Posted on 11/08/2014 5:52:27 AM PST by rellimpank
On Thursday night, 5-year-old Laylah C. Petersen became one of about 300 Americans per year killed by stray bullets.
Laylah, who was sitting on her grandfather's lap when a bullet pierced the wall of her home and struck her in the head, joins Sierra Guyton, 10, fatally shot on a playground in May, and at least nine other Milwaukee children killed by errant gunfire since 1995.
On Friday, city residents were once again left with this question: "What can we do?"
While the answer is multifaceted, one thing is clear, according to Joshua Horwitz, executive director of the Washington, D.C.-based Educational Fund to Stop Gun Violence.
"We've got to do better."
Horwitz and other national experts, in town for a previously scheduled symposium on preventing gun violence, have some concrete ideas on where to start.
Universal background checks for gun purchases are a fundamental first step, they said. But background checks as they currently exist often target the wrong people. Violent misdemeanor convictions, for example, are a good predictor of future gun violence but don't stand in the way of legal gun purchases in Wisconsin.
(Excerpt) Read more at jsonline.com ...
-first step, of course, "universal background checks"--
—ping—
Guys that used to named Bert? What do they know? Shades of I-594?
The gun grabbers and their ilk don’t want criticism just total compliance,hence no comments allowed. I see the same “comments not accepted” for a number of “controversial subjects”.Of course there really is no controversy in that rational people can and will absolutely destroy the arguments of the statists,homos,gun-grabbers,and criminals. Well,that last may have been redundant.
“How come these “experts” always come up with the same “solutions” regardless of the actual problem at hand?”
Because they are so much smarter than the rest of us and they are all progressives with the goal of making life so much better for the rest of us.
Your dead kid doesn’t trump my right of self defense.
Just as much as my possession of a swimming pool, which kills far more.
Jerks.
How many people die from stray trees falling each year?
From Snake bites?
From Dog bites?
From Sports activities?
From Airplane incidents and crashes?
From Snow related activities and sports?
From Automobiles?
OUTLAW them all!!!
Dear Gawd, outlaw them all...
That’s because they’re so brave...
Everyone who does not own a gun should be required to put a sign on their door that says “Unarmed Victims Here.”
Gun violence will go down if the criminals know where it is safe to go without anyone shooting back.
Since these victims are almost universally black, and the occurrence of this is in the less than savory neighborhoods, how about the denizens of such places start to make them less then hospitable to such elements where firearms use are the preferred method of retribution for slights and crimes within a criminal activity.
Some people can’t accept Darwin’s theory and live with it...
How random are the shots? The house wa targeted, and the trigger pulled. These aren’t from Ferguson wanna be just walking down the street and shooting a gun. No, it was specific, and the shooters intended to kill someone, even a child. But by god, they weren’t dissed.
“people with violent misdemeanor records are barred from possessing a gun”
“temporarily denied access to guns they already own”
“restraining orders”
“petition a court and ask that their guns be seized”
“tightening rules for legal gun purchases”
Oddly, I didn’t see anything related to the root cause - cultural issues.
I’d start here:
Stop the pervasive exposure of youth to Pornographic Violent Hip Hop “music”.
Swift Execution of anyone found guilty of using a gun or any other weapon during the commission of a crime resulting in death.
—in the past, the gun grabbers usually get outnumbered about ten to one in the J-S comments—
It'd be messy for a little while, but no one not willing to get shot at would be riding along. Imagine people along a street focusing fire on one vehicle. It would not take long to have a shortage of punks.
First step, declare and prosecute a war on the cartels.
After declaring war on the cartels, all members of the cartels on US soil will be shot as spies.
Problem solved.
How about the 47 % actually spending quality time with their children and raising them right so they don’t join gangs, sell drugs, and wear their pants above their poop chute? That would get rid of crime and gun violence better than any gun ban ever could.
Ah yes, start with a heart-wrenching but totally irrelevant anecdote. The author not so subtly trying to set your frame of mind. BS.
...according to Joshua Horwitz, executive director of the Washington, D.C.-based Educational Fund to Stop Gun Violence. "We've got to do better."
Yes, but it is better at what exactly that concerns me. If you are concerned about saving human lives you would be pushing for more private firearms ownership and training, not less. If you look at history, every single place that has enacted strict gun control and/or outright gun bans has seen a significant and sustained increase in violent crime. Surely Mr. Horwitz isn't advocating for more violent attacks, rapes, and murders without good reason. So what is that reason Mr. Horwitz? Why are you advocating a position you know will result in more violence, more murder? What are your true motives and agenda here?
Horwitz and other national experts, in town for a previously scheduled symposium on preventing gun violence, have some concrete ideas on where to start.
Oh, I'm sure you do... Just where do you want to take us? Down the fascist path? Lets see...
Universal background checks for gun purchases are a fundamental first step, they said. But background checks as they currently exist often target the wrong people.
Well effin' DUH! We pro-gun pro liberty people have been saying this all along. So Horwitz, are you supporting the repeal of these laws that by your own admission, common sense, and actual test are ineffective? {crickets}
The experts would like to see people convicted of a single violent misdemeanor barred from buying a gun for 10 years.
People with two or more drunken driving convictions or misdemeanor drug convictions within five years should be barred from purchasing or possessing guns for five years...
Flynn also wants to see the crime of illegally carrying a concealed weapon upgraded from a misdemeanor to a felony with a minimum three-year jail term.
That wouldn't be necessary if people with violent misdemeanor records are barred from possessing a gun in the first place...
People in crisis — mental health or otherwise — also need to be temporarily denied access to guns they already own...
...the consortium recommends legislation to establish gun violence restraining orders. This would allow family members who believe their loved ones are at risk of harming themselves or others to petition a court and ask that their guns be seized until the crisis passes.
In other words, they are looking for more ways to chip away at our Constitutionally protected fundamental rights. A little here, a little there. "Hey, how can you be against this? It sounds so good, denying xyz access to guns...???" Then of course when these ill-conceived measures do not actually reduce gun violence (big surprise) they'll push for more, and more and more controls and restrictions.
They know they can't simply ban private firearm ownership in the US - yet. Try that today and it would result in the overthrow of the government. But little by little they can, and are actively trying, to move in that direction.
Tough sentences for career criminals in possession of guns ... But law enforcement is just one part of the solution.
Not surprisingly the libtard writing this is soft on criminals. Sure, tough sentences, but that's not really where we should be focusing...
"We need to fire on all of these cylinders — and hope there is a piece of it that does prevent the 5-year-old from getting killed — instead of the default of doing nothing," he said.
...and wrap up by coming back and jerking on those heart strings again. When someone is trying to lead you into an emotional response to an issue you just know there's a good reason they don't want you thinking rationally and dispassionately about it. Sorry, but laws and policy should be set rationally and dispassionately.
Maybe it's me and my understanding and appreciation of the issues, or maybe not. However, it seems ever more clear that the aim of so-called gun control advocates really has absolutely nothing to do with safety and everything to do with disarming and ultimately controlling people. Lets not forget the roughly 50 million people killed in the 20th century by their own governments after having been disarmed. No joke, google it. Think it can't happen here? Think fascists and dictators and evil are just something that happens in other places and other times? Wake up.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.