The only defense/talking points I have heard against gun control legislation are:
1. the government will "eventually"??? ban all guns.
2. we need semi-automatic weapons for self-defense???
We can't just assume that the government will make a "leap" to ban ALL GUNS.....we need good safe legislation to keep us from "ANARCHY". The problem is we DO NOT have trustworthy and honest legislators to do the job!!!"...and some with a "far-right mentality" that "assumes doom & gloom" in any attempt to do that job.
Just because we have "speed laws" does not prevent us from "driving" or possessing a car!!
We have the right to own property....so we can buy a car;
but the state collects a tax on its purchase, your county makes you register it & pay another tax/fee, then you are required to purchase insurance for it, and then to "drive it" you have to obey speed laws along with many other road rule restrictions including, now, wearing seat belts. Does that prevent you from buying or driving your car ???? NO!!!
Hopefully, it keeps us safer !!!
We have FREE SPEECH, but there are restrictions to prohibit "slander", libel, etc.......
so, on it goes in a "civilized society" where not "everyone" does the "right thing" or has the necessary individual responsibilty we would expect or hope for.
The National Rifle Association (NRA), the main gun lobby, has refused to consider any common sense gun reforms following several mass shootings. It has instead chosen to be the primary group working to block reforms.
Steve Sack / Minneapolis Star-Tribune (click to view more cartoons by Sack)
But the NRA wasn’t always so extreme. In fact, for the majority of its 141 year history, the organization backed gun regulation and rarely if ever claimed that regulations were unconstitutional.
In 1934, the group’s president Karl T. Frederick testified in support of certain gun regulations that later made it into the National Firearms Act of 1934, one of the first federal gun laws. The law regulated “gangster weapons” used by organized crime, such as machine guns and short barrel shotguns.
THE ROOT CAUSES OF GUN VIOLENCE ARE MANY AS SHOWN ABOVE...... SURE, WE NEED TO KEEP OUR RIGHT TO POSSESS GUNS AS GIVEN IN THE 2ND AMENDMENT......(I HAVE MINE AND PLAN TO KEEP IT) BUT, THERE IS MORE TO FINDING A NEEDED SOLUTION TO THE GUN VIOLENCE IN AMERICA......
"America's political left is culpable here, as well: as a group, the media is the Democrat Party's staunchest political ally, and, refusing to bite the hand that feeds, liberals have doggedly, hypocritically refused to pin certain root-cause labels where they truly belong."
"Many young people, here and abroad, now bedight their bodies with piercings and tattoos in efforts to emulate the deranged freaks (of all races) cavorting about on MTV. The media daily exert a direct, pernicious influence on the comportment of millions of gullible youngsters. Our common culture, mores, and manners (in short, our future ability to live together, peacefully) have all been systematically wrecked -- sold out for money -- by the media elite. http://www.gsusignal.com/2.14076/the-root-causes-of-gun-violence-1.1952190"
"Do we need better gun laws? Sure." "Do we need better cybersecurity laws? You bet."
But that's not because we will solve all our problems by increasingly restricting our law abiding populace, it's because we need better laws, period. And, by "better," I don't mean more intrusive. I mean better thought out, better coded, better debugged."
"Our legal system has been subject to the same sort of feature creep that our operating systems struggle under. The code of laws we live under is a spaghetti code of unmanageability and special interests. If we, as a nation, are to take serious adult action about our serious adult problems, we're going to have to first have to address one of our more serious issues: how we govern and whether we can afford to continue to tolerate the childish behavior of our leaders.
Isn't it about time our politicians grew up and put American interests before Democratic interests or Republican interests, or the interests of the nearest lobbyist with an open checkbook?"
I have written about NEWT before...... but despite the sudden and disasterous results of his 2012 campaign, he remains active in the political scene......WHY??
We all can admit that he is certainly the most EXPERIENCED, KNOWLEDGEABLE, AND ARTICULATE potential candidate out there.... and he even "looks Presidential" !! (even his opponents agree to that.) So....WHY??
A number of FACTS and QUESTIONS arise....
FIRST, the FACTS: 1. A majority of the vote-eligible public still does not vote. 2. A majority of the vote-eligible public considers themselves dis-enfranchised from the political process. 3. A majority of the vote-eligible public has stated their preference to be "independent" and not aligned with either party. 4. A majority of the vote-eligible public has shown an increasing tendency to be fiscally conservative and socially tolerant on most issues. 5. A majority of the vote-eligible public favors a smaller and Constitutionally bound government.
So, NOW the QUESTIONS:
1. Why is NEWT still active in politics??? Does he plan to run again.....despite his age and the ever-present, age-old baggage he carries?? Will he manage to find a way to carry the moderate, libertarian-minded segment of the voting and non-voting public??
2. Is he simply trying to resurrect his dear-old party...the GOP, despite its reputation of overwhelming distrust and corruption??.....or help establish some New party??
3. Is he just trying to give direction and leadership advice to any new inspiring political candidates??....or just help educate the public??
I probably don't agree with every one of NEWT's positions (never have).... BUT, he is the most open-minded, forward thinker I know of... that would have the ability to merge this diverse society we have found ourselves in ! I truly hope that he can find it in him to accomplish such a task and lead this nation back on a moral and fiscally sound path!! If not......the year is young and I still can dream!!!