By in Politics

More gun control? Not for me

I am not wanting to upset or offend anyone but this has been on my mind for several days. The recent shooting at Umpqua Community College in Oregon as well as other places has opened up the debate once again on gun control. The President of the United States was quick to state that we need tougher gun control laws and I honestly disagree. Taking guns out of the hands of everyday citizens is not going to cure the problem. Criminals aren't going to follow the law and that's who is committing these crimes. No, they may not have had a criminal record in the past but they still did the crime. I just don't believe that taking the rights of gun owners away works. In my opinion, telling a criminal that they can't do something...well, they won't do the trick. I mean, you tell a criminal not to do something, are they really going to listen? probably not. But what if you tell a common citizen? Chances are that they won't want to break a law or risk going to jail. So if you take guns away from the average person and the criminals are the only ones, is anyone being protected? We have tough enough laws on the books already...the fact that they aren't being enforced continues to be a problem...taking away rights from gun owners won't cure this problem.

You will need an account to comment - feel free to register or login.


JohnRoberts wrote on October 4, 2015, 12:56 PM

You have to admit the unspoken intent of Obama and anti-gun liberals is an eventual ban on guns period. Yes, no issue with background checks unless such a scheme is devised as a stepping stone to outlawing guns period. And if the liberals ever get their dream utopia of a gun free America, we can enjoy the kind of utopia that England, that model of outlawed gun society, enjoys: peace and harmony with rampaging soccer hooligans using everything at their disposal in wanton violence.

dcnj123 wrote on October 4, 2015, 1:02 PM

Background checks are already being used for gun purchases. Yes, there are people who purchase at gun shows and things of that nature but Obama tends to believe that so much more should be done. Most gun owners abide by the laws to the letter. I mean, alcohol is readily available with a valid ID and nothing more yet they want to make stricter gun laws? Alcohol has killed many times more people than guns have...just a fact.

Kasman wrote on October 4, 2015, 2:44 PM

Yes, but our soccer hooligans (which aren't as bad as many make out) don't use guns and neither do our police (not routinely at least). The problem isn't gun ownership - it's people who disrespect other people which is the problem. America's attitude to guns needs to change - there is no such thing as a dangerous weapon, there are only dangerous people but guns are such a part of who and what America is that I don't see the problem being solved any time soon - if at all.

JohnRoberts wrote on October 4, 2015, 4:35 PM

I would disagree about soccer hooligans. I witnessed their behavior first hand in London's West End. I just watched footage of West Ham fans in violent riots and brawls. America's attitude towards recognizing that it has a sick narcissistic society is what needs to be done. The ills causing a person to use that gun are not the focus. Obama blathers that the gun did it not the person and how we need to get rid of guns but not trying to do something getting to the root of this growing sickness in people.

Kasman wrote on October 4, 2015, 4:39 PM

I agree that Obama is wrong. It's people who kill not weapons and i also agree that it is the USA's attitude to guns which needs to change and not laws which restrict gun ownership - they will only annoy the vast majority of law-abiding citizens.

littlenancy wrote on October 4, 2015, 4:43 PM

Hi, just my opinion:

We don't have a gun problem. We have a people problem. Just my opinion. I do not currently own a gun. I don't even like guns. I wish we had world peace. We don't.

There are always warning signs in every case. It becomes a tragedy when people do nothing.

I just wrote a news story today, and am waiting on editing, where something was done in California. Kids who saw a problem stepped up, told someone. An investigation happened. 4 teens are in custody for their plot to kill as many people as possible at a school event. No one was hurt, all because other kids noticed a problem, told someone, that someone took them seriously, and an investigation was launched. THIS is how it is supposed to work. People doing the right thing can avert many tragedies.

Feisty56 wrote on October 7, 2015, 10:56 AM

I agree with your reasoning and argument. So many of these troubled people could have been stopped somewhere along the way before the tragedy occurred.

A young friend of mine had concerns about another student on campus and voiced his concerns to university administration. The system worked as it is intended to do: administration took the concerns seriously, looked into the situation and, in this case, the student with issues left the university. How many times has the system failed to work as it should, or have concerned people looked the other way, thinking it someone else's problem?