eligible for PowerShare or is not your post. Return Home
                                                                  0

                                                                      Click to confirm you are 18 yrs of age or older and open

                                                                      Click to confirm you want to see post

                                                                      more less

                                                                      Posts
                                                                      Points
                                                                      Users
                                                                          more less
                                                                          Block User
                                                                          This user will be blocked and not see your posts when logged in. You will also not see this user's posts when logged in. In order to later unblock this user, visit the blocked user tab found on your about me profile page. Click confirm block to complete.
                                                                          loading...
                                                                          Last Heard: a minute ago
                                                                          Joined: Mar 4' 15
                                                                          Followers: 100
                                                                          Points: 100,000