Friday, July 20, 2012

The Importance of Gun Control....


                                                       The Importance of Gun Control
                                                                     

                                                                   By Lady Rhiannon

No democratic legislation has ever called for a ban on all guns; rather we call for gun CONTROL. We need tighter gun control in this country and the reasons should be obvious. How many innocent children have to die before the access to deadly weapons becomes more difficult? I hope the recent tragedy in Aurora, Colorado brings to light the importance of gun control reform. Gun control is not a threat to our freedom, and it can save thousands of lives.
More people die from gun shots in the United States than any other country in the world, we also have more gun-related crimes, over all, than any other country in the world. According to the statistics from the FBI, 6,009 people were murdered with handguns in America in 2010, which was 67.5% of all murders in the country that year. There were 8,775 total firearm crimes reported in the U.S. in 2010. The highest rates of gun crimes in the Unites States come primarily from states where gun laws are most lenient. South Carolina and Tennessee dominate the board in their rate of gun crimes per capita.
Our constitutional rights are very much valid and important, but no right is absolute, without exception or consideration for particular circumstances. Even the sacred right to freedom of speech is limited in that you cannot knowingly spread false information (although no one is telling that to Fox News), you cannot call in a fake bomb threat and insight terror, and you cannot threaten someone’s life or purposefully insight violent actions. The second amendment right to gun ownership is equally as relative.
When the Second Amendment was ratified, the founding fathers had very little or no understanding of mental health and stability. Medicine and medical knowledge was still very primitive at the time and psychology was not a known practice or science until late into the 19th century. So the founding fathers never gave a thought to those who were mentally unstable and should not own guns, nor to young boys with guns who were treated like men from a very early age. Guns at the time were also far less dangerous than they are today, their guns shot one weak bullet at a time and it took a long time to reload. There were no weapons of mass destruction, no bombs, no silencers, and no automatic rifles, and there was no way for the first congress to anticipate the future of weapons technology.
Children who are not even old enough to vote or drive have access to deadly weapons. If a nine year old were allowed behind the wheel of a car, even with an adult, it would be a crime and the parent would be charged for negligence and child endangerment, at least. Yet I have seen and heard of children as young as four and five who are taken to shooting ranges and taught to shoot. This practice, even with older children, desensitizes them of the dangers of guns. Children’s brains are NOT developed enough to handle the dangers and responsibilities of handling a gun. They are not mature enough to comprehend the severity of the potential consequences. The human frontal lobe, which is the home of consequential thinking, rationalizing, and decision making, is not fully developed until the age of about twenty-five. Children are also not physically coordinated enough to safely handle a gun, which is why we also don’t let young children play with sharp things, boiling water, and fire!
I am an advocate for the restriction of guns from everyone under the age of twenty-one. I believe that if you pass a written safety test you should be able to acquire a firearm learner’s license when you’re eighteen.  With the learner’s license you may go to approved shooting ranges, be issued a gun, and practice shooting targets under strict supervision. Once you turn twenty-one you should then be able to have a psychiatric evaluation, a written safety test, and a shooting range test. If you pass the tests, you can get a license to buy and own certain hand guns and rifles for self-defense. We are required to be tested in multiple ways to get a license to drive; it is only logical that it should be at least as difficult to attain a license to own a deadly weapon. Cars are also registered, and no one questions it, and it is far more important that guns be registered so that crimes are easily traced back to the offender. It should also be a law that all firearms must be locked away securely and unloaded when not in use.
 Assault weapons and automatics should be strictly prohibited. I am viciously against hunting, but even if you are pro-hunting there is no reason for anyone to have automatic assault weapons. Automatic weapons are meant to kill people in an attack. They are not used in hunting, are impractical for self-defense, and no civilian has any business with such dangerous weapons. In an ideal world such weapons would not even exist, but as long as they do they must be kept from those unqualified to use them.
For those that would argue that they fear of a massive military uprising against the American people, you are exactly the type of paranoid nut that I do not want handling guns. The fact is that most of the people in our military would not turn on the American people (their own people) even if they were ordered to. Also, if the far-fetched, unlikely scenario occurred wherein the government and military utterly, blatantly, and violently turned on us and made this country a military state at gunpoint, we are not going to be saved by a crowd of civilians with a few assault weapons. The fact is that the American people have already been taken over, but it has been done in subtler ways, through economic disparities and corporate control of our government.
The reason that our weak gun control laws go utterly unchallenged is that the NRA, weapons manufacturers, and rich Christian institutions have strict monetary ties with the political “right”. The NRA supplies the right-wing with a mountain of campaign contributions and, in return, the politicians vote for and pass legislation that “protects the second amendment”, and keeps gun restrictions weak. The NRA and the GOP also fool the general public by asserting that the Democrats and liberals want to “take away your guns”, and ban guns entirely. They also feed into baseless conspiracy theories about “socialist” military take overs. The second amendment is a Republican talking point used to distract the masses and gain followers who don’t understand that the right-wing’s true agenda is to take over the people by sucking our way of life dry and turning us into ignorant, desperate subjects and sheep.



