Better check your stats!
CDC "stats" include all up to the age of 17. And the number of these "children" that are involved in criminal acts (read that as gang-related) are ? Oh,thats right, they are all lumped together.

You want to play numbers? Try this, compare to the number of children that drown in pools (about 10 times as many) each year.

What do you have against the Laws as we have them? Is that to easy a solution ?

Guess I don't have the right to defend myself if needed?
There is that NEED again.

There is an old bumper-sticker that went: "Teddy Kennedy has killed more people with his Oldsmobile than I have with my Guns". It's still true!

You need to research how well the "No Guns Program" has worked in the UK & Australia. Report back to us next week on the rate of violent crime there & its upward climb since the enactment of those laws.

Do we NEED those "evil-child-killing-pools"?

And your "crystal-ball" is so much clearer,right!

"Today, once again, 60 million guns killed no one"

DougDem,
Once again , don't we NEED to put Lawbreakers in Prison? What new restrictions will prevent anti-social,abberant behavior ? (Criminal Acts)

StanG,
What am I going to do?
How bout ,call my lawyer & have my day in court.
"Defend my Alamo"? Wow! Thats out there!

"big bad GOVERNMENT", I don't think I said that. Sounds too violent for me!

Doug Dem,
Here we go again with the magical word "need".
Funny that all the other Amendments have been found to have an almost un-limited scope of growth. (Can you say InterNet, etc). Where is "Need" factored in ?

"two hours of work on that" (not quite !)is called " making of a machinegun". That has been a Federal Crime (Title 18, USC) roughly since 1986. That's called being a Criminal. Maybe you "need" to research your facts.

As for firearms in general, you want to be the person to decide what is rational, to you, that is ?

As far as "freakin' paranoia", yes I do detect quite a bit of that.

Once again, the laws are on the books, and have been. Maybe we "need" to apply them and jail the folks that break them ? Oh, that's a "need" I have. That "need" we will just discount and forget?

You seem to forget the premise of "Innocent Till Proven Guilty". Now we take an inanimate object and give it "Magical Powers ", "Evil Powers". "Touch It And you are not responsible for your actions any longer." Or quite simply ,living within our Laws. Thats a "Need"(your term, not mine) I've been fond of for quite a while also.

vsestini,
The criminals at Columbine (yes, criminals, not just students) did not use "automatic weapons".

The 2nd Amendment says nothing about "hunting"

"bazookas,RPGs, grenades, AK-47s" are not available over the counter at gun stores, gunshows etc. Or for that matter on the "street corner" in a illegal sale. You might want to go to Mexico for that. (Private ownership of military-type guns has been ilegal there for 50+years. That is working well , right !)

As far as "need", I always question when someone else makes a determination as to what my "needs" are. Do you "need" a vehicle that "you" drive on MY Public Roads that will go twice the Legal Speed ? Keep in mind that over 50 thousand + people die on the roads each year in accidents, mostly having to do with excess speed & or drinking !

There was an old bumper sticker that simply stated "Teddy Kennedy has killed more people with his car than I have with my guns".

What say we punish the people that mis-use them ! Did you know that there are over twenty-thousand gun laws on the books nationwide. Is that not enough?

I don't feel the biggest problem in this ill thought out law is with processing the citations.

I'd rather have our Police Officers on the street dealing with violent crime. The Health District is stuck with it (they were one of the most vocal supporters of the Law by the way). It has now come home to roost with them.

Let's just hypothetically say that Health Inspector Ziggy enters the suspect establishment,see's a person or persons violating the Law and approaches.

What happens then?

I suspect that it may go like this:

Ziggy- "Excuse me , but you are in violation of the Clark County Health Code, I have no choice but to issue a citation".

Customer- "OK, you caught me"

Ziggy- While writing out the Citation , "Can I see some identification?"

Customer- While lighting up another cigarette,
"No, I don't have it with me. My name is Michael
Mouse".I don't have to show you anything, you're not a cop!"

What happens then? This is putting all involved
in a situation that could escalate rapidly into a violent confrontation.

The Health Distict is stuck with a Law that cannot be reasonably enforced. The issue needs to be revisited via the Legislature.

Till then, it would seem that the District is doing just what it has done in the past with other issues, ignore them. They did not think that they would be the ones to enforce it.

Don't lay the blame on just the present administration. Veterans have been treated in this way (as a Disposable Resource )in the aftermath of every conflict that our great Country has ever been involved in.

We have a bunch of incumbent politicians in this state (as well as others)who pander to the Veterans concerns on a routine basis. Especially when it's Election Time.

"Look at what I do for Veterans" is the cry ! Like that is a task above and beyond, or it places them at great risk.

I submit that Veterans needs are a BASIC area of their "Job Description".

The "Concerns" that they express are nothing but empty promises to a group of Citizens that they view in the whole as desperate, somewhat organized sheep.

The Politicians that are the most vocal have picked up on the "game plan". In comparison to their counterparts, they would appear to be "Beyond Reproach". As the young adults say today, "Right"

Their "most gallant efforts" should be viewed as what they really are, the bare minimum level that all elected officals should perform at in regard to Veterans Needs.

These observations & feelings are probably just my form of PTSD !

FWIW, Your Mileage WILL Vary!

A Combat Vet

As a legally armed citizen, why is it I lose these rights upon entering a National Park?

All of the reasons stated "target shooting,poaching ,etc" are already illegal, banned etc. Someone engaging in these acts are criminals by conduct.

Add to this the multiple wild animal attacks that we have experienced in the past year and I feel that this makes the case for allowing firearms in these area's.

The US Park Rangers, Hummmm? Bet they carry firearms don't they ? But that is "just in case they need them". If the National Parks are so safe, why ?

The writer needs to research the high incidence of violent crime (drug manufacturing,growing) that appears to be taking place in these "Gun Free Zones"that are our National Parks!

Is it too simple a concept to use the exsisting Laws of the States the these areas are located in? Naw, that makes too much un-common sense!

To quote an old saying:
"Why do I Legally Carry Concealed ?"
" I can't fit a cop in my pocket"