Victor H. Sanderson of Flandreau posts a critique of America's gun obsession on the letters page of that Sioux Falls paper. He offers these interesting statistics:
One has to wonder what has caused our present obsession with guns. I will quote an article I recently read: “The United States ranks number one globally in private gun ownership with 270 million guns in civilian hands or, 88.8 firearms per 100 people. U.S. law enforcement officers have only 897,400 firearms and the military 3.1 million.”
The writers of the Second Amendment gave us the right to gun ownership; however, I don’t believe they meant for us to be stupidly avid. It appears that many are making idols out of guns [Victor H. Sanderson, letter to the editor, that Sioux Falls paper, 2013.04.22].
I find Sanderson's numbers come from gun researcher Aaron Karp. His 2012 figures show law enforcement firearms have increased to 1,150,000. Karp's data on civilian firearms comes from 2007. The surge in gun purchases since President Barack Obama took office is well-documented; while conservative commenters mistakenly equate background checks with actual gun purchases, the over 70 million background checks the FBI reports since 2009 suggest that the current count of civilian firearms in the U.S. may now be well over 300,000,000, possibly giving us a 1:1 ratio of firearms to citizens.
So assume we have 300,000,000 guns against the combined government armory of over 4,000,000 firearms. We the People apparently outgun the State 75 to 1. With firepower like that, why is anybody worried about big government?
Could it be that because deep down, even conservatives recognize that the Second Amendment doesn't protect us against tyranny nearly as well as the rest of the Bill of Rights? Could it be that we all (well, all of us except gun-nuts like John Constantine) get that the pen, the press, the courts, and the schools really are mightier than the sword and the gun?
In my opinion, some people have hoarded guns and ammo since Obama's reelection because they suffer from paranoid delusions.
They think Obama wants to take their guns away from them. After that, who knows? A disarmed populace would have no defense against Obama's storm troopers ...
... and what scares me is the apparent fact that a lot of people actually believe that rubbish.
The police, the military, even the government is not our enemy they never were, they are our partners.
The entire purpose of the Second Amendment is to allow the average citizen the means to protect themselves. If there is an invading force, they work with the military and the police to defend their community, or town.
If someone chooses to own a firearm, I strongly suggest they get training how use it.
The police should not fear it citizens being armed.
BTW with that many firearms in the United States, every terrorist sleeper cell should be afraid. We could mount such a search and destroy campaign that scare Satin himself
Yup, we are a big unregulated militia. At least we got it half right.
the down side Bill, there way too many people running around with guns who:
1) don't know how to use them
2) are afraid to use them
3) think they are Rambo the Commando
IMHO if learned early enough how to properly use firearms, and respect (not fear) their power, they can be a great tool.
It was refreshing to read a letter from somebody that wasn't a gun rights activist.
Guns and meth don't mix too well, anyhow, as they found out recently in Cody, Wyoming, my home away from home.
Republican apologists for the gun nuts have been saying we only need to regulate purchases by people who are dangerous with guns. Anybody with a gun is dangerous to himself, his or her family, and society.
I've had several friends take their own lives. I don't want any guns in my house. If you want to have one, please be responsible with it's use, care and storage.
We cannot predict the future. There may come a time when gun controls become very strict and everyone will be happy about it. That is not the case right now.
Mr. Black, The right to keep and bear arms is not a mandate.
As the head of your house hold, if you do not want firearms in your house, then so be it. I will honor your request.
I am not going to force you to go out and acquire a gun.
As husband, a father, and a land owner, I feel I have a duty to protect my family from harm, be it from an intruder, a whacked out terrorist, a varmint (four legs) or a teenage boy with hormones out of control. I know my neighbors, community and law enforcement will help me with my duties; in the end the responsibility is mine and mine alone. Depending on the situation, I may opt for a firearm, or a bucket of cold water.
When the day comes that there is no crime, there is peace and love all round the world, varmints learn their boundaries, teenagers (boys and girls) control their hormones, and all evil is vanquished, then I will gladly surrender all my firearms.
Until that day, please don't try to hinder my ability to protect what is more dear to me.
BTW the buck of ice cold water is amazing for the over heated hormones.
There's a lot to like in the responsible California law and jurisdictions that retrieve guns from those no longer having the mental or emotional capacity to possess them. The right to keep and bear is conditional, as is the right to vote, or right to peaceable associate or travel. Don't be a convicted of domestic violence and keep and bear arms; don't be a convicted felon and please be free to vote; don't be a convicted pedophile and be free to live and travel where you want.
Rights. Responsibilities. Consequences. As the founders intended.
Real Bravo, Mr. MC . Big, bold statements, yet you can't state your name. Time to man up if you really mean what you say.
Mr. Johnson please see
http://dakotawarcollege.com/who-i-am/
for more details. Not only do only do you now know my name, but my face as well.
