Will Congress find middle ground on gun legislation?
L.A. Times
2013/01/31 05:00:00
|
|
|||||
|
189 votes
|
|
20% | |||
|
734 votes
|
|
80% | |||
The year's first congressional committee hearing on guns began with an emotional jolt Wednesday, with former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, who was seriously wounded in a mass shooting two years ago, urging senators to "be bold, be courageous" in addressing gun violence.
Bucking tradition, Giffords spoke at the outset of the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, before senators made their opening statements. She and her husband, former astronaut Mark Kelly, were escorted to the witness table by the committee's chairman, Sen. Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont, and its ranking Republican, Sen. Charles E. Grassley of Iowa.
Giffords, whose speech is impaired after being shot in the head by Jared Loughner two years ago, spoke slowly and emphatically in a minute-long statement. "Speaking is difficult, but I need to say something important. Violence is a big problem. Too many children are dying. Too many children. We must do something," she said.
Bucking tradition, Giffords spoke at the outset of the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, before senators made their opening statements. She and her husband, former astronaut Mark Kelly, were escorted to the witness table by the committee's chairman, Sen. Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont, and its ranking Republican, Sen. Charles E. Grassley of Iowa.
Giffords, whose speech is impaired after being shot in the head by Jared Loughner two years ago, spoke slowly and emphatically in a minute-long statement. "Speaking is difficult, but I need to say something important. Violence is a big problem. Too many children are dying. Too many children. We must do something," she said.
Read More: http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-senate-...
Top Opinion
-
William 2013/01/31 09:58:30
for the people to retain the right to keep
and bear arms is,
as a last resort,
to protect themselves
against tyranny in government."
Thomas Jefferson
I hated it more because people were trying to use that reaction to further an agenda.
I don't believe that taking guns away from law abiding people will fix the issue the way that they think it is. I don't believe it is constitutional either. They should use facts instead of propoganda moves to argue their point.
Clint Smith (Thunder Ranch)
Even though Switzerland has not been involved in an armed conflict since a standoff between Catholics and Protestants in 1847, the Swiss are very serious not only about their right to own weapons but also to carry them around in public. Because of this general acceptance and even pride in gun ownership, nobody bats an eye at the sight of a civilian riding a bus, bike or motorcycle to the shooting range, with a rifle slung across the shoulder.
Read more: http://world.time.com/2012/12...
"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subjected people to carry arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subjected peoples to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing" -
Adolf Hitler
"An armed man is a citizen.
An unarmed man is a subject."
"Gun control is not about guns; it's about control."
Free men do not ask permission to bear arms.
Assault is a behavior, not a device.
64,999,978 firearms owners killed NO ONE YESTERDAY.
You don't shoot to kill, you shoot to stay alive.
You only have the rights you are willing to fight for.
Know guns, Know Peace, Know Safety.
NO GUNS NO PEACE NO SAFETY
Guns have only two enemies:
Rust and Politicians
When you remove the people's right...
Clint Smith (Thunder Ranch)
Even though Switzerland has not been involved in an armed conflict since a standoff between Catholics and Protestants in 1847, the Swiss are very serious not only about their right to own weapons but also to carry them around in public. Because of this general acceptance and even pride in gun ownership, nobody bats an eye at the sight of a civilian riding a bus, bike or motorcycle to the shooting range, with a rifle slung across the shoulder.
Read more: http://world.time.com/2012/12...
"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subjected people to carry arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subjected peoples to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing" -
Adolf Hitler
"An armed man is a citizen.
An unarmed man is a subject."
"Gun control is not about guns; it's about control."
Free men do not ask permission to bear arms.
Assault is a behavior, not a device.
64,999,978 firearms owners killed NO ONE YESTERDAY.
You don't shoot to kill, you shoot to stay alive.
You only have the rights you are willing to fight for.
Know guns, Know Peace, Know Safety.
NO GUNS NO PEACE NO SAFETY
Guns have only two enemies:
Rust and Politicians
When you remove the people's right to bear arms,
you create slaves.
The Government does not need to know what firearms we own.
