Do we need greater gun control?: First lady is right person to lead charge on sensible policy

J Weekly - Covering the SF Jewish Bay Area ^ | January 10, 2013 | Rabbi Amy Eilberg

[2ndDivisionVet]

Along with citizens throughout our nation and beyond, I was anguished by the death of the beautiful, innocent children of Sandy Hook Elementary School. In the wake of the shootings, I was gripped first with deep grief and then with a powerful wave of activist energy.

I hoped that this most horrific incident of gun violence would shake the nation from complacency and stir the adoption of sensible gun control legislation. I believed that all over the country, parents of all stripes and persuasions — including gun owners — would recognize that a civilized nation cannot continue to allow policies that make such unimaginable acts possible. I feared that the calls for gun regulation that filled the airwaves just after the shooting would be drowned out by the next compelling news item.

Several great national leaders have stepped up to lead a national gun reform campaign: Vice President Joe Biden (who has the passion and political expertise), New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg (who has the money), and Sen. Dianne Feinstein (the legislative vantage point), to name a few. Many fine national organizations — including a remarkable range of national Jewish organizations — have begun sophisticated organizing campaigns. (I urge every reader of j. to sign the petition at http://www.endgunviolencenow.org.)

The general contours of thoughtful violence-prevention policy have begun to emerge. These include legislation limiting access to assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines, effective enforcement of firearm regulations and registration of arms. More complex are questions about how inadequate mental health services contribute, in very small numbers, to gun violence, and a broad conversation about sanctioned violence in news, media, entertainment and sports.

To effect such changes, the president and his congressional allies will need to demonstrate an unstoppable groundswell of support from the American people....

[ArrogantBustard]

OK ... I’m suggesting that we turn their rhetoric against them, and that we take the offensive in this war of words and ideas. Yes, we must oppose whatever insanity they’re puking up at the moment. We must also propose and advance our own agenda of liberty and self reliance. It’s not enough just to argue about whether the latest repressive outrage from the left is a good idea or not. We MUST turn the conversation toward what increases in personal freedom should be enacted first. This strategy has proven successful in the several States.

[Dead Corpse]

Well said...

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Not that facts enter into the gun control debate now that the Left-wing extremists see an opportunity to end America as we knew it, but here are two journal articles that illustrate the unintended consequences of gun control, namely increased murder and suicide rates, and mass-murder by government of its own citizens.

WOULD BANNING FIREARMS REDUCE MURDER AND SUICIDE?, Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, Volume 30, Number 2, Spring 2007 (pp. 649-694)

OF HOLOCAUSTS AND GUN CONTROL, Washington University Law Quarterly, Volume 75, Number 3, Fall 1997 (pp. 1237-1275) (PDF Version)

[FredZarguna]

She must be from one of the more liberal versions of the Jewish faith.

Subjected to suitable modifications, we agree:

"She" must be from one of the more liberal versions of the "Jewish" faith.

[rw4site]

THE RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS
————
R E P O R T
OF THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE CONSTITUTION
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
UNITED STATES SENATE
NINETY-SEVENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
FEBRUARY 1982
Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary
——
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
88-618

http://www.constitution.org/2ll/2ndschol/87senrpt.pdf

[onedoug]