| Author | Post |
|---|
Doug Huffman
State Researcher
|
Posted: Sat Mar 1st, 2008 02:40 pm |
|
http://www.charleston.net/news/2008/mar/01/letters_editor32313/
Ban handguns
Out of the ashes of tragedies can arise opportunities for significant change. There is no better example than the shootings at Northern Illinois University.
Can there be a more compelling reason for strict gun-control legislation than this catastrophe? The murder of these students having occurred during a presidential campaign creates the perfect forum for candidates to set forth their positions on how true gun control can be achieved.
But no candidate has made any meaningful statements to this effect.
Here is part of Sen. Clinton's response to the NIU shootings:
"We just have to figure out how we're going to get smart about protecting our kids because obviously we have to first and foremost do everything we can to take reasonable steps to keep our children safe and while safeguarding and respecting our Second Amendment rights"
Sen. Obama's reaction to the shooting has not been any more substantive than Sen. Clinton's. He was quoted by the AP as follows: "I think there is an individual right to bear arms, but it's subject to common-sense regulation."
Again, there it is again, the individual's right to bear arms. These responses are unacceptable. The solution does not lie in protecting an individual's rights to bear arms, a right that has never been determined by the Supreme Court as the true meaning of the Second Amendment.
The solution lies in federal laws, which would totally ban handguns, and would require extensive background checks, and prohibit the import of guns into our country, and more.
I implore Sens. Clinton and Obama, along with Sen. McCain and Gov. Huckabee, to seize this opportunity to offer our country and the bereft families of victims of gun violence more than condolences.
NINA D. HOFFMAN
Lavington Road
Charleston
Letters editor at the Posted & Currying mailto://barbara@postandcourier.com
We want to hear your opinions. Click here to send a letter to the editor. Please include your full name and contact information so we can verify who you are. Unverified letters cannot be printed.
|
Shinz1212
Member
|
Posted: Sat Mar 1st, 2008 03:12 pm |
|
Reading this made me physically ill. It is beyond me how someone could be so naive to think that a law would prevent crime.
|
Louisiana Carry
Member
|
Posted: Sat Mar 1st, 2008 04:00 pm |
|
|
springer7676
Member
| Joined: | Sat Mar 8th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 7 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Mar 9th, 2008 03:39 am |
|
The following was my reply sent to the Editor.barbara@postandcourier.com
Dear Ms Hoffman,
I am appalled by the NIU shooting as everyone who are parents, educators, media, and gun owners. Yes I am a gun owner. Appalled and angry that another shooting has occurred in our great country by someone who neither collects, hunts, or otherwise enjoys the firearm as am object of beauty in some cases and/or as a tool for enjoyment. The shooter was apparently insane or depressed to the point that he wanted revenge for his state of solitude and anger. He used guns, a shotgun and handgun, to murder fellow students without remorse and without love for life either his or his victims. His mental state was one of revenge as proven by his action.
I do not criticize your editorial ,however I do disagree with it. I have owned guns for 30 years. In that time I have owned and still own a handgun and a shotgun. Your call to ban handguns and eventually all guns is not the answer to the NIU shooting. I honestly don't know what the answer is for stopping a murderer. Either a single murder or a mass murderer. I do know that the tool is not the cause. Banning the tool will not stop the murderer. It never has and never will. Did this shooter purchase the guns in order to carry out his mission? He probably did. His motivations were to cause harm and take revenge and those are very strong motivations. So strong that if a handgun ban were in place, or a shotgun ban in place, he would have purchased his tools in some fashion, illegally or from an unsuspecting friend, parent or stranger in order take his plan to fruition. He had no remorse.
I am saddened by the shooting and as stated, angry with him. He has distorted the truth and created an atmosphere where we believe that banning handguns or shotguns would have prevented his act. His world was not reality. Our world is reality and we need to take action to prevent his unreal world from colliding with our real world. He is like the drunk driver in that he took something useful, as the firearm, or as the drunk does an automobile , and used it in a destructive manner. These type individuals infringe on our world and cause pain it it without care. We cannot ban tools and make a difference. What we do is important to many other innocent citizens so our response needs to be aimed at the causes not the tools. Otherwise we restrict car ownership and firearm ownership of the innocent.
