Promote gun responsibility

  • Follow Letters

I wish to praise Beverly Goda for her Nov. 30 letter (“Keep guns in safe hands”) regarding the deaths by gunshot of our young people. She appears to be a compassionate and responsible person who is willing to take a stand against the irresponsible behavior that allows children access to loaded firearms.

When is this epidemic of deaths going to be recognized and steps taken to get some measure of control? In 2002, available data reported 3,385 firearm deaths for the age group 0-19 years; 73 were of children younger than 5; 416 were children 5 -14; and 2,896 were 15-19. I have been a personal witness to this ever increasing carnage over the past 35 years. The price we pay for the “freedom” to keep unsafe firearms is being paid for by the continual slaughter of our young people.

In contrast to the responsible concern of Ms. Goda, I would like to point out the editorial on this subject published in your paper Nov. 7 (“This story should scare you”) was totally irresponsible. Your editorial writer used such phrases as a shotgun “as the top choice for home defense,” and “One can see why a homeowner would want one around.” While I fully support the position of Ms. Goda, I find the position of your editorial writer to be a total contradiction of your editorial page editor who maintained Nov. 25 that the role of an editorial writer required a sense of responsibility.

When are you going to grow a spine and take a stand for what is right for our children? Or do we wait until the next tragedy of a child killed by gunshot and again turn away from the truth of this carnage of our children?

Comments (11)

Add comment
ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.
Jane Doe 1
62
Points
Jane Doe 1 12/04/12 - 12:33 am
0
0

Amen!

Unpublished

Jane Doe 1
62
Points
Jane Doe 1 12/04/12 - 12:35 am
0
0

Also...

Unpublished

Bizkit
6109
Points
Bizkit 12/04/12 - 01:17 am
3
0

There were 52,447 deliberate

There were 52,447 deliberate and 23,237 accidental non-fatal gunshot injuries in the United States during 2000.The majority of gun-related deaths in the United States are suicides, with 17,352 (55.6%) of the total 31,224 firearm-related deaths in 2007 due to suicide, while 12,632 (40.5%) were homicide deaths In 2009, 60% of all homicides in the United States were perpetrated using a firearm.
The number of deaths related to alcohol each year is roughly 75,000 a year.
I guess it would be more practical to abolish alcohol to save more lives than abolish guns. The gun Genie is outta da bottle and it is absurd to deal with all the guns and impractical to do much about it just like trying to deal with immigration and a massive number of people. The best is to manage the situation.

nofanofobama
3879
Points
nofanofobama 12/04/12 - 07:53 am
7
0

its not the guns...the

its not the guns...the problem is lack of morals...a gun is a tool it has to have someone physically pick it up. .we no longer are concerned about right or wrong ...we have citizens and the govt. covet our EARNED possesions and scheme how to take it..we kill millions of fetus each year...we blame society and not the criminal..we elect govt.. who are criminals at best we elect obumler who ignores laws he doesnt like...punish those who work ..entitle those who dont..lavish vacations and parties at the white house while millions goe without due to his policies..no its morals and not the gun

Riverman1
34849
Points
Riverman1 12/04/12 - 09:37 am
7
0

Irresponsible parents

Irresponsible parents usually have irresponsible kids. We have an element of lawlessness with parts of our society. Lillard confuses recklessness with guns by some elements as being promoted by the responsible folks. What responsible person or gun owner HASN'T ALREADY taken a stand for responsible gun use?

He's mixing apples and oranges. His anger and unreasonable attitude surfaces at the end of his letter. He should be criticizing the families that promote such behavior and not those who are thankful for the second amendment.

Bizkit
6109
Points
Bizkit 12/04/12 - 09:12 am
7
0

Very Good point-Riverman. I

Very Good point-Riverman. I grew up to treat any gun as if it is loaded-and never point at anything unless you are going to shoot. It isn't rocket science.

LillyfromtheMills
6407
Points
LillyfromtheMills 12/04/12 - 09:45 am
4
0

Me, too!

And only shoot what you're going to eat!

Humble Angela
19823
Points
Humble Angela 12/04/12 - 10:31 am
4
0

Lilly....I don't like eating

Lilly....I don't like eating clay targets....

dichotomy
14587
Points
dichotomy 12/04/12 - 03:18 pm
5
0

Banning guns is similar to

Banning guns is similar to deporting 12,000,000 illegal aliens. One is a very liberal position, the other is a very conservative position. Neither is practical and, oh by the way, there are already laws on the books to cover both but they aren't being enforced.

