Do You Like This Story?
gun control 380x338 5 reasons why gun control is not as easy as it sounds.

Gun control. Not as easy as it sounds.

 

 

 

 

Since 1982, there have been at least 61 mass murders carried out with firearms in the United States. And in the vast majority of those cases, the killers had obtained their weapons legally.

Now, in the aftermath of yet another devastating school shooting (the three guns used by Adam Lanza to kill 20 children and 6 adults were legally owned by his gun-enthusiast mother), we are hearing the inevitable cries: WHY won’t the United States DO SOMETHING about gun control? Why can’t the Americans get it together and stop this sort of horror from ever happening again? How can so many deaths be allowed to occur as the result of legally purchased weapons?

All sorts of ideas are being tauted: A gun buy-back, restrictions on who can purchase a firearm, better controls on where guns can be carried in public places, revoking the much heralded ‘right to bear arms’…

But reform, quite simply, isn’t that easy.

Why not? The Second Amendment to the American Constitution reads as follows:  “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

And that has basically been interpreted to mean that Americans have an entrenched right to carry a gun. As a result, plenty of American households are taking up that right with gusto, keeping a gun in their house or workplace. There are more than 300 million privately owned guns in America – that’s approximately one for every citizen.

So what CAN be done? Will all these calls for reform amount to anything?

Today, we explore the five (gut-wrenching) reasons why real action on gun control in America is not as easy as it sounds and sadly, is pretty unlikely.

 1. The president can’t just change the Constitution.

Barack Obama 5 reasons why gun control is not as easy as it sounds.

Obama, wiping tears from his eyes at the press conference following the shooting

First things first. President Obama can’t just change the Constitution – the Second Amendment is an entrenched part of the American legal system and is incredibly hard to alter.

Article V of the Constitution goes through the processes by which amendments to the Constitution (and that includes DELETING previous amendments) can be proposed and ratified.

In short, it requires a proposal to amend to be supported by at least two thirds of the Congress (the equivalent of our House of Representatives) and two thirds of the Senate BOTH to vote in favour of change, or, two thirds of all the State legislatures (remembering here that there are fifty states) have to petition for change. Amendments then need to be ratified by three quarters of State legislatures.

In very, very basic language: there are a lot of steps in the process, involving several levels of Government and a hell of a lot of voting (including by some gun-toting, proud to be armed, fierce defenders of the Second Amendment).

According to About.com, of the thousands of proposed amendments to the Constitution “only 33 have obtained the necessary two-thirds vote in Congress. And of those 33, only 27 amendments (including the Bill of Rights) have actually been ratified and made into law.”

So it’s not just a matter of President Obama just picking up a Sharpie and crossing out the Second Amendment. If only.

 

2. 50 autonomous states means that there are 50 sets of gun laws which need changing

It would be nice to have just one document outlining all gun laws in the United States but that’s simply not how the legal system works. There are fifty states and each of them have their own set of gun laws.

As The New Yorker explains, each state has its own particular set of laws that govern how you acquire, use and carry a firearm – and they’re all different:

Since 1980, forty-four states have passed some form of law that allows gun owners to carry concealed weapons outside their homes for personal protection. (Five additional states had these laws before 1980. Illinois is the sole holdout.)

So again, this doesn’t require one set of changes by one legislature – this is about 50 different states somehow coming to an agreement on uniform changes that would see a safer America. And that’s pretty hard to achieve, considering they all have different laws.

 

3. The National Rifle Association unspeakably and terrifyingly powerful.

The NRA is the National Rifle Association. It’s an American lobbying group that is, according to their website, the “foremost defender of Second Amendment rights” (it’s website currently makes no mention of the Newtown massacre). In other words – they like guns, and they support everyone owning a gun. And in America, lobby groups can be incredibly powerful – they’re big political players.

The NRA argues that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual’s right to carry a gun. In their view, gun-safety legislation is an attack on that constitutional right. And fights over rights can be politically very effective because nobody wants their rights to be taken away from them.

The NRA’s slogan is: “Guns don’t kill people, people kill people”. And that’s supposed to convince us that owning a gun is a great deterrent to crime; that somehow, it will result in a less violent society.

National Rifle Association Says This 5 reasons why gun control is not as easy as it sounds.

