Gun-law proposals useless

  • Follow Letters

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., has attempted to bring gun control legislation to the floor of the U.S. Senate to be voted upon. This legislation primarily focuses on the expansion of background checks conducted at the point of sale for firearms.

Unfortunately, this legislation is hollow. It does nothing to actually keep criminals from committing crimes.

It doesn’t protect the innocent from predators. It will not stop future deaths caused by the illegal use of firearms. Sadly, this legislation mainly is intended to make members of Congress appear to their constituents as if they are really doing something through the use of their legislative power to stop gun violence. In reality, they are just misleading the American people – at least those who are gullible.

The truth is that most of what is being introduced in this legislation already is law. Background checks already are mandatory. “Straw sales” – sales to those ineligible to purchase firearms based on false pretenses – are illegal. Fines and prison terms already exist. This legislation is purely feel-good in its intent.

Sadly, like other previous gun control laws passed by Congress, these won’t be enforced. If the Justice Department and the Treasury Department won’t prosecute criminals for breaking existing gun laws, why pass more laws? Is it easier to ride the backs of law-abiding citizens? Maybe.

The bottom line is that the real reason for gun control has never been about saving lives. Rather, it’s about controlling people. Unfortunately, the people who need to be controlled aren’t being prosecuted. It’s the law-abiding citizens who are being harassed and persecuted.

Comments (24)

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.
Bodhisattva
4942
Points
Bodhisattva 04/13/13 - 06:13 am
1
6

So if criminals don't follow

So if criminals don't follow laws all laws are useless and a waste of time. They should be immediately repealed since all they do is infringe on, harass, and persecute us law abiding citizens. We could save a lot of money and time in Washington, and Columbia.

carcraft
20671
Points
carcraft 04/13/13 - 06:41 am
4
1

There have been hundreds of

There have been hundreds of attempts by people to illegally buy fire arms over the past year. How many has Obama and the Justice Department under Holder prosecuted? Well the number is about 2%. http://www.seattlepi.com/national/article/Few-gun-laws-enforced-1114708.php (tip of the hat to Fox News, this information certainly wasn't on other news service programs)Yes we need a new law so we can pat ourselves on the back! If the idiots in DC would only enforce the existing laws you might actually impact crime! BUT NO we need more laws and more control till you have so many you can’t exercise your freedom and your freedom is gone at the whim of some paper pushing jerk in DC! Well if the laws aren't enforced they are equally useless corret? So why pass more? If the government refused to enforce all laws then we could really save more, all law enforcement would be local! We could save all the money the legilature costs us corret??

chascushman
6653
Points
chascushman 04/13/13 - 07:50 am
0
1
Humble Angela
41338
Points
Humble Angela 04/13/13 - 07:59 am
4
2

Bodhisattva, again you have

Unpublished

Bodhisattva, again you have FAR missed the point. Murder is illegal. Making it illegal, in NO way infringes on any law abiding citizen's rights. The left wants to make a magazine that holds more than 10 rounds illegal. Making them illegal DOES infringe on law abiding citizen's rights, and a large capacity magazine does not harm anyone in any way. For that matter, making a machine gun illegal infringes on law abiding citizen's rights. I challenge you to give a good logical reason why a law abiding citizen should not be allowed to own a machine gun.

RMSHEFF
10999
Points
RMSHEFF 04/13/13 - 08:34 am
4
0

President Obama has a history

President Obama has a history of not enforcing the laws he does not like. Immigration law, voter intimidation laws etc, however he will enforce gun laws except on the criminals. I would suggest he start with Chicago. Just look at the cities run by democrats that also have the most strict guns laws and this is what he wants to do all over America.

ymnbde
7500
Points
ymnbde 04/13/13 - 08:35 am
6
1

bodhisvatta is the point

dull, but of a peculiar cognition shared by many in the media controlled world.

"So if criminals don't follow laws all laws are useless and a waste of time. They should be immediately repealed..."

that is a cognition missing the prerequisite intellectual foundation for healthy debate.
It does, however, serve as yet another example of why resistance to gun control is so important. Those such as bodhisvatta don't get the next step in that thought pellet.
Criminals don't follow laws (duh).
The government is incapable of protecting lawful citizens from criminals.
Criminals will always have guns.
Civilized people are forced to protect themselves from criminals.
Therefore...

david jennings
514
Points
david jennings 04/13/13 - 08:56 am
1
0

Thank you

Certain members of congress appear ( at least to the gullible) to really be doing something meaningful. Well said Mr. Huffman.

nocnoc
30847
Points
nocnoc 04/13/13 - 10:07 am
4
1

Poopie and Reids own staff members admit

this latest gun control bill has NOTHING in it that would have stopped any of the School Shootings.

Until we start locking up dangerous mentally ill people, instead of tossing med's at them and pretending they are safe, we will continued to have this type of problem.