In your 3385 shootings in 2002, you fail to point out that the 2,896 that were 5-19 were probably mostly young thugs shooting each other. The vast majority were not accidental shootings in the home. If our liberal justice system actually locked up the criminals and KEPT them there, we would not have so many citizens that felt the need to exercise their Constitutional right to keep a locked, loaded, and accessible weapon at home. I am not speaking against safety, but the practicality of the situation is that a gun that is under lock and key is absolutely useless when you need it. It only takes a couple of seconds to kick a door in during a home invasion and that is happening every day right here in our community.

If our government actually secured our border and enforced immigration laws, we would not be having these discussions about separating families, anchor babies, and welfare and medical benefits for those who are not entitled come here and live off of the taxpayers.

Both problems are simply the cost of doing business in a "progressive" society where our government has apparently sided with criminals and lawbreakers. And half of us have chosen to NOT be donors to the beneficiaries of our revolving door justice system and to resist being consumed by the socialist welfare state.

The bigger question on guns is why do so many people suddenly feel need to keep a weapon at home and the answer is liberal governmental policies and our progressive judiciary system which no longer protects it's law abiding citizens. If you are truly concerned with reducing the number of weapons in people's homes then you should be lobbying the judges to lock up criminals and keep them there. There are people buying guns to keep at home who absolutely hate, fear, and know little or nothing about a gun but they buy them because they live in fear of robberies and home invasions. And they see that our judges and prosecutors are doing NOTHING to lock up the criminals. The criminal justice system is nothing more than a speed bump on a superhighway. It don't even slow the little punks and thugs down.

You won't solve the gun in the home "problem" until you cure the crime in our neighborhoods problem. And I don't see any progressives writing letters about locking up the thugs and keeping them there for a really long time so ordinary folks can feel safe in their own homes. On the contrary, I see our politicians and judges supporting legislation that essentially says "let's don't even bother to try to punish criminals". Until that changes, I don't see gun ownership going down and yes, there will continue to be accidental shootings. But guns are not the root of the problem. The root of the problem is crime and perceived danger. Now you start addressing the crime and you'll have yourself something there Dr. Lillard. Until then, you are blaming tornados on people who build storm shelters.

oneofthesane
2184
Points
oneofthesane 12/04/12 - 05:17 pm
3
0
OpenCurtain
10048
Points
OpenCurtain 12/04/12 - 05:54 pm
4
0

We need to ban them all - Car's

It is simple as that.
There are few vehicles in the USA than Citizen owned Firearms.
Yet Vehicles account for more deaths and injuries than Firearms every year.

Should we be banning Vehicles instead?

Using more current numbers from 2009:
Statistics based on 1 registered firearm for 1 registered vehicle.

Vehicle deaths vs. Citizen Firearm Deaths.
(I have say citizens because a few left leaners tried to included Military in their numbers to get what they wanted,)

2009 1 for 1 number
Gun Deaths ...... 6.33 per 100k
Vehicle Deaths...11.62 per 100k

Gun Injuries ..... 211.00 per/100k
Vehicle Injuries... 862.75 per /100K

So Vehicles despite training, testing, licensing and stricter law enforcement are 2x times more likely to get you killed, or 4x times more likely to get you hurt.

Quoting the Author May 25, 2012 Bruce W. Krafft
"... the fact that defensive gun users save twice as many lives as criminal gun users take, guns are still safer than cars and gun owners are still safer than car owners."
note:He said citizens are 2x times as likely to save a life than the one a criminal takes.

Is this why they want to ban firearms?
To make it safer or have equality for the Criminals?

Parting Shot
Pun intended... Remember, nothing in the US constitution gives you a right to own a vehicle. But, there is a 2nd amendment giving us a right to private gun ownership.

Gage Creed
5740
Points
Gage Creed 12/04/12 - 08:20 pm
1
0

Doc....if it has to be

Doc....if it has to be explained to you....you will never understand

Jane18
12326
Points
Jane18 12/04/12 - 09:05 pm
0
0

Just don't get it!

And Gage, Dr.Lillard and the others that think like him, will never, never, understand the common sense of responsible gun owners! They only think one way.........................

itsanotherday1
19157
Points
itsanotherday1 12/04/12 - 10:51 pm
0
0

Hey! It's.... thuh

Hey! It's.... thuh children...... ; The one phrase that makes everybody go stupid and lose all trace of common sense. Sure, the life of a child is precious, especially your own; but the the world is an imperfect place and unfortunately, sometimes children die.

Well, if it saves the life of one child.... A noble thought, but again, impractical when you are talking 6 billion people on this earth. We want to minimize child mortality within practical limits, but we don't need to get stupid about it. Nature and chance are cruel.

Back to Top
Top headlines

Man charged in deaths of parents, brother

Richmond County sheriff's investigators have charged Ryan David Jones with three counts of murder and related charges in connection to Tuesday's discovery of three charred bodies in south Augusta.
Loading...