Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
By J. Patrick Coolican (contact) 
Wednesday, Jan. 16, 2013 | 10:01 a.m.
President Barack Obama laid out his agenda today to reduce gun violence, but here’s the reality: Obama’s re-election and the Sandy Hook massacre have been a gift to the gun industry and the gun rights lobby. It may seem counter-intuitive, but that’s the sober -- and I believe accurate -- assessment of Paul Barrett, an editor of Bloomberg Businessweek and author of “Glock: The Rise of America’s Gun.” Last year, when his book was published, I went shooting with him at Desert Hills Shooting Club. Barrett is in town this week for the Shooting, Hunting, Outdoor Trade Show, a major ...
Government laws and regulations usually accomplish just the opposite of what they are intended for. Ban guns and more are sold. Make them illegal and demand goes up. Along with the increased sales come increased profits both legal and illegal. And we can have gun police spending full time going after the offenders. Just like drugs. How's that working out?
CarmineD
Tell the people they can't have something and then they want it all the more.
Remember the word "Prohibition"?
Well, well, well, J. Patrick Coolican, didn't I write some good advice on a post in your last article entitled, "How we can get in concert to enrich our children"? Didn't I mark in this short commentary, 'When you write 'non-politically-non-confrontational' articles, this is when you are at your best?"
So what do you do? Several hours later you post this story about you and your gun firing buddy, Paul Barrett. You claim, Coolican, that Barrett is a fair-minded reporter who tries to put himself in the shoes of gun owners, gun rights advocates and gun dealers. Is that so? So, why is it Coolican that at the end of this article you write, "They sometimes, (includes Barrett, yes?) Asserts that Obama is a totalitarian and that gun ownership is a defense against tyranny. And, it goes without saying, they are heavily armed."
Am I and all the other gun control advocates supposed to be frightened over a statement like that? Well, the answer to that is, only for our children. But, in reality, do you gun enthusiasts believe that us gun control supporters have no choices but to concede to threats of being heavily armed? Better think again.
One moment you are describing how precious our children are and how important music is to their development, and the next flash you are writing that gun control is impossible, even in the midst of our children being slaughtered by gun wielding maniacs. What is really wrong with you, Coolican?
Come on Coolican!!! Choose better friends that don't influence you so much into senselessness. Murder laws are on the books, but does it stop murder? Incest laws are on the books, but does it stop incest? Rape laws are on the books, but does it stop rape? The list goes on and on. Laws are on the books because many of them are necessary. Just because they are not absolutely effective, does not mean they should be trashed. These also limit average citizen's actions, but they are enacted due to the fact that they have concern for the greater good.
When I was a U.S. Marine, my rifle was secured in an armory. If a gun enthusiast cares to use an assault type weapon, or large capacity ammo clips, they should be able to store or rent these at their local gun range armories for use only at that range. What makes private citizens think that they are more privileged and responsible than a United States Marine?
Comment removed by moderator. Name Calling
Totally correct BChap. The president's ideas are rational. Background checks for ALL sales, limit magazine size, eliminate online sales of ammo, any legitimate gun enthusiast who is not on the fringe should agree that these are sensible measures.
BChap I'm sure that when you were on maneuvers or whatever they call it in the Marines you had your weapon with you. I'm sure that all those weapons secured in the armory did a lot of good when Major Hassan came calling at Fort Hood. I'm willing to bet that if Major Hassan knew there were a few hundred armed soldiers on the base at any time he might have thought twice about his jihad exercise. Thank you for your service to our country.
Bravo Bradley!
What is driving all this frenzy is FEAR! Fear driven by just about everything now is indicative of the behaviors we see in those who feel they need assault rifles, etc.
Shades of the rise of Hitler and fascism! However, it isn't our government that is to be feared in this extreme way, it is these paranoid delusional gun fanatics!
Normal gun owners have no need for military style home armories.
We need comprehensive mental evaluations for gun ownership, especially for those who think they are normal when they clearly are not.
BChap. Think you kinda missed the point. I never said gun control is impossible. I said I was skeptical of its effectiveness. The point of the piece was to lay out changes in the gun culture during the past couple decades, changes that I find a little troubling. But maybe I should have been more explicit about that. Thanks for reading and commenting, as always.
In reply to "bbtbrain" from the "All Comments" section. I fully understand your point. However, at the time of this rampage that you referred to, there were at least several hundred weapons on the base that were in possession of trusted soldiers. The Military Police, soldiers walking armed guard posts, etc.. As much as I would love to see a "protection station" for our citizenry at their every step to ensure their absolute safety in life, those ways and means are just not attainable.
Respectfully, to suggest that soldiers not be required to turn their weapons in to their unit armories while in garrison would be not only impractical, but unworkable, as well.
But, we do need reasonable gun control in our society. There is no getting around it.
Mr. Coolican; I thank you for taking the time to reply.
However, I don't believe I missed the point of your article.
What I find troubling is, Americans who cannot give, like your friend, Paul Barrett, even just an inch, for the proposed reasonable gun control laws submitted by Barack Obama and Joe Biden that are solely designated for the betterment and certainly an added chance of safety for our citizenry.
I asked this on an earlier post, and I'll ask again, just what the hell is the matter with you people who are gun enthusiasts?
Thank you "PeaceLily"; Oh how right you are!!!
"Comprehensive mental evaluations for gun ownership, especially for those who think they are normal when they clearly are not."
Amen to that!!!
This is the wild west and always has been. The citizen's guns have ruled the west and always will.
Yep! High-capacity firearms in the hands of people who are both paranoid AND delusional is just what we need.
The NRA are a bunch of dumbnuts. See this satirical piece on the NRA's views: http://sorrysods.com/an-apology-from-the....
"They sometimes assert that ... that gun ownership is a defense against tyranny."
Coolican -- and the U.S. Supremes confirmed that's part of the Second Amendment's foundation. Good article amongst the recent frenzy.
"Totally correct BChap. The president's ideas are rational."
notacon -- not only not "rational" but violates the oath of office he's about to take AGAIN to support, etc., the very federal Constitution. That oath is what gives him power to do anything. That Constitution's Second Amendment clearly includes the limitation "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed." That verb means "to encroach or trespass." Obviously it warns all government representatives they're on thin ice when dealing with anyone's freedom protected by it. Some violations of oaths are perjury, a felony.
"The NRA are a bunch of dumbnuts."
rodzzz -- like all people organized to be heard on any part of the Bill of Rights, they deserve respect.
"Fear is the foundation of most governments." - John Adams "Thoughts on Government" (1776)
Guns exist, we all lose.