Student demands for gun control are reasonable, critically important
More InfoTo the editor:
It troubles me that there are people who misinterpret the goals of the students from Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, who have organized in an effort to change the laws that rule the ownership of guns in the United States.
What they want is absolutely reasonable, critically important and does not take away Second Amendment rights from gun owners. Here’s what they want our congressional leaders to do:
- Ban semi-automatic weapons that fire high velocity rounds;
- Ban accessories that simulate automatic weapons;
- Establish a database of gun sales and universal background checks;
- Change privacy laws to allow mental health professionals to communicate with law enforcement;
- Close gun shows and second hand sales loopholes;
- Allow the Center for Disease Control to make recommendations for gun reform (i.e. conduct research on the dangers of gun violence);
- Raise the firearms purchase age to 21;
- Dedicate more funds to mental health research;
- Increase funding for school security.
More and more the cry has become “enough is enough.” The student movement is crossing the country, educating our citizens (as more and more school shooting amass) and pleading for cooperation from all of us. It took the violence, which caught two of my grandnephews in its grip, for me to get on my high horse and spread the word that not only is “enough is enough” but “enough is enough is ENOUGH.”
Rita Kasky
Sandisfield
FilmColumbia 2018: Nine days, 50 films
Health Coalition and RSYP unveil ‘Talking with Teens,’ new video series for parents about alcohol, drug abuse
I think these 9 recommendations have been placed in the conversation by adults whose goal has little of anything to do with safety of our children. Even the last two items about mental health and school security only mention pouring money into the problem and no actual move toward action. All the rest are like throwing the child out with the bath water and cannot accomplish anything other than challenge constitutional law.
Before these vocal children attack one of our most concrete base laws they should study history and learn why this is a non-negotiable matter. Learn why adults, parents, grandparents support our lobbying agency known as the NRA. It is the most powerful lobbyist in the USA, it is 175 years old, it exists because millions of older, wiser, Americans support it. The mass killings of human history have happened to unarmed citizenry by their own governments. More people have been killed by their own governments after being disarmed than by any other single threat to life, including disease. Instead of helping the promoters of disarming our citizens I would think these children would seek the facts and question authority in this matter.
You do realize more people are killed by hammers than semi automatic rifles each year? Or distracted driving incidents. Lets not even get into how many children are aborted. Lets be honest about things at least
The prior two comments by Mr. Cordon and “Bob” are exemplars of a far right ideology which has taken over the NRA and is the reason that this powerful lobbying organization has become irrelevant to a reasoned debate on gun control. We have a second amendment and cannot ignore it, that said, reasonable regulation to stop the yearly slaughter is not opposed by most gun owners. If Mr. Cordon really believes that his ownership of guns is protection against the government killing him, all the more power to him. If Bob wishes to contrast gun violence with abortion and distracted driving, I wish him well; but we shouldn’t pretend that those positions add anything to the discussion about stopping gun homicides, suicides and mass shootings in schools and elsewhere. Or, perhaps, like Alex Jones, they both deny that Sandy Hook and other massacres ever happened. That idea would perhaps not be that far fetched to them considering their above mentioned opinions, and their condescending comments about students who are fed up with the carnage left to us by the NRA and their ilk.
One of the most telling disconnects about so-called conservatives is that they appear to be “pro-life” only during a very short time period, I.e., the 9 months from conception to birth. After that it’s every man, woman and child for himself.
Once you talk about banning semi autos or mag limits, the conversation is over. It’s a non-starter, and is the definition of “taking our guns” I understand you know next to nothing about guns, but let me fill you in on something.. almost every gun in modern society is a semi auto that fires “high velocity” rounds. Who gets to determine the velocity cutoff? You? or some other person who knows just as little about firearms?
Don’t tell us no citizen needs an AR-15, until you’ve experienced a violent home invasion by four intruders. It’s not rare at all where I live and has happened to me personally. No.. I don’t find your presumption that a single action revolver should do me just fine in that situation.. or a break action shotgun, or flintlock Kentucky longrifle, or whatever else your envisioning in your head that the 2A only covers. Your life experience, or lack thereof to be more accurate, means nothing to me.
Want to talk about keeping guns out of the hands of crazy people? Fine.
Want to talk about severe penalties for not locking your guns safely and letting your deranged adopted kid get at them? Let talk.
Want to talk about special licensing for semi-autos? ,,, not sure you’ll get a lot of pro 2A people agreeing to that, but hey at least it’s an idea that doesn’t involve taking guns, or preventing innocent people from getting guns, or limiting their ammo.
Until then, I’m not sure how you can blame us for accusing you of coming after our guns, when you’re literally proposing a ban on those very firearms and the STANDARD 30rd mags that they’re most often paired with.
I’d be interested in hearing how your AR-15 was used in the home invasion you experienced. How many of those invaders did you “off” with your artillery? Are you aware of the fact that a child is 5 times more likely to be killed or injured if the child lives in a house with a firearm? If you accept that statistic as accurate, do you think that adults who subject their young children to greatly increased risk of death or maiming are acting responsibly?
April 20, 1999, my grandson was in Columbine High School. His teacher had the students shove their desks against the door to keep the two killers from getting into that classroom. My grandson heard the killers ask a question to someone just outside the door to their classroom. “Do you believe in Jesus?” was the question. Before the student could answer the shotgun went off, and he was killed instantly. When the police FINALLY went into the school, over FOUR HOURS LATER, and my grandson was able to leave the classroom, he and the rest of the students had to step over HIS BEST FRIEND, who was killed before he could answer that question. Yep. Two deranged and sick, twisted killers did that damage, and the police took HOURS before entering that school.
What is going on is nothing more that the Liberal Progressives believing that IF they can CONTROL everyone, the world will be a safe place. BS!
Had one of the teachers been properly trained and been carrying a concealed weapon, some lives would have been saved. Period.
My grandson, has never been the same. He dropped out of school; finally went back to a different school and graduated. He now is doing well in business, but to this day says “anyone wanting to take our guns away, is simply naive and stupid.”
He “gets it.”
Unfortunately, there is a lot of hysteria by the gun lobby that is belied by the facts. If anyone is willing to read the manifesto of the Stoneman Douglas group, he will see that there is absolutely no mention of altering the Second Amendment. And if anyone is truly interested read the majority opinion of Justice Scalia to understand that the Amendment does not preclude the regulation of guns. The Commonwealth, which has some of the most stringent gun control laws in this country, has done nothing that is in contravention of the Second Amendment. And the banning of assault rifles is hardly a “non-starter” as one of the commenters claimed. In fact, such a ban was in place not that long ago and it will happen again because the arc of history is not a straight line and every so often there are more sensible people than demagogues around