Home Non Cigar Related

Rallies assail Obama's proposed gun curbs

RainRain Posts: 8,960 ✭✭✭
From Yahoo.http://news.yahoo.com/pro-gun-rallies-across-u-attack-obamas-curbs-154112625.html Pro-gun activists who say the right to own firearms is under attack from President Barack Obama's proposals to reduce gun violence held "high noon" rallies across the United States on Saturday in support of gun ownership rights. The U.S. debate over gun control flared in mid-December when a man armed with an assault rifle killed 20 first-graders and six adults at an elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut - the deadliest of a string of U.S. shooting sprees last year. "We are law-abiding citizens, business owners, military, and we are not going to be responsible for other people's criminal actions," former Marine Damon Locke said to applause at a Florida rally he had helped organize. Some in the crowd of about 1,000 in Brooksville, about an hour north of Tampa, hoisted signs that said "Stop the Gun Grabbers" and "Gun control isn't about guns, it's about control." Obama and gun control advocates have begun a push to reinstitute a ban on assault weapons in the wake of the Connecticut school massacre. A number of other states have taken up gun legislation, and New York, which has among the strictest gun control laws in the country, broadened its assault weapons ban on Tuesday. Obama also called for a ban on high-capacity magazines and more stringent background checks for gun purchasers. "Until we enforce gun laws on the books against the bad guys, I think it's hypocritical to discuss more laws against law-abiding citizens," Gary Schraut, a Brooksville real estate agent, told Reuters. Across the country at a rally in Denver, the mood was defiant as about 500 people, including families with children, gathered in unseasonably warm weather outside the state capitol. "I have earned the right to have my guns," said Don Dobyns, an Air Force veteran and former police officer from Colorado Springs, who was among the rally organizers. Sporting a shirt that read, "Girls with guns," 31-year-old Jennifer Burk said: "My parents didn't raise a victim and the government shouldn't try and make me one." Gun control advocates say U.S. civilians have no justifiable need for assault weapons or high-capacity magazines, and they say more background checks will help keep guns out of the hands of criminals. The reaction has been fierce from gun supporters such as the National Rifle Association, who point to a right to bear arms that is enshrined in the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and which they do not want to see watered down. Saturday's rallies were organized by Guns Across America, a group launched by Texas airline pilot Eric Reed, who has said that after he heard Obama talk about gun control on the day of the Connecticut massacre he thought gun owners should send a strong message to lawmakers in Washington. As of Saturday afternoon, the Facebook page for Guns Across America listed more than 20,000 people saying they intended to attend events planned mostly in state capitals. Local media reported hundreds of people gathered at rallies nationwide, from Kentucky to Oregon to Michigan and Pennsylvania. Gun-control advocates on Sunday plan to hold a National Gun Prevention Sabbath, where they say 150 houses of worship will call on the faithful to advocate for an "actionable plan to prevent gun violence." People who have lost loved ones to gun violence will display their photographs, organizers said.

Comments

  • laker1963laker1963 Posts: 5,046
    Just a question. Are those who are in favor of keeping things the way they are presently in the US regarding guns and gun control, saying that ANY and ALL guns should be free of restrictions? Should a citizen of the US be able to buy any gun they wish? How about magazines for these guns? Should they be limited or what? I am just trying to get my head around what is acceptable gun control if ANY is acceptable. Does the constituation actually give you the right to bear arms of any kind as some suggest? What is reasonable? Background checks?
  • jgibvjgibv John G.Posts: 9,320 ✭✭✭✭✭
    And only 5 people were hurt by accidental shootings at these rallies .... I'd say that really helped prove their point (sarcasm)

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/01/19/accidental-shooting-gun-show/1847879/

    * I have a new address as of 3/24/18 *

  • NeleneaNelenea Posts: 90
    There are certain things that need to be tightened up. Type of gun or capacity of gun aren't them.

    All the media has failed to address one of the underlying problems all of these mass shooters had... mental instability / mental problems.

    Until we resolve that, taking guns away from the 99.7% of law abiding citizens will do nothing but weaken the safety posture of those people.

    If gun bans work SO well... Someone, anyone explain Chicago to me. Explain the greater amount of violence in all of these cities and areas with these "toughest gun laws."

