Tuesday, February 5, 2013
From State to State, Varied Responses to the Issue of Gun Violence
Since the Newtown shooting, many governors have now included some sort of reference to their views on gun control anytime they have made a formal address. However, these views have not always been consistent with the views of the parties these governors belong to, some noticeable examples being Chris Christie and Mike Beebe of of Arkansas. Across the country, new reforms and arguments are appearing that are allowing either stricter or less-strict gun laws without actually going against any federal laws or regulations. However, many states are now trying to avoid the conflict of guns all together by instead turning to trying to change regulations of schools specifically. No matter what happens, the country is in great divide, including in the parties themselves, about gun control and what is the "right" thing to do.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I have never quite understood the argument about guns. This could be because I'm on the side that doesn't have them, but I maintain my opposition to owning firearms. I know the Constitution says that people have the right to bear arms, but I personally have very little trust in the Constitution. Firearms are built for murder, and they should be much harder to get than they are right now.
ReplyDeleteUmm...why are they trying to regulate schools when it is GUNS that are the problem? I feel that the schooling is fine, but gun laws need to be stricter. Being in a family that have very little guns, I see both sides. I don't think guns should be banned, but I think the laws should make it harder to get them. As for the governors saying different views than their parties, good job and hats off to you! I am so proud that our governors have different views on things that the mass of their party! It is about time. I hope this will push many others to change their views and hopefully cause a compromise.
ReplyDeleteAubrey, they're trying to regulate schools because we have people who think the only way to solve their problems is by going and shooting up a building..... And I wouldn't call trying to make schools safer "regulating", and I also don't see that as a bad thing.
ReplyDeleteAaron, my family has successfully owned and operated a wide range of firearms from a 9mm Glock all the way to a .22 pump action shot gun, and so far we've murdered a total of zero people, so how about we dial it back about six notches on the dramatics scale?
I think the main problem is that when people hear gun control or regulation they think of different things. Some people think that means banning all guns, others think it means only banning some guns, and others think it means just making it harder for people to get guns. People also look at all of those things as either a good or bad thing. I see that gun control is definitively necessary but that does not involve taking guns away from responsible gun owners, collectors, and hunters. And the president's plan does not intend to that that either. We need stricter and mandatory background checks, a ban on high capacity magazines, and a ban on MOST assault rifles. If all of these things were in place there would be a lot less gun violence as we have seen in other countries. Also think that our country's mental health system needs to seriously be restructured. Some want to blame it on relax of gun control others on the major flaws in mental health system, but honestly it is both.
ReplyDeleteI think the only possible medium for all these issues is to make gun laws stricter, but still make it possible for people to obtain guns. Making guns harder to get will hope simmer down the shootings. I believe it is way to easy for a normal citizen to obtain a gun in the US. This may be a little extreme but I believe that a person wouldnot need a gun for proection if he/she knew that others did not have a gum as well. Of course, I am all for hunters having guns since it is a highly practiced sport in many parts of thr country.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Seb. We should have stricter gun laws and background checks, and nobody in this country needs an assault rifle or machine gun for anything. But guns are always going to be a part of this country, and that's okay in a controlled environment. The many Republican-dominated state governments and the relative ease of travel between states undermines most attempts of Democratic governments to regulate gun ownership, so broad federal policy on gun control needs to be made fast.
ReplyDeleteI think the main regulation or law that should be implemented by the federal government is to increase the difficulty by which one acquires a gun by creating mandatory background checks and giving the ATF more power to oversee this. I do not believe anybody particularly needs an assault rifle and a ban on them might decrease mass shootings such as what happened in Newtown, but the vast majority of gun related deaths and shootings are done by handguns which will not be banned, so the only way to limit these incidents seems to be better management of who can own such a weapon.
ReplyDeleteI honestly agree with Nora. My father and I own several firearms, have been to numerous gun shows, have gone shooting for fun, and have murdered zero people. Guns get their bad reps from the people who abuse their rights, not the ones who actually have good intentions for owning ones. Stricter gun control won't change anything. I lied, it will. It will make the law-abiding citizens who use their guns for good purposes (protection of their homes, hunting, self defense, whatever the case may be) have a harder time getting the guns; however, the guns that are being stolen and purchased illegally will be just as easy to get before restrictions are on them. Actually, at the most recent gun show that we went to, there were several people carrying guns openly. Wanna know why no one was shot? They had to show that their barrel was empty before entering. There were several.. actually a majority... of people there who had concealed carry permits. What kind of person is going to be dumb enough to shoot up a place like that? Also, at the same show, my dad bought a Baretta hand gun. Next to him was a seemingly harmless elderly man who also wanted to buy a hand gun. The salesman conducted the background checks. My dad was approved, but the elderly man was rejected. Obviously he had a bad history with guns in some way and thus was rejected and was not eligible to purchase the hand gun he wanted. So there are effective background checks being done.
ReplyDelete"The right to keep and bear arms shall NOT be INFRINGED." -The Constitution
Seb- Obama's plan is "geared to look like Chicago's"
ReplyDeleteHow's that working out for them so far?
This is a very hard issue for me to accurate depict my position. I have shot guns and my cousins have guns and we are very responsible with them so I feel that they should not be stripped of their right because some nutcase decided to murder innocents. That being said, I feel that getting a gun is far too easy as many of these shootings have illustrated and therefore some regulations should be put into place for the safety of others. There should definitely be a more complete background check where certain felonies can keep you from getting firearms period. Also the mental health of individuals should also be checked and tested in order for them to get a firearm. Guns are an important right for Americans, but given the current events, something must be done, but preventing responsible Americans from having guns is not the best way to go in my opinion.
ReplyDeleteThis is an issue that for an incredibly long time will be surrounded by controversy and disagreements. I have nothing against guns, but I want to see change. I do think that Sam brings up a good point that illegal sales of guns will most likely remain the same and for those trying to purchase guns for sport or protection will have a harder time, but this is not an ideal world and no solution is perfect. In this situation I think we just need to keep trying until we find the best solution, but if the possibility of saving lives may compromise the right to bear arms, I am to go with saving lives.
ReplyDeleteThere is no real "right" or "wrong" thing to do. Stricter background checks and guns laws would make a difference , but the problem is that the type of guns that were used at tragic events like Newtown shooting are military type guns. Why would a normal person need a military type gun?
ReplyDelete