The NRA’s slogan

This from The Atlantic:

It’s not just that the NRA has pushed for the end of a ban on weapons that are very effective at killing a lot of people in a few minutes… The NRA has pushed for laws allowing people to bring guns to work in 17 states. It’s pushed for “Stand Your Ground” laws in more than 20 states that encourage the use of those weapons.

So the gun lobby have had an awful lot of legal victories and American politicians are very much conscious of the power and influence they wield (including over the pre-selection of candidates for public office and funding political campaigns). All in all? This state of affairs doesn’t really lend itself to reforms that would limit access to guns.

 

4. The deeply ingrained United States gun culture.US gun laws11 5 reasons why gun control is not as easy as it sounds.

America has the highest gun ownership per capita in the world – with about nine privately owned guns for every 10 American citizens. The country has the highest gun-related murder rate in the developed world (excluding Mexico). One in three Americans know someone who has been shot.

The population of India is three times as big as America, and yet they have one sixth of the amount of guns. Americans have twice as many guns per person as Yemenis, who live in a war-torn nation full of conflict.

In summary: gun ownership in America is unparallelled. But that’s really not so surprising, when you consider that guns can be purchased over the counter at Walmart (a chain store which is kind of like our Big W).

Quite simply, owning and using firearms is a right that many Americans hold dear. If you’ve watched much of the news over the past few weeks, you would have seen at least one American responding that the tragedy in Connecticut would never have happened if the Principal herself had had a gun… It can be baffling to us in Australia but it’s very much ingrained in the American psyche that guns are a necessary and vital part of protecting your own property and family.

This from The New Yorker:

Between 1968 and 2012, the idea that owning and carrying a gun is both a fundamental American freedom and an act of citizenship gained wide acceptance and, along with it, the principle that this right is absolute and cannot be compromised; gun-control legislation was diluted, defeated, overturned, or allowed to expire; the right to carry a concealed handgun became nearly ubiquitous; Stand Your Ground legislation passed in half the states; and, in 2008, in District of Columbia v. Heller, the Supreme Court ruled, in a 5–4 decision, that the District’s 1975 Firearms Control Regulations Act was unconstitutional.

 

5. The political reality for both Democrats and Republicans who are in favour of greater gun control.

This is sad, but true: in America, gun control is simply not politically popular. The majority of people in the US aren’t in favour of reform – even after major tragedies like the one in Connecticut last Friday.

Gallup (a data-tracking website) has been asking Americans since 1990 whether they think gun control laws should be stricter. And, increasingly, the answer is no.

“The percentage in favor of making the laws governing the sale of firearms ‘more strict’ fell from 78% in 1990 to 62% in 1995, and 51% in 2007,” Gallup reported. “In the most recent reading, Gallup in 2010 found 44% in favor of stricter laws. In fact, in 2009 and again last year, the slight majority said gun laws should either remain the same or be made less strict.”

When questioned about gun control, Jay Carney, the White House Press Secretary said: “I don’t think today is that day.” He meant that it was not the time to discuss the implications of the political issue. And, according to The New Yorker, if you look at his response from a purely political perspective – it makes sense:

We are, all of us, angry now. Bewildered. And those of us who support gun control are perhaps maddest of all—right now. When it comes to Election Day, though, it’s the pro-gun people whose vote is most likely to be determined by this one issue.

 

So what does all of this mean? It means that President Obama is in a pretty difficult position. While a mass murder like this would seemingly give him some serious leverage to push for major reform on gun control, the political reality is that it would be extremely difficult. The community appetite for change simply isn’t there, the power of the gun lobby is too strong and legally, the hurdles he would have to jump over are just too high.

Comments

Comment Guidelines : Imagine you’re at a dinner party. Different opinions are welcome but keep it respectful or the host will show you the door. We have zero tolerance for any abuse of our writers, our editorial team or other commenters. So if you’re rude, mean-spirited, snarky, aggressive, defamatory or bitchy, your comment will be deleted (so will any replies to the original comment – so don’t bother arguing with rude people, instead just hit the ‘alert moderator’ button).
And if you’re offensive, you’ll be blacklisted and all your comments will go directly to spam. Remember what Fonzie was like? Cool. That’s how we’re going to be – cool. Have fun and thanks for adding to the conversation…