    Here is another statistic for you. England and Wales - 2.2 million estimated violent incidents. United States - 1.2 million

    Use the violent index to average... England 2000 incidents per 100k people... United states. 380 per 100k people.
  • catfishbluezzcatfishbluezz Posts: 7,001
    Any and all guns and accessories should not be regulated to any law abiding citizen. I have no problem with background checks and regulating gun show sales. The problem is criminals with handguns, not law abiding citizens with AR15's. It's a waste of time legislating laws against those whom do not break them. The last ban did not work.
  • laker1963laker1963 Posts: 5,046
    Nelenea:
    There are certain things that need to be tightened up. Type of gun or capacity of gun aren't them. All the media has failed to address one of the underlying problems all of these mass shooters had... mental instability / mental problems. Until we resolve that, taking guns away from the 99.7% of law abiding citizens will do nothing but weaken the safety posture of those people. If gun bans work SO well... Someone, anyone explain Chicago to me. Explain the greater amount of violence in all of these cities and areas with these "toughest gun laws." Here is another statistic for you. England and Wales - 2.2 million estimated violent incidents. United States - 1.2 million Use the violent index to average... England 2000 incidents per 100k people... United states. 380 per 100k people.
    I went for a quick look into your stats and here is what I came up with right away. I can look further if you like.

    Violent crime by country The comparison of violent crime statistics between countries is usually problematic, due to the way different countries classify crime.[2] Valid comparisons require that similar offences between jurisdictions be compared. Often this is not possible because crime statistics aggregate equivalent offences in such different ways that make it difficult or impossible to obtain a valid comparison.
    [edit] Australia

    The Australian Standard Offence Classification (ASOC)[3] document published by the Australian Bureau of Statistics does not have a single category for violent crime. Rather, violent crime is classified under a number of different categories that often indicate a range of both violent and non-violent behaviour. The categories include:[4]

    Homicide and related offences, covering murder (including conspiracies and attempts), manslaughter and driving causing death. Acts intended to cause injury, such as Assault, as well as other acts. Sexual assault and related offences including non-assaultive sexual offences, such as those against a child. Abduction and related offences such as kidnapping, deprivation of liberty or false imprisonment. Robbery, extortion and related offences such as blackmail.

    [edit] Canada

    Canada classifies homicides, attempted murder, all assaults, all sexual offences, abduction and robbery as violent crime.[5]

    [edit] New Zealand

    New Zealand's crime statistics Devil [6][7] has a category for violence that includes homicides, kidnapping, abduction, robbery, assaults, intimidation, threats, and group assembly, while all sexual offences are shown in a separate category from violence.

    [edit] United Kingdom

    Violent crime rates in the UK Includes all violence against the person, sexual offences, and robbery as violent crime.Music [8]

    Rates of violent crime are in the UK are recorded by the British Crime Survey. For the 2010/2011 report on crime in England and Wales,[9] the statistics show that violent crime continues a general downward trend observed over the last few decades as shown in the graph. "The 2010/11 BCS showed overall violence was down 47 per cent on the level seen at its peak in 1995; representing nearly two million fewer violent offences per year." In 2010/11, 31 people per 1000 interviewed reported being a victim of violent crime in the 12 preceding months.

    Regarding murder, "increasing levels of homicide (at around 2% to 3% per year) [have been observed] from the 1960s through to the end of the twentieth century". Recently the murder rate has declined, "a fall of 19 per cent in homicides since 2001/02", as measured by The Homicide Index.

    [edit] United States

    The United States Department of Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) counts five categories of crime as violent crimes: murder, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, and simple assault. It should be noted that these crimes are taken from two separate reports, the Uniform Crime Report (UCR) and the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), and that these do not look at exactly the same crimes. The UCR measures crimes reported to police, and looks at Aggravated assault, forcible rape, murder, and robbery. The NCVS measures crimes reported by households surveyed by the United States Census Bureau, and looks at assault, rape, and robbery.

    According to BJS figures, the rate of violent crime victimization in the United States declined by more than two thirds between the years 1994 and 2009.[10] In 2009 there were 16.9 victimizations per 1000 persons aged 12 and over. 7.9% of sentenced prisoners in federal prisons on September 30, 2009 were in for violent crimes.[11] 52.4% of sentenced prisoners in state prisons at yearend 2008 were in for violent crimes.[11] 21.6% of convicted inmates in jails in 2002 (latest available data by type of offense) were in for violent crimes.[12]



    As you can see it is very misleading or at least not a good comparison to use the data this way. As there is no standard for what is and what is not a violent crime in these country's, it is impossible to make definative statements in this regard.
Sign In or Register to comment.