MC, I'm not trying to take that ability away from you. Neither is President Obama. But you don't need home military arsenal to do that.
In your posting you put 'us' against the government.
We are the government. Don't believe me? Read the Constitution. The first three words say it all.
If you note, the right to keep and bear arms is the Second Amendment. The first and more important is the right to free speech and freedom of the press (among others) This isn't by accident.
You should use the correct tool for the job at hand. You don't use a handgun to get a law changed or to correct a social injustice, that is what a printing press and the pen are for. You don't post blog about a raccoon that has been killing your chickens hoping he reads it and stops. That is what a hand gun or rifle is for. For each threat there is a different tool.
Like the printing press, a firearm is an extremely powerful tool. With great power come great responsibility. As a blogger you know your words and easily destroy a person's life, you select what you post with great care. As a firearm owner, I understand that one round can easily end a life. I take great care where the muzzle is pointed.
As a blogger, I am sure you have made your fair share of mistakes, mistakes that may have hurt people. Yet, you didn't step down, no one asked you to turn in your keyboard. You learned from your mistakes and keep going Mistakes are made with firearms, you shouldn't take them away because of the mistakes. We should learn from the mistakes and move on. You are responsible for the words you post. Just I am responsible for where my bullet go.
Michael, Michael, Michael: you know I shout "the government is us!" louder than anyone else in this room. I'm mucking about here in the gun-nut worldview that sees guns as their protection against a government turned tyrant and pointing out their calculus is all wrong.
1. I believe the number of guns on US soil was estimated at 700Mil several years before Obama. I always thought my father had two guns and later found six more in the attic. An assortment of old 22 caliber and shotguns. I believe that is the rule in many cases plus the imports never recorded.
2. Flem is part of a big unregulated industry which can destroy nations, and those words, like a speeding bullet once gone do their work not to be undone.
3. MBlack, we've all experienced friends or acquaintances taking there lives with guns. I have a friend in law enforcement who's son hung himself out in the yard. Was it any easier to bare looking at him hanging for the 45 min it took for officials to arrive than to have him in your arms with a hole in his head?
4. Charlie, you've been here a matter of months and you expect all here to come clean for you on identity. MC has been in the blogs for 3-4? years and is respected by many and his words didnt just arrive here to help an election agenda. Many of us are known by others here, but, for business reason don't aspire to having attacks by the insane that drop in for a day or two as well as those who work to destroy your biz because they don't agree with you. When I see you defending those receiving the caustic slander thrown here, your thoughts will become more than just empty words.
gawd.
Make no mistake Cory, there are tyrants among us. They are well camouflaged. Some have an ‘R’ and some have a ‘D’ after their names. Our Constitution protects a number of rights. These rights are what we need to defeat these tyrants.
No "Lar", not even close!
Les: can you give us a source to substantiate that 700 million claim? (And back off on Charlie: we can't all know everyone's initials. MC pointed Charlie toward his bio; issue settled.)
MC: Tyrants among us? Real tyrants with aspirations to widespread power? Name one against whom my best defense is a gun. Name one against whom a gun is any kind of effective defense.
I'm sure there are many links offering many numbers.. One that mirrors what I've read.
.
http://extranosalley.com/?p=36535
.
We'll get a count on them soon enough. Nobody knows right now and that's a fact.
.
Interesting link: http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp
Really Cory? Okay if you insist (I think you do.)
Let's say you want to take over the world. Even if you superior firepower and boatloads of money, there is no way to make it happen directly. You have to control the media, and convince everyone your way is the best for them. You don't put your name out there. You get someone else to do it for you. You convince them to surrender their freedoms for their own good. You really don't want people talking to each other, because these are smart people they can put two and two together. So you use other people to squelch speech that you haven't approved of. If you can mix some religion into plan, that is true gift, people will do anything in the name of their god. There will always be a few hold outs, those who believe you are evil. You use your 'police' force to quickly and quietly remove them. Because you control all the media, there is no reporting of it. All of our rights, the press, the pen, to worship, to keep and bear arms, protection from search and seizure, to vote, etc. all work together to ensure our freedoms.
That's right, you want names.
Just look at who seems to be pulling the strings of the puppets in Washington and Pierre.
Try George Soros, the Koch brothers, and lessor degrees Warren Buffet and Bill Gates. I would be willing to bet that there is still someone else behind the curtain.
Great, MC. Now, suppose I grant the tyranny of Soros, the Kochs, Buffet, and Gates. Tell me how to use my gun to stop their tyranny. (And let's answer carefully, lest we end up in jail with Jon Constantine.)
Developing:
http://www.aberdeennews.com/news/aan-brittonhecla-teen-shoots-another-student-at-school-20130502,0,1174604.story