An I will continue to ask the questions:

Bizkit
21916
Points
Bizkit 04/13/13 - 11:11 am
4
0

This is being driven by the

This is being driven by the mindblindness of urban citizens who take a simplestic approach that violent crimes are always associated with guns. Certainly people from the midwest and rural areas would disagree-because they don't see guns used for violence more so than other more practical uses of the area-hunting, varmits reduction, etc.
The issue isn't what people kill people with but that violence is growing in our society-in particular in our youth. The analogy would be like taking a gun from a serial killer and assuming that would end the killing spree-missed the Hannibal movies eh. There are numerous ways to address violence in our society. We need to address the root problem rather than putting a bandaid on a major bleed by a series of taking weapons away. That will just create an "arms race" of new ways to kill. We need to remove the motivation and desire-not possible weapons-even box cutters can kill eh.

grouse
1582
Points
grouse 04/13/13 - 12:37 pm
0
0

Gee, Angela, why shouldn't we

Unpublished

Gee, Angela, why shouldn't we all have access to grenades, tanks, flame-throwers, deadly gases, etc. If something is useless unless it's used, what's the point of having it?

Truth Matters
5179
Points
Truth Matters 04/13/13 - 12:44 pm
4
2

Guns

I wonder how many patrons showed up at the Masters with assault rifles.
I am just saying.

And it strange that some legislators are all against weapon control but when I visited the Capitol one had to lock all items (phones, belts, wallets, purses) in a cabinet before entering the chambers. Maybe Congress should preach what they practice.

Gage Creed
12378
Points
Gage Creed 04/13/13 - 01:41 pm
6
2

There just so many inherently

There just so many things inherently wrong with the 1244 post...

It leads one to believe that TRUTH doesn't matter....

RMSHEFF
10999
Points
RMSHEFF 04/13/13 - 05:24 pm
3
1

Truth Matters

Yes, Obama should require the secret service that are charged with his protection not carry guns.....that would be a good idea would you not agree?

dichotomy
26646
Points
dichotomy 04/13/13 - 07:56 pm
5
0

Seems Bodhisattva (Techfan)

Seems Bodhisattva (Techfan) has a problem with reading comprehension. He always responds to something the writer DID NOT SAY.

Techfan......The POINT is that nothing in the proposed gun legislation would NOT have prevented ANY of the recent mass shootings. They are ONLY intended to inconvenience LAW ABIDING CITIZENS who are attempting to buy a gun.

Obama and the Democrats cannot harass law abiding gun owners with existing laws so they must create new laws that will harass and inconvenience law abiding people while they refuse to enforce existing laws to lock up the criminals who use guns to commit crimes. And they ALSO want to violate OUR 2nd Amendment rights while refusing to violate the unwritten "rights" of mentally ill people to be forced into treatment or confinement.

KSL
105764
Points
KSL 04/13/13 - 08:31 pm
2
1

Here is a 15 year old female with more sense in her trigger

Finger than Obama, Michelle, Reid, Feinstein and the rest of the gun control crowd collectively have between their ears.

http://godfatherpolitics.com/10354/maryland-teenage-girl-destroys-argume...

nocnoc
30847
Points
nocnoc 04/13/13 - 09:05 pm
2
0

What the police say to Poopie and Reid

about the proposed additional Gun Control laws.

A major Police Website of Active & Retired personnel conducted a poll about the new proposed Gun Laws and results are NOT what the Socialists hoped for.

http://www.policeone.com/Gun-Legislation-Law-Enforcement/articles/618378...

* 95% say that a federal ban on manufacture and sale of ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds would not reduce violent crime.

* 71% say a federal ban on the manufacture and sale of some semi-automatics would have no effect on reducing violent crime.

* Of the 71%, 20%+ say any ban would actually have a negative effect on reducing violent crime.

* 85% of officers say the passage of the White House’s currently proposed legislation would have a zero or negative effect on their safety.

* 70% said they have a favorable or very favorable opinion of some law enforcement leaders’ public statements that they would not enforce more restrictive gun laws in their jurisdictions.

* 90+/- % of officers believe that casualties would be decreased if armed citizens were present at the onset of an active-shooter incident.

So now we know even the front line in Citizen protection the POLICE, don't support the proposed Socialist Gun Control law.

Darby
19147
Points
Darby 04/13/13 - 10:43 pm
2
0

"So if criminals don't follow laws

all laws are useless and a waste of time."

.
To paraphrase your statement, "If a law does not and cannot do what it is intended to do, passing it is a waste of time and taxes; suggesting that the law did nothing to actually address the problem it was intended to solve."

That's what you really meant wasn't it??????

Truth Matters
5179
Points
Truth Matters 04/14/13 - 02:36 am
1
2

Obama

I am sure the President would love to dismiss his SS team; however, the Ted Nugents of this world who make what some believe to be veiled threats, and with the overt threats that are made against him and his family (which are more than any president ever), that is not possible.