Use your profile to comment: Or, comment as a guest:
(Max file size is 150kb & jpeg's only - if you need help resizing go here »)

49 Comments so far

  1. szcz4069

    gun control…..yep great!….has anyone in the media mentioned the fact that Connetticutt already has very strict gun laws and bans on semi-automatic weapons. Each state has differing laws in relation to what weapon is legal or non-legal. to change these law nationally is a great (almost impossible) challenge. its noy just a case of “because the president wants it”…he and the “individual” states will have to jump through many hoops to have any chance of success. It will take years!!!!…and in all probability – not go anywhere fast.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  2. Jay

    Guns have nothing to do with this situation, they are simply a tool used to unleash their rage. But the problem is the rage and where it comes from.

    We all get angry at times, we may throw things, scream and shout but few humans have that place in their minds where the rage blinds them completely. Mental health is most definitely the issue. But what is the solution? Lock them up, give them counselling hope that they change? Leave them out in society and hope they never hurt anyone? I don’t think we have anything close to the solution yet.

    Yes take away the guns, take away the weapons. But what about homemade bombs, what are they capable of with their bare hands? Too many questions need answering.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  3. nonna

    When laws need changing anywhere, not just in America, it’s never easy. That argument can no longer be used as the excuse and I don’t think President Obama is under any illusion as to how tough it will be for him to make progressive change. But it has to be done and from what I hear this morning, the NRA are now willing to work with the government on this. As far as “the right to bear arms” in the constitution is concerned, it is no longer relevant and that is exactly why Nancy Lanza had guns in her home, to protect herself from intruders. It didn’t do her any good because she couldn’t even protect herself from her own son.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  4. Gin & Tonic

    My heart breaks that this wonderful country that has lead the world for so many years is in such a mess. It cant possibly be too late to do something about the gun culture. What is so scary is that so many ordinary Americans cant see that it is a problem and not making them safer.

    I cant see anything changing right now, but maybe after the next massacre, or the next one something might turn the tide?

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  5. vocaaloft

    Howdy, I am from Chicago. I am 40. If your doctor has prescribed Cialis to you, please explain how you take the pill and how you get more of them.Lastly, how much does it cost you annually? If yes, how?

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  6. Amandarose

    who ever thought America would have a black president? Or that gay marriage would be legal?
    Change can happen- It needs a movement and a leader to move the people but I believe it can happen.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  7. Kris2040

    There have been similar suggestions (on posts here!) that teachers have weapons in their classrooms.
    A classroom full of kids and a loaded weapon? Nothing could go wrong there ever!!
    There are enough subjects in a teaching degree without “shootin 101″, thanks!

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  8. Kris2040

    Hey wow! Whoever suggested restricting ammo sales the other day – it was just made as a suggestion on The Drum – cause the 2nd amendment doesn’t say anything about ammo. Nice!

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  9. kaye11

    I’ve been following the debate about US gun control over the last few days. There are those who want stricter laws and a ban on certain types of weapons. Sadly there are the “gun nuts” that don’t want any change at all. It’s just heartbreaking that they feel the situation is fine as it is, that the death of children is acceptable. For the US to do nothing would be embarrassing. Does anyone know if there is any avenue for parents from around the world to have our say, and somehow put pressure on the govt over there, or show support for advocates of new laws? Just feel strongly about this. I picked my baby up from kindergarten on friday.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  10. Anonymous

    Sure it’s difficult, so is sending men to the Moon and robots to Mars.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • Bec

      I agree but have to say that technical solutions are often easier to implement than political ones. I keep hoping there is a technical solution for Climate Change, because politically it doesn’t seem to be going too well.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
  11. Guest

    I don’t agree with the second amendment (it’s a classic case of why a bill of rights is a really, really bad idea) but those below who suggest that it should be limited to flintlock muskets as per the time of its adoption are wrong. Firstly, as a general principle, when you interpret statutes etc you do so according to evolving technology which is why freedom of speech (in the US of course) isn’t limited to just shouting and quill pens but includes new fangled stuff such as radio and the internet. Secondly, the drafters were among the most intelligent men of their time and collectively invented a lot of new stuff, they were not people who intended society to remain static. But most fundamentally, the second amendment is not about self defence or hunting, it’s about the ability to overthrow a tyrannical government which was of course of some importance to the people who had just fought off the most powerful military force in the world. So second amendment “arms” mean something you can keep at home that will allow to you fight off a modern army. Muskets won’t do it, high powered semi automatics will, heavy calibre weaponry is probably overkill. Ironically, this interpretation would allow you to ban pistols which are militarily useless and which together account for most of the gun death in the US.