The Government needs to remember WE DO own firearms.
love big money too much. Congressmen/women do not care how many citizens are
killed -- they are living in their own little bubble.
infrige;
1. To transgress or exceed the limits of; violate: infringe a contract; infringe a patent.
2. Obsolete To defeat; invalidate.
v.intr.
To encroach on someone or something; engage in trespassing:
Frankly, I don't know which of the proposed bans is more offenstive to gun enthusiasts. . . so called "assault weaponry" or bullet clips of more than 10 bullets per magazine. If one or the other is acceptable to the powerful gun movement, I, for one, would like to include that as well. . .
What "cat out of the bag"? Biden has proposed no federal law. Barack Obama has imposed 23 executive decisions, and Diane Feinstein has submitted a bill to Congress.
All Americans except the repulsive want to push gun control since Sandy Hook! Before Sandy Hook, while Barack Obama has been president, there have been mass shootings in Aurora, Portland, a Wisconsin Sique temple, a Tuscon Safeway parkinglot and Fort Hood. SINCE Sandy Hook, Webster, New York firemen have been ambushed, kids in a California classroom were blown away, an Albuquerque family was slaughtered, and a school bus driver was shot dead so a 5 year old boy can be held prisoner in a 2nd Amendment "Patriot's" survivialist shelter!
The American gun enthusiasts, mass shooters, make the Black Panther Party look like saints!
We are $16.5 trillion in debt. Hiring full-time armed guards for 300,000 schools in America, so that private citizens may have military weapons is unacceptable.
One more time, the 2nd Amendment has in no way been infringed, anywhere, as all states and communities still have their national guard units (militias) with adequate "tents, camp equipage, field pieces, arms, and ammunition" to equip them in "public stores" which we call "armories". Now, we will discuss what personal firearms a private citizen is allowed to have. In both "Heller v Washington DC" and in "McDonald v Chicago" the Supreme Court has ruled that reasonable restrictions on arms and public places where they cannot be allowed IS constitutional under the 2nd Amendment. It is all a question of "definition". . .
You imply the line should be drawn AFTER AR15's and bullet magazines greater than 10 bullets when you say "none of the proposed restrictions to the 2nd Amendment are acceptable". . . I guess "well regulated militias" is totally absent from your version of the 2nd Amendment. . . Should we also allow in Anthax? Siran Gas? Dirty Nukes? These, like the AR15, are also military "arms" designed for mass killings . Do we have a right to "keep and bear" them? The position of you peopl...
We are $16.5 trillion in debt. Hiring full-time armed guards for 300,000 schools in America, so that private citizens may have military weapons is unacceptable.
One more time, the 2nd Amendment has in no way been infringed, anywhere, as all states and communities still have their national guard units (militias) with adequate "tents, camp equipage, field pieces, arms, and ammunition" to equip them in "public stores" which we call "armories". Now, we will discuss what personal firearms a private citizen is allowed to have. In both "Heller v Washington DC" and in "McDonald v Chicago" the Supreme Court has ruled that reasonable restrictions on arms and public places where they cannot be allowed IS constitutional under the 2nd Amendment. It is all a question of "definition". . .
You imply the line should be drawn AFTER AR15's and bullet magazines greater than 10 bullets when you say "none of the proposed restrictions to the 2nd Amendment are acceptable". . . I guess "well regulated militias" is totally absent from your version of the 2nd Amendment. . . Should we also allow in Anthax? Siran Gas? Dirty Nukes? These, like the AR15, are also military "arms" designed for mass killings . Do we have a right to "keep and bear" them? The position of you people who take sport in shooting firemen, 1st graders and other innocent people is now subject to the real, law abiding, responsible adults of America. I suggest you get real about things like AT LEAST universal background checks, felony penalties for "straw purchases" of guns, and a universal database in which each and every gun in America must be registered. Definition of semi-automatic weapon legality is very much subject to discussion (and future federal laws or Supreme Court decisions), but you people better come on board really damn quick in minimal gun safety and gun slaughter pevention. . .
Americans have no intention in Negoitating our Inalienable rights
When will the gun grabbing Liberal progressive elites disband their armed guards and place gun free zone signs in their yards?
I don't believe in posting "gun free zones" either, as long as there are the likes of you AR15 toting 1st grader killers around. . .
Rest assured we will stop you and your brethren from mass shooting anymore 1st grade children!