I hope I have not offended you with this email. That reaction is not my intent. My intent is to offer a sincere response to what you feel is the answer to this issue. Its not about the second amendment which I certainly believe is valid for all Americans but which does not have to be embraced by all Americans who do not wish to own a firearm. My desire to own a firearm and use it as the tool as it was intended should not be infringed on unless I use that firearm against my fellow American. In that case, if I have not committed suicide, I should be punished severely. I am the cause. The firearm had nothing to do with my actions. Any device that would fulfill my motivation to do harm is my tool.
I cannot express the emotions I feel for the parents of the students that were murdered. Murdered in a way that causes pain and grief for a lifetime. I have lost a love one to the misuse of a firearm. His life was ended by someone who didn't take responsibility for his actions. Nothing can change the horrific result. That realization when it comes over the grieving process is absolutely the most heart breaking realization. The parents of those children will suffer with their thoughts regarding this shooter and murderer for the remainder of their lives. The realization that the murderer was the cause for their pain will eventually come. Before it does however, there will be thoughts about firearm bans, student psychological screening, security lapse, and many others that if even managed would not have changed the outcome. In the end they will realize the murderer was the cause. His motivation could not be stopped unless we could have read his mind.
Respectfully
Stephen Grigg
|
Doug Huffman
State Researcher
|
Posted: Sun Mar 9th, 2008 02:34 pm |
|
Thanks. I'll watch for its publication with bated breath. Which is to say the P&C selects their LtE veery carefully and with a sufficiency of criteria to excuse non-publication. I have suffered them all.
|
Anubis
Member
|
Posted: Tue Aug 12th, 2008 01:40 am |
|
"a right that has never been determined by the Supreme Court as the true meaning of the Second Amendment"
Guess again! (I know, it was actually written March 1.)
|
Citizen
Founder's Club Member
|
Posted: Tue Aug 12th, 2008 01:53 am |
|
Last edited on Tue Aug 12th, 2008 01:54 am by Citizen
|
SouthernBoy
Member
|
Posted: Tue Aug 12th, 2008 10:09 pm |
|
My fervent hope is that NINA D. HOFFMAN is not a native born Southerner. I would be both agast and appalled that a fellow-Southern might think this way. Almost as bad would be if she was a transplant from some other region if the country that views arms as being rather gauche. I really do not like people migrating to our part of the country and bringing their ideas with them instead of adopting out traditions and ways.
Guns are as much a part of the South as grits. I suspect we have the highest percentage of homes with guns (78%) of any region in the country. If our "friend" hates guns so much, what else about the South might she also find distasteful?
|
rds801
Member
|
Posted: Tue Aug 19th, 2008 03:16 am |
|
| Why is it that when some BG commits a crime with a gun, some people cry for a gun ban? A BG commits a crime with a knife? Nothing! Anything else used to commit crimes will not go on a "we need to ban those" lists. If I ever go to a place that bans guns (store, restaurant, etc) and something happens while I am there, I will blame the store, restaurant for not protecting people there. They want to ban guns but they don't want to do the things necessary to make sure people are safe.
|
Liko81
Founder's Club Member
| Joined: | Wed Dec 26th, 2007 |
| Location: | Dallas, TX |
| Posts: | 462 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Aug 19th, 2008 04:09 am |
|
rds801 wrote: Why is it that when some BG commits a crime with a gun, some people cry for a gun ban? A BG commits a crime with a knife? Nothing! Anything else used to commit crimes will not go on a "we need to ban those" lists.
Well, take a gander across the pond and insert your tarsal complex into your oral cavity. The Brits do indeed very heavily regulate carry of knives and are contemplating registration of ownership as well. Pretty soon every knife over in Britain will have to have a serial number, and when you buy one you'll have to fill out a form and pass a background check.
|
Doug Huffman
State Researcher
|
Posted: Tue Aug 19th, 2008 12:31 pm |
|
No knives, Brit teeth and 'healthcare', beef, and they'll soon be toothless 90# weaklings like in the back of old comic books.
|
Current time is 08:25 pm | |
|