    Now obviously apart from the odd whacko that thinks the US Government did 9/11 no one really thinks the US Government is or will ever be a government that needs to be overthrown but that’s what the second amendment is there for.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • szcz4069

      you are generally correct in terms of the second amendment….its there to protect the people from the government….and if anyone thinks this is an out of date concept…plse just look around the world and tell me which countries could have done with such a basic law,…most of the african continent, the middle east, south america…in all these places you have basic human rights being abused by the governments that are there to serve the people…..so in todays modern world, the US government is technically no different…although it hasnt gotten so bad in the states that the government is openly fighting the people….it is removing their constitutional rights piece by piece….alot cannot see this happening….others can…and its this group that is being labelled the conspiracy theorists, whacko’s and even terrorists!!!..there will come a day when those that cant see this ….wake up one day to a world which they now nolonger have the power to change…only then will they wake up to the reality of an america that is not too dissimilar to Africa or Chile…..you have some of the strongest laws around….change them at your peril!.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
  12. TLeaves

    http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/america-s-gun-culture-after-the-newtown-massacre-by-jeffrey-d–sachs

    Check out the articles about gun control from this guy.. pretty amazing stuff… they know what they need to do, they are just self paralysed to do the things they need to.. to the detriment of the innocent..

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  13. Anonymoose

    Just because something is hard doesnt mean its not worth trying.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  14. Tuesday

    geez…the US is one messed up place. When the constitution was written they had no idea that the semi automatic guns available today would exisit. Surely they would have thought twice if they’d known.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  15. Cinnamon

    As an Australian I can’t wrap my head around why people here feel the need to have a gun/guns. I mean that guy that was planning another school massacre had 47 guns… 47! Who needs that many guns?! On the other hand you look at countries like Canada where gun access is just as easy yet shootings are so low and Switzerland. So yes while I believe something definitely should be done about gun control there are also other issues at play here. One of which I believe is the media sensationalising these sort of events and making the shooter almost celebrity like in status. If someone is introverted, has been bullied, suffers a mental disorder and generally feels like they’re alone, feeling like doing something like this could make people see and acknowledge their existence may be enough of a push. Like hey look here I am… Now plaster my face and make everywhere!

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • Spekegirl

      For the record, it is not “just as easy to have gun access in Canada”. Canada has very strict gun laws. One must have a licence to buy a gun. In order to obtain a licence you have to take a course in how to handle and store guns. You also have to have another licence to hunt. All firearms must be registered. There are no exceptions. Not anything like the US at all. Just for the record!

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
  16. Sammie

    I don’t know many people who are in favor of outright banning guns, but most of the people I talk to do support specific limits, such as background checks and bans on semi-automatics. To be fair, I live in Washington state and the culture here is VERY different from that in the south. I would not be surprised at all if Washington and other similar states made some drastic changes, but getting the south to bend will be a whole different ballgame…

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  17. Regis

    It’s disheartening to read the many obstacles that will need to be overcome, and it will take brave leaders to stand up to the NRA. I truly hope President Obama is the man to start to reform the gun laws, and that ‘meaningful action’ will mean winding back the long-held beliefs that you have a constitutional right to own a gun, ‘just because’.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  18. lucinda

    I think most people realise these limitations, and understand that is why the push for change has not even happened in the US. However, the argument that guns are so ingrained in their culture, while true, is not the best argument.

    African-Americans having no rights, gay marriage being illegal, women not having the right to vote – all of this was part of the US culture. Culture can be changed. I don’t think this falls squarely on the politician’s shoulders, but if they start fighting for it, the process will speed up. If everyone just shrugs their shoulders and says “it will never change” then it won’t.

