Posted on 04/05/2002 3:26:03 AM PST by rw4site
This is a long-running theme of the VPC. I don't know for sure, but Josh may be the originator of the idea of giving the CPSC the authority to regulate firearms, he's certainly been the leading proponent of the notion. At least the VPC and Mr. Sugarman are open about their agenda -- his rational for proposing this is that (I'm paraphrasing) "any rational regulator would outlaw them..."
The Remington 700 problem? A highly debatable "problem", frequently related to remarkable misuse of the product (unusual mis-maintenance, like rusting or untrained DIY-ism).
The .50 caliber problem? What problem? Nobody has been hurt (except one flagrant criminal misuse indistinguishable from equivalent criminal misuse of any other gun).
Other problems? Virtually all "problems" in this industry come from deliberate criminal misuse of the product. Most of those people who call for safety regulation don't understand the products. I wish my cars were built as well & safely as my Colt and Glock products. If an industry doesn't need regulating, don't regulate it.
No, kidding, and actually since .50 cal target rifles were developed by civilians and adopted by the military, they should be considered a 'serious threat to the military safety', by his logic.
Firearms will be safer by being unencumbered by any type of locking device other than a well-designed thumb safety. You wouldn't want your car's steering wheel locked when you need to make a quick maneuver; it's not a safe feature on a gun either.
Firearms will be safer by having a light, crisp trigger pull that aids accuracy and plants bad guys. You wouldn't have clunky, gritty controls on an airplane; not a safe feature on a gun either.
Firearms will be safer by having a large enough magazine capacity to ensure planting all the bad guys. Who wants a tiny hard drive or gas tank? Not a safe feature on a gun either.
Last but not least, firearms will be safer when they are freely carried without fear of being arrested or demonized. It does not good to leave a fire extinguisher or spare tire at home; not a safe idea for a gun, either.
I look forward to working with you all as we work together to make firearms safer! :)
Hahn, Christopher H & Sarah Jo
3507 Hillbrook Dr
AUSTIN, TX 78731
I don't know if it's the same one, but he is listed as an attorney.
Notice how he says "100 deaths and injury claims". Is that 1 death and 99 injuries or what? However many deaths, none of them could have occured if the simple rules of gun safety were followed. If someone released the safety while pointing the gun at thier friend or themself the problem is not the gun.
Here:
Apologies to JimRob for linking to this bilge on his board BUT, this just goes to show that the article in question is not just factually wrong, logically flawed, and poorly written, it verges on plagarism.
"Your car? Side impact panels would not be tested for resiliency without the National Highway and Traffic Safety Administration. Your lunch hamburger? The beef would not be inspected for bacteria without the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Your child's new doll or action figure? Warnings about small parts would not be on the packaging without the governance of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.
Anyone seriously agreeing with this article ... think. The car industry added the re-inforced side door panels. The industry is continually adding features to attract new buyers infinitely buying.
So now there is car safety checks on which panels are more effective. Good idea. However it all depends on cost. Some buyers buy the smallest and least expensive cars; we all know small cars are much more likely to have serious or fatal injuries to the passengers if involved in an accident than larger, heavier cars, etc.
All cars can not be made equally safe. It goes without saying. It is the drivers of the cars that cause accidents for multitudes of reasons, chief of which is poor driving habits, speed, distraction, alcohol or drug impaired, going to sleep while driving, poor maintence of the vehicle and its systems, etc.
We do not say cars are too dangerous for people to have. We do not really enforce the rules and regulations all that well. Many immigrants drive without licenses.
Articles like this are too stupid throughout and hopefully not taken seriously. Some young and some non thinking types might jump on the bandwagon as does the medias.
Besides ...... teddy bears are for infants and children guns are for responsible, consciencious, individuals with maturity. Of course this is not enforceable as some are not going to reach this state of development is this life.
Food is dangerous, people choke on food all the time. Usually by accident, however death follows if the blocking substance can not be dislodged. Do we make laws about it? It is the way of things. All things can not be fixed.
Parental neglect,or having lack of descent behavior theirselves do not or can not teach their children how to live life. We do not and can not stop them from having children, etcerta. The writer of such an article is a person seeking the spotlight and attempting to gain devotees.
Simply put.
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.