Twitter @ladyrhiannon824

Read my blog at The Daily Kos  at http://www.dailykos.com/blog/ladyrhiannon824

Youtube channel at http://www.youtube.com/user/ladyrhiannon824

Facebook - www.facebook.com/LadyRhiannon824

Read my blog at www.ladyrhiannon824.blogspot.com

Google+ at Rhiannon Avaneen
www.ladyrhiannon824.tumblr.com
www.ladyrhiannon824.deviantart.com


http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jan/10/gun-crime-us-

15 comments:

  1. The problem with the second amendment is that in a hypothetical armed stand against a tyrannical government (you know, the typical Republican fantasy), we would need to be armed to the teeth to defeat the US army and we would need to have like a million nukes. I don't think that is what the founding fathers had in mind.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are so right. I try to point that out, but the information doesn't seem to sink in. If our government were to turn against us, we would be screwed....have a few rifles is not going to help us. Besides....the government would need the whole military to take such orders...and that is not going to happen. As flawed as our military is, I doubt if they would EVER turn on their own friends, neighbors, and family.

      Delete
  2. there are so many incorrect statements in this blog that I don't know where to start.

    The idea that gun crimes are prevalent in states such as tn and SC is erroneous. the top states for that honor are Illinois (chicago), Ny state (nyc) and New Mexico. Mainly because they don't follow the constitution and prosecute citizens who simply possess firearms without their permission.

    Weak gun control laws?? we have over 14 THOUSAND laws on the books that concern firearms.
    What you refuse to understand is that CRIMINALS DON'T FOLLOW LAWS!!

    America is a free country. you're free to do anything you wish as long as it doesn't interfere with the rights of others.
    Should you do so, you will go to jail. it's that simple. FREEDOM means you can do right OR wrong. it's your choice.

    The supposition that there weren't "crazy people" during the time of the founders is about as inaccurate as you can get.
    mental illness has been with mankind since he's been around. It didn't magically appear right after folks started carrying firearms and history is replete with crazy people using firearms ti exterminate millions of people yet I hear nothing about them.
    Notable people such as Adolph Hitler, Pol Pot, Vladimir Lenin, just to name a few.

    To the idea that the firearms we own now wouldn't deter tyranny from our own government, I would like you to explain to me how you know this. Do you have any experience in asymmetric warfare? Because I DO, and I can tell you that the government has about as much chance of winning as a paper dog does catching an asbestos cat in hell.
    We have over 150 MILLION gunowners in the US. our combined military might? right at 3 million.

    You show your bias when you say you hate even hunting. allow me to hit you with a cluebat. Hunters conserve wildlife more than any vegan tree hugger ever will.
    they have a vested interest in doing so. They harvest the meat from those animals. That meat feeds their families, the poor and the hides even go to help habitat for humanity in many states through the sale of deerskin gloves, created through donated hides.
    The money spent on tags helps fish and game conserve as well.
    the only thing that 'environMENTALists' do is show up somewhere, shit all over everything, leave trash laying around and then after the area is trashed, they GO HOME.
    It's my opinion that there should be tags issued by fish and game for environmentalists and animal activists.

    Anyhow, all of your blathering BS really doesn't matter. why? because of the bottom line.
    The constitution requires a 2/3rds majority of the states to change it. You will NEVER get that many states to agree to do away with firearms. Gun ownership overlaps democrats and republicans, all creeds and colors. We were FOUNDED on guns.

    My I humbly suggest that you consider immigration to England or France. There, the populace is unarmed. Except for the muslim immigrants.

    I doubt you'll have the courage to let my remarks stand. most folks that don't believe in the 2nd amendment usually believe that THEY are the only ones allowed the 1st amendment.