    There are more options than just changing the constitution. Perhaps the Supreme Court wouldn’t allow it, but even limiting the number of guns a person can legally own would help to stem the gun-loving culture. It may not save lives immediately, but if it slowed the gun trade, the gun shows etc it should have a flow-on effect.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • Kris2040

      Yeah, I think of those things too – “that’s just how it is and it works fine” except it didn’t, so someone finally had the guts to change stuff. It won’t be pretty and it may well be dangerous, but it needs to be done.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
  19. Jayne

    I don’t think anyone believes that the change required will be easy. That does not mean it should not occur. Nothing worthwhile ever comes easy.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  20. Poss

    What is scary is that this has inspired people to buy more guns. One gun shop owner declared he had sold more guns after this massacre than any day in the last 20 years – these people fear losing their right to own guns so they stocked up!
    The other Mammamia post this morning about the parent of a mentally ill child is also timely in that mental health is such an ignored issue in our society. Even with legally owned guns, tragedies like this will still continue to happen, even here in Australia, unless those with mental illness are able to get better access to treatment and more money spent in this most stygmatised health area.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  21. MikeyMike

    The U.S.A. is usually the master of the knee-jerk reaction, especially when it comes to terrorist activity, so why can’t they have one NOW ???!!!

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  22. Dragongirl

    Put gun reform in the too hard basket and continue to let the blood of your children soak your country.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  23. sharoncello

    We Australians just don’t understand the gun culture. It has been a part of their culture for so long & it is ingrained. I cannot understand why many Americans think they “need” a gun – and they cannot understand why I would think that they don’t need a gun.

    I’ve had a look at some recent stats (on wikipedia… hmmmm) and many of their closely neighbouring countries apparently have very high rates of gun homicides per 100,000 population in one year (much higher than the US at 3). El Salvador (50.4), Honduras (46.7), Guatemala (38.5), Colombia (27.1), Panama (12.9) & Mexico (10)… seriously high!

    I imagine that many Americans perceive a real threat from these countries – a reality that I cannot even comprehend! This is such a complicated issue…

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • Neeks

      A lot of the gun deaths in those countries listed are a result of poverty and the drug trade. The vast majority of drugs from those countries supply the US, particularly in regard to Mexico, so the US influence is also a contributing factor to the gun deaths in those countries as well.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • sharoncello

        Overall gun deaths are much higher in the US (around 12 per 100,000 population from memory). The numbers I quoted above are gun homicides – the difference is mostly gun suicides (and a few police shootings). Interestingly, the rate of police shootings in the US is very similar to the overall rate of gun deaths here in Australia!
        In the other countries I mentioned the gun deaths are almost entirely homicides.
        But it’s an awful situation whatever way you look at the numbers.

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
  24. needshelp

    It is very tough for President Obama. Unfortunately to make a change of this magnitude you need a statesman of the calibre of PM Howard – the Man of Steel.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  25. phoodietweets

    “Guns don’t kill people. People Kill people.”

    No…. People WITH guns kill people.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • Anonymous

      Great poiny

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
    • Anonymous

      It’s also possible to kill someone with your bare hands…

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • Zepgirl

        Yeah, but not 27 people in 20 minutes unless you’re Jack Bauer or something.

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
      • whatahooha

        yes but not a whole classfull of kids at the same time

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
      • Dea Clark

        But probably not 28 in a matter of minutes

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
      • Kate

        Duh of course but does this really compare to a GUN vs children?

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
  26. Anonymous

    Thank You. SO many people think PRESIDENT Obama (Hate how people just call him Obama) can just click his fingers and there will be change. This is a complex issue that will take time, lots of time to address.
    I believe an amnesty is good plus a ban on semi automatic rifles and handguns. No one needs those type of weapons apart from the police and armed forces.
    Just as an aside, I’ve lived in California for 10 years and have never seen guns at any of our local Wal Marts. I think the South has a more prevalent access in these type of stores. However I think many Australians tend to sensationalise this issue by inflating the actual availabilty of weapons. This varies from state to state.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • Shaezy

      Hi Anonymous,

      I completely agree with you on an amnesty. What do people need these guns for unless they eventually intend to use them (be it for home protection or otherwise.).

      As far as Australians sensationalising the availability of weapons, I posted this on Saturday – it comes from abcnews and seems to support the all-access availability.

      129,817 federally licensed firearms dealers in the United States
      - 51,438 are retail gun stores
      - 7,356 are pawn shops
      - 61,562 are collectors with licenses to sell
      - 9,461 manufacturers and importers

      Excluding the manufacturers, on average that is approximately 2,400 places to buy per state. Granted I understand it would vary state by state, and the laws of purchase would also, but that is a truly staggering number.

