I agree that the leftists are hardheaded. Additionally, the right side tends to be equally hardheaded. This article seems somewhat slanted to me in that no one on the left side has blamed deer hunters for violence. The article does say that they blame easy access to guns, but the reality is that the deer hunters are clearly not the issue. Therefore, using them as an example, is somewhat of an irrelevant point. The nation we live in is doing it’s best to control who and who does not get a gun. I don’t think any additional measures need to be taken. The background checks that are in place today are designed to keep guns out of the hands of criminals. It is unfair for the government to assume that everyone who buys a gun is going to use it criminally. Hence, we are doing the best we can as a nation to protect our people without impeding on personal rights laid out by the constitution. I just think the point this article is trying to make uses the wrong angle to make it.
During the Vick-Dog nonsense, I remember comparisons between Vick killing dogs and deer hunting. Which is an absolute outrage.
The point of the article is that in this group of people with guns and easy access to guns, the problem isn't there. Ergo, the presence of guns and access to guns is NOT the root of the problems that the anti-gun crowd claims it is.
I don't think the point is irrelevant. To me, it (correctly) implies that those who go thru the legal process required to purchase and carry a weapon are not a threat to the general population.
I believe this article is exactly to the point and that is that people kill people, not guns.
Welcome to Free Republic.
Quinn's First Law: Liberalism always generates the exact opposite of its stated intent. Similarly, government bureaucracies never solve problems, they manage them and exacerbate the ones they created by interfering with market forces and processes.
The only thing the background checks do is make it harder for law-abiding citizens to purchase certain guns quickly. Criminals will get their guns, regardless of the laws out there, by breaking the laws they don't follow in the first place. Which is the nutshell of the article. Deer hunters follow the laws in place, criminals with guns don't.
Deer hunters and any legal gun owner in general take the label assigned to them by the left....we’re all gun nuts.
The article is spot on.
Yeah, and they work about as well as the "War On Drugs" has in keeping the inner city clean and free of illicit substances.
Regards,
GtG
PS The (black) market will supply a demand wherever it develops. Throwing government money at the problem just forces prices up.
Some goober in a gooberment uniform can’t protect you or any citizen. The Supreme Court has stated (correctly, according to the Constitution) that the cop on the corner is not responsible for the prevention of crime s against the citizens on his beat.
An armed citizenry once did protect against the inevitable social predators which are always amongst us. Police are a relatively recent invention.
Get a gun because the armed are able to live free of rear and predation.
The following summarizes the armed citizen discussion:
1. Historic American Belief: Know guns, know peace.
2. Leftist (socialist) belief: No guns, no peace.