    ReplyDelete
  3. by the way. guns are regulated MORE than cars. yet cars still top the list of killing machines in the US

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. TC, just as many deaths in the US by car - then by firearms. Around 300,000. Half of which are suicides. Which is why you might be statistically error-ed. Good news is there are 600,000 deaths by heart disease and another 585,000 from cancer... but no ones pulling that cheeseburger or soy latte from you. Totally with you though when it comes to focus being on enforcing the laws already on the books and holding criminals who are completely apathetic to the laws accountable... the fact that a felon gang banger can say that he can easily get one on the streets through the black market so he can continue to deal drugs which is also illegal and how is it that he is even allowed back on the streets? You know the cops know him, you know they know what hes doing, they could simply just roll up on him and ask him whats up and pat him down.... Bam! back to prison... what was the words Crip Tony from Dayton, OH said? "Rather get caught with it- then without it." More laws wont fix this... it only keeps the law abiding citizen unarmed and then only criminals will have them... what needs to be done, should be done with those we elect pushing law enforcement to do their damn jobs in the first place... in a period of 4 years between 1994 and 1999 the NICS background system went black... over 200 hours that a person legally could not buy a gun. In that time frame though over 3,300 guns did end up in the hands of felons and only about 3% of them were even investigated... want to know what the problem is? Its Federal agents not doing their job. Whatever the reason, maybe its money, man power, or maybe political aim... That's where my finger is pointing.

      Delete
  4. I will leave your comment as a perfect testament to the ignorance and irrationality that permeates in almost every aspect of this country. You obviously cannot even read what I wrote properly, so argument is futile. Almost everything you said is absurd and founded on lies and illogical, reactionary talking points from the right.

    ReplyDelete
  5. "6,009 people were murdered with handguns in America in 2010" of this statistic what percent were criminals? It would be interesting to see how many were second time offenders ect. Also how many people died from automobiles in that year?

    You question his (Towerclimber's) rationale -
    If there are no legal assault weapons, would it stop criminals from using them? If yes, then I would like to better understand this world in psychological advancements that can cause this to be so. If no, then I would wonder why you would want to disarm the innocent.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What relevance is there to the number of auto wrecks that year? What would your argument be then? To DE-regulate cars? Because that is the only logical reason for making that statement. We test people to get drivers licenses...there would be at least twice as many deaths on the road if we didn't give tests, licenses, and impose traffic laws. We are also required to buy car insurance, register our cars, and renew our licenses. It is a fact that regulating guns and improving gun control reduces gun crime and reduces their availability to criminals.
      Also, in ten states, gun deaths have surpassed traffic deaths...so twice over your point is moot.
      "disarm the innocent"....I believe my FIRST sentence read that there has never been a democratic legislation that has called for a ban on guns...we want gun CONTROL....get it through your head.
      Oh and how very nice and humanitarian of you to think that most of the people killed by guns were criminals so who gives a shit.

      Delete
    2. You fail to give credible evidence. Secondly you do not understand criminals thinking that having more control will stop them from committing crimes. I never said that I thought most people killed by guns were criminals - but with you saying that I am not sure you read what I wrote.

      Delete
    3. If you don't think that regulation and control reduces crime than you are denying and ignoring clear, logical, and proven fact. Even 70% of the NRA believes in reasonable gun control. You cannot give me a valid counter argument because there is none. Nothing will ever stop crime completely, but it is reduced with tighter laws and that is simple "DUH" truth. All the guns the killer in Colorado got were obtained legally, including the thousands of rounds of ammo.

      Delete
    4. The problem with the Colorado incident was it was a GUN FREE ZONE. Leaving every law abiding citizen helpless and only the killer armed.. I have no problems even with certain places being gun free zones... courthouses for instance, and other government buildings are gun free zones.. you walk through a metal detector and there are armed men in the building... You want to make a school gunfree... enforce it with metal detectors and armed reactionary forces... this would have stopped what happened in Oregon the first place.

      Delete
  6. LadyRhiannon, I started following you when I was looking for cons to go with my pros for my college thesis paper. I read your piece titled "The Vital Importance of Strengthening Gun Control in the United States" and then had to continue to review you and your blog and find it fascinating... That after all the push from different campaigns by the different states.. First California, then DC , Detroit, Chicago, New Jersey, all the states with restrictive gun laws have the most violent crime. Where when Suzzana Gratia Hupp in Texas fought and won the right to carry laws passed in Texas, then Florida... now 35 states later.... the facts are facts... Gun violence did not escalate as they thought it would when they passed it in Florida... it actually declined. Florida's homicide rate dropped 23%!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The 10,000 plus homicides a year you used, 67% of by firearms happened where? In States that had restrictive laws already. Hmmmm. go figure. It is only a tool and if you take it away from the legal citizen.. then only the criminals will have them... saying they wont is like saying there's no drugs on the streets. Homicides will continue, they will use hammers, knives, even bare hands... more laws only restrict the law abiding citizen and not the criminal element that does not care about laws, ethics or morality.

      Delete
  7. Just want you to know your my muse.

    ReplyDelete