What do guys who like this guy .....
think of this guy?
Posted on 11/13/2004 2:34:57 PM PST by neverdem
OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR
Nothing kills Democratic candidates' prospects more than guns. If it weren't for guns, President-elect Kerry might now be conferring with incoming Senate Majority Leader Daschle.
Since the Brady Bill took effect in 1994, gun-control efforts have been a catastrophe for Democrats. They have accomplished almost nothing nationally, other than giving a big boost to the Republicans. Mr. Kerry tried to get around the problem by blasting away at small animals, but nervous Red Staters still suspected Democrats of plotting to seize guns.
Moreover, it's clear that in this political climate, further efforts at gun control are a nonstarter. You can talk until you're blue in the face about the 30,000 gun deaths each year, about children who are nine times as likely to die in a gun accident in America as elsewhere in the developed world, about the $17,000 average cost (half directly borne by taxpayers) of treating each gun injury. But nationally, gun control is dead.
So it's time for a fundamentally new approach, emblematic of how Democrats must think in new ways about old issues. The new approach is to accept that handguns are part of the American landscape, but to use a public health approach to try to make them much safer.
The model is automobiles, for a high rate of traffic deaths was once thought to be inevitable. But then we figured out ways to mitigate the harm with seat belts, air bags and collapsible steering columns, and since the 1950's the death rate per mile driven has dropped 80 percent.
Similar steps are feasible in the world of guns.
"You can tell whether a camera is loaded by looking at it, and you should be able to tell whether a gun is loaded by looking at it," said David Hemenway, director of the Harvard Injury Control Research Center. Professor Hemenway has written "Private Guns, Public Health," a brilliant and clear-eyed primer for the country.
We take safety steps that reduce the risks of everything from chain saws (so they don't kick back and cut off an arm) to refrigerators (so kids can't lock themselves inside). But firearms have been exempt. Companies make cellphones that survive if dropped, but some handguns can fire if they hit the ground.
Professor Hemenway notes that in the 1990's, two children a year, on average, died after locking themselves in car trunks. This was considered unacceptable, so a government agency studied the problem, and General Motors and Ford engineered safety mechanisms to prevent such deaths.
In contrast, 15 children under the age of 5 die annually in fatal gun accidents in the U.S., along with 18 children 5 to 9 years old. We routinely make aspirin bottles childproof, but not guns, even though childproof pistols were sold back in the 19th century - they wouldn't fire unless the shooter put pressure on the handle as well as the trigger.
Aside from making childproof guns, here are other steps we could take:
Require magazine safeties so a gun cannot be fired when the clip is removed (people can forget that a bullet may still be in the chamber and pull the trigger). Many guns already have magazine safeties, but not all.
Finance research to develop "smart guns," which can be fired only by authorized users. If a cellphone can be locked with a PIN, why not a gun? This innovation would protect children - and thwart criminals.
Start public safety campaigns urging families to keep guns locked up in a gun safe or with a trigger lock (now, 12 to 14 percent of gun owners with young children keep loaded and unlocked weapons in their homes).
Encourage doctors to counsel depressed patients not to keep guns, and to advise new parents on storing firearms safely.
Make gun serial numbers harder for criminals to remove.
Create a national database for gun deaths. In a traffic fatality, 120 bits of data are collected, like the positions of the passengers and the local speed limit, so we now understand what works well (air bags, no "right on red") and what doesn't (driver safety courses). Statistics on gun violence are much flimsier, so we don't know what policies would work best, and much of the data hurled by rival camps at each other is inaccurate.
Would these steps fly politically? Maybe. One poll showed that 88 percent of the public favors requiring that guns be childproof. And such measures demonstrate the kind of fresh thinking that can keep alive not only thousands of Americans, but the Democratic Party as well.
For a minute there, I thought I was reading something sensible. "Democrats have made a big mistake by P***ing off the voters with gun control. Photo ops of kerry carrying a shotgun followed by a safari bearer with a dead goose didn't do the trick. So we need to confront this issue and admit that gun control was a mistake."
Then he goes on to say, "Instead of p***ing off the voters by making guns illegal, lets p*** them off by regulating guns out of existence."
Sure, that will really appease gun owners. What a jerk.
What do guys who like this guy .....
think of this guy?
Wonder how they plan on making the gun recognize it's a criminal removing the numbers.
fake ...... is something every one sees now..... MSM doesnt understand and wont ..... they will just fade..
"Driver's Ed (now removed from many school systems in favor of putting condoms on cucumbers) did help people be more competent drivers."
Thanks for the humor break.
LOL
Luigi
OK, I'm calling bu!!$h!t here. I owned a camera that you could work the film advance lever on, and it looked like you had taken X number of pictures, and thus that the camera was loaded. The only way you could definitively tell was by opening up the back.
I missed about 40 pictures on a trip once because of this very issue. This guy has no understanding of technology whatsoever, and is thus unqualified to comment on guns.
These libs are truly inhabitants of the twi-light zone.
And now let's start rolling back some of the existing gun control laws! We have the momentum on our side -- even the ultra-liberal, gun-grabbing Senator Kerry was running as a gunowner, and Mr. Kristof of the New York Times is conceding the issue -- we have changed the dynamic of the whole discussion. Now we should use that momentum to gain back some ground.
My first choice would be repealing the 1968 GCA, which would really put a kink in state laws that depend on it for definitions and regulatory bases.
Until they observe, listen and get educated about "our side" ...they will continue to push their agenda. They are so ignorant,they actually think that we are the ones who need education....as if they could possibly take a different route to reach their goal--and get *us* to get as brainwashed as them. HA! Good thing we think, read, and listen. sigh
These clowns (Kristof included), just don't get it. Here is the simple solution to the problem posed above: ALL GUNS ARE ALWAYS LOADED, SO DON'T POINT ONE AT ANYTHING YOU DON'T INTEND TO KILL!!! (Editorial comment only) DICKHEADs.
5.56mm
I had to jump in here again after I read this more thoroughly. NAME ONE, wise ass. I'm about as familiar with guns as anyone on this board, and I can't think of a single gun with this "feature" made in the 19th century, and only one that was made in the first part of the 20th (Colt 1911, of course). And that gun's not childproof - if they have it in their grip and pull the trigger, it will go off. What a F%%%%%g moron.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong here.
Sweet goodness.
"Next they would want to make knives safer. How, by making them dull? "
Yes, and banning knife sharpeners . . .
How do you make a baseball bat inherently safe? That poor med student was killed with a bat a few days ago. Make it out of styrofoam, I guess. Major League Baseball would be forced to play wiffle-ball.
Golf clubs would be banned, too.
Also, to avoid beating to death with a frozen cut of meat, freezers would be banned. We would have to buy our meat every day.
etc.
Yes, all practical suggestions to avoid 15 deaths a year of children under 5 -- so we also have to ban 5 gallon buckets, swimming pools, cribs (SIDS is more than 15 per year, not?) etc etc etc
One emminet 'gun nut' once wrote in a letter to a friend of his....
"One loves to possess arms, though they hope never to have occasion for them"
The gun nut was Thomas Jefferson and the friend he wrote these words to back in 1796 was George Washington.
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.