      Australia (in total) has around 1,900 supermarkets (average 238 per state/territory), the US has 36,569 supermarkets (731 per state). Even clothing – there are “only” 98,767 clothing stores across the US. That’s on average 1,975 stores per state. (all stats from Census bureau, 2007). Surely this must mean that gun stores/sellers occupy first place in the number of stores/sellers of all categories?

      I can’t get my head around the sheer number of stores and brokers of weaponry. It boggles the mind. And sadly, whenever there is a massacre, we hear about it and see these statistics that, by all accounts, indicate that the gun obsession is rife in the US and they are available readily everywhere.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
    • Faybian

      When we went into a sports store last year in California (fresh off the plane so to speak), to get some sneakers, we were faced with a variety of guns at the front of the store. These included various Rugers, rifles and shotguns and a Tommy gun (of sorts). We actually took pictures we were so morbidly fascinated.
      We did leave with a pair of sneakers.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
  27. Karyn

    It is an enormously complicated issue given the power of the NRA, the US political system, the Congressional election cycle, American gun culture and Constitutional law.

    But fundamentally like any laws, the “right to bear arms” needs to be viewed in today’s context.

    In 1791 when the 2nd Amendment, “the right to bear arms” was adopted, a highly trained solider could shoot 4 rounds per minute. Today using a semi-automatic rifle an untrained civillian can shoot 40 rounds per minute

    http://visual.ly/gun-control-and-evolution-guns

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • anon

      Actually, there are two restrictions on the number of rounds that can be fired by a semi automatic weapon, the first is how quickly the shooter can pull the trigger, the second is the capacity of the magazine and how fast the shooter can change the magazine.

      Really, 40 rounds a minute is pretty slow.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
    • Guest

      When the ‘right to bear arms’ discussion comes up, I always think of the family guy episode where the founding fathers are discussing the consitution.. For me, it sums it right up:

      Founding Father 1: ‘All right, we have our Constitution ready.’
      Founding Father 2: ‘Shouldn’t we fix the second amendment about the right to bear arms?’
      Founding Father 3: ‘What’s there to not understand? Every American has the right to hang a pair of bear arms on their wall.’
      (cut to picture of bear arms on a wall)

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • Zepgirl

        Yeah, I think about that too! Classic :)

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
  28. Alice

    Thank you for posting this after yesterday’s post. While I agree that a lot of people including myself would like to see Obama attempt to change the gun control laws, we need to understand what he is up against. A nation of people who already own guns and majority of whom want to protect their right to keep theirs. Even if change is brought about, how are they going to get the assault rifles out of all of the homes they are already in?

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  29. Laura

    I don’t care if they think it won’t work, they should at least try to change the laws. If nobody tries it’ll never change. They don’t have to get rid of all guns – just make it harder to get them and harder to get a license and control the number and type of guns the general population can purchase. Make some changes – it’s terrible that these shootings keep happening – you can’t control the mental unstable ppl in the world but you CAN control their ability to get their hands on weapons which they can use to harm other ppl.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  30. Rebecca

    Devastating. They are literally “shooting themselves in the foot” with their selfish disregard for anyone but themselves. And with the exception of a handful of people with sense they can’t even see it. Devastating.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  31. Theresa

    and this is what makes it all so sad. I cannot fathom how there is justification for owning weapons that can kill so many people so quickly. To think this massacre was over in a matter of minutes leaving so many dead and so many shots fired, is unbelievable. The constitution was written in a different era, when muskets were used, single shots taking many minutes to re-load.I say give the NRA members muskets as per their constitutional right and call it even. Unfortunately that’s utopia and while I think Obama is the man to start the change I don’t think we will see it happen in our life time. Rest peacefully little angels of Sandy Hook, you are mourned all over the world.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • matildavdb

      I can’t agree more, this right they speak about is based on the constitution written hundreds of years ago – time/things change, technology changes.

      Whenever someone talks about the right to bear arms I am always thinking about the poor children’s right to life and how the law should be protecting that right. (and of course rights all the other innocent victims of gun violence).

      I really would have so much respect for the President who decided to take this problem head on. I understand that writing about change is a lot easier than making it happen.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...