There are many reasons why he needs protection. in one case, some nuts complained that he is not a Christian, then when he attended a particular church in DC, they started harassing the members and leaders of that church. I thought people were over the top with "Bush derangement syndrome," but the derangement re this president is off the charts.

Someone suggested that we need to look at the cause of violence rather than banning certain weapons, which I think is a piece of the solution. Well the NRA has an answer for that___they lobbied Congress to get laws that will not allow gathering certain data that could be used for research.

Now that shows you what their interest is!

carcraft
20671
Points
carcraft 04/14/13 - 09:11 am
1
0

Gee truth matters, if the

Gee truth matters, if the government enforced existing laws, but you can't make political points or divide people doing that!

t3bledsoe
13264
Points
t3bledsoe 04/14/13 - 12:02 pm
1
3

Even tougher gun control is needed:

After, and as a result of Sandy Hook, tens of millions of citizens demanded that something must be done to deter criminal actions like the one in Sandy Hook. Quite frankly, I believe that current gun control laws are absolutely not enough ! This new gun control law only passes the "POLITICAL TEST" not a real test. There is absolutely no, I repeat; no reason for non-military and non-police citizens to be able to own fire arms that should only be made for the military and police ! As for these magazines that hold much more than 6 bullets, tell that to the law enforcers and military of old. Police and military functioned for decades with 6 shooters and rifles ! Why should modern men and women expect to by magazines that hold many, many more bullets then this ?!

t3bledsoe
13264
Points
t3bledsoe 04/14/13 - 12:04 pm
1
3

Even tougher guncontrol is needed:

Tougher gun control is needed to ban assalt rifles and magazines that hold much, much more than 6 bullets.

Darby
19147
Points
Darby 04/14/13 - 07:15 pm
4
1

"....Ted Nugents of this world

who make what some believe to be veiled threats"

.
Wonder who the "some" who believe are??? As for Ted Nugent, liberals have more to fear from Teds of their own ilk, such as Theodore John "Ted" Kaczynski than self starters of conservative inclination.

Vowing to hold on to your constitutionally protected rights at all costs is to be lauded, not feared.

If you are determined to abridge those rights, then look out!

Humble Angela
41338
Points
Humble Angela 04/15/13 - 07:20 am
3
1

So, t3bledsoe, can you give a

Unpublished

So, t3bledsoe, can you give a logical reason why law abiding citizens should not be able to own high capacity magazines?

Humble Angela
41338
Points
Humble Angela 04/15/13 - 09:16 am
3
1

"There is absolutely no, I

Unpublished

"There is absolutely no, I repeat; no reason for non-military and non-police citizens to be able to own fire arms that should only be made for the military and police ! "

There is absolutely no, I repeat no reason for people to be able to own cars that are capable of exceeding the speed limit.

Fortunately, the constitution doesn't say that we only have rights that t3bledsoe and other liberals think we have a reason to exercise.

t3bledsoe
13264
Points
t3bledsoe 04/15/13 - 01:04 pm
1
3

Humble Angela, sorry that I was washing cloths earlier:

I gather, by the comments I have read of your's, "Liberal" MUST BE a very bad 4 letter word in your book. Your education shows in your writing.

First, even though a car IS somewhat of a weapon, drivers have proven daily, even hourly, that cars can go faster than the legal speed limit and kill no one.

Second, law abiding citizens MUST become satisfied with smaller magazines. If people are TRULY law abiding, then there will be no need for high capasity magazines but only for military and police.

t3bledsoe
13264
Points
t3bledsoe 04/15/13 - 02:18 pm
1
3

Humble Angela no reasoning with you

T3bledsoe here. I, in no way meant to insult you ! I mean that your writing excells many times more than mine.

As for trying to, at least, reason with you, I guess I will have to be satisfied with equality in our arguement.

I enjoyed our "banter". We will do it again because this is what politics is all about, n'est pas ? Untill next time, and by the way, how about writing some of your own LTE's

Humble Angela
41338
Points
Humble Angela 04/15/13 - 02:21 pm
3
1

If it wasn't an insult, then

Unpublished

If it wasn't an insult, then I apologize.....but a LOGICAL reason would certainly be nice to hear.....but alas....I guess I won't get one.

Darby
19147
Points
Darby 04/15/13 - 06:56 pm
4
0

"Tougher gun control is needed

to ban assalt (sic) rifles and magazines that hold much, much more than 6 bullets."

.
Okay???? Now tell me in twenty-five words or less, WHY???

And document your work, or provide some form of logic other than "Just because".

KSL
105764
Points
KSL 04/15/13 - 08:12 pm
3
1

t3

I am reminded of the reason I gave my children: Because I said so!

Back to Top

Top headlines

New chair gets vet off-road to fish

Army veteran Henry Kent's new Action Trackchair has attachments for fishing, with a holder for his fishing pole and a built-in tackle box, but others can be outfitted with gunracks for hunting.
Loading...