Gordon Howie tags his post on our video conversation about the Second Amendment with a graphic reading, "Criminals prefer unarmed victims, and dictators prefer unarmed citizens."
Australia isn't a dictatorship, is it?
Just as the Newtown shooting triggered new gun laws in the United States, the 1996 mass shooting of 35 people at the Port Arthur historic site in Tasmania precipitated a national response in Australia. Within 12 days, the country had passed a ban on automatic and semi-automatic long guns. The government also bought, collected and destroyed more than 1 million firearms, eliminating about one-third of the nation’s overall firearm stock. Since then, Australia has not had another mass shooting. Meanwhile, its firearms mortality rate is half of what it was in 1996 and about one-tenth of the current rate in the United States [J.B. Wogan, "Lessons in Gun Control from Australia and Brazil," Governing, May 2014].
President Obama cited Australia's successful automatic weapons restrictions yesterday as an example of our nation's shameful failure to get serious about stopping gun violence.
Citizens have better options for fighting criminals and dictators than openly carried assault weapons. Australia shows us the justification for reasonable restrictions on our Second Amendment rights.
There are two problems with this:
1. You are much more likely to be murdered by somebody with a club, stick or baseball bat than any type of rifle (FBI statistics).
2. Australia doesn't have a 700 mile border with a dysfunctional neighbor. Are you telling me I should believe that a government that can't keep millions of illegals and thousands of tons of drugs from pouring across its border is going to be able to control illegal weapons from the same source? Firearms laws are mostly for the law abiding as criminals and crazy folks just ignore them.
Isn't it interesting that the Oligarchs who propose these frauds send their children to private schools which frequently have armed security personnel while espousing "gun free zones" for your children?
Maybe we ought to be looking at our education system to see what it is that inspires people to take out their rage on it.
Gotta love The Onion
‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens
http://www.theonion.com/articles/no-way-to-prevent-this-says-only-nation-where-this,36131/
Cranky, 1. Never heard of a mass killing with a club unless we are talking about baby seals.
2. Canada is not dysfunctional, they have pretty good cannabis laws there.
3. What oligarchs are you speaking of? The Koch brothers certainly do not want to hold back the flow of background testing. Nor does Wall Street. The money dude, is keeping you pissing your pants.
4. The reason schools, restaurants, theaters and the like are chosen is because that is where you will find the least resistance to the hate that has been building since their mommies punished them or abandoned them.
5. The only reason you want to kill someone with such brutality is sexual repression. We see that in jihad with the promise of all those virgins and here is no different with having your name in lights like a rock star. What is the difference between our domestic terrorists and the ones in the Mid-East? None, they are identical.
" Never heard of a mass killing with a club"
Have you heard of mass killing with gas chambers? Kill the Second Amendment and set up the eugenics movement.
Way to go JERRY.....
Mr. Sibson, I am a veteran that put it on the line for all of the Amendments, including the Second. I am a responsible gun owner are you any of these Mr. Sibson? Did you have the balls to defend the Second Amendment, along with the First, along with the rest?
Jerry, no I never did put my life on the line in order to defend the Constitution, only to come home and work to destroy it like Joel Arends is doing. Sometimes I wonder if the wars we fight are for actually defending the Constitution, or is it to serve the interests of the global Crony Capitalists that seem to be centered around Great Britain.
"The conclusions of these studies were 'all over the place,' says [Samara McPhedran, a University of Sydney academic]. But by pulling back and looking purely at the statistics, the answer 'is there in black and white,' she says. 'The hypothesis that the removal of a large number of firearms owned by civilians [would lead to fewer gun-related deaths] is not borne out by the evidence.'"
http://goo.gl/Odj707
"What to conclude? Strict gun laws in Great Britain and Australia haven't made their people noticeably safer, nor have they prevented massacres. The two major countries held up as models for the U.S. don't provide much evidence that strict gun laws will solve our problems."
http://goo.gl/HsOT8U
"Other researchers have focused on mass shootings: there were 11 in Australia in the decade before 1996, and there have been none since. This appears to be a strong argument for gun laws designed to help prevent massacres like Port Arthur. But McPhedran argues that because "mass shootings have been such a rare event historically ... it's incredibly difficult to perform a reliable statistical test on such rare events." Massacres, she argues, are a separate research question."
Prior to the 9/11 terrorist attack, the worst mass murder in New York occured in 1990 when Julio Gonzalez got tossed out of an after hours nightclub. He returned later and killed 87 people with scores of others injured. His weapon of choice was a plastic laundry detergent jug filled with gasoline. In the aftermath, there was no call to ban the jug or limit gas purchases. It became a story of illegal after hours clubs, undocumented immigrants and negligent landlords. If he would have returned with an AK-47, AR-15 or TEC-9, it would have been a story about a need for gun control. When a mass attack occurs with a firearm, it's only a gun problem. When a mass attack occurs with a knife, motor vehicle or bomb, it's something else, never the weapon used. G-day.
Ben Franklin:
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
Sidearms for the pre-born!
74 school shootings since Sandy Hook.
Why is it when firearms comes up for discussion it is always about mass murders, but not about the individual murders where a firearm was used as a weapon?
For example, the kid in Pierre who shot another kid, or guy shot another guy over drugs, and left the body to rot at the Sioux Falls fairground, or the guy who shot his wife then dumped her body in the Missouri River, of the the guy who shot the woman who was the manager of Cost Cutters on 41st Street in Sioux Falls. Aren't those victims just as dead as those who are murdered during a mass murder?
More like 15. Those numbers were hugely inflated.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/06/11/us/school-shootings-cnn-number/index.html
Thanks for proving the point of background checks Mr. X Ray, Mr. Sibson and Mr. Buresh. By banning guns, it does not solve our violent ways here, but what it has been proven is that the mass killings do decrease. As long as we do not do background checks and we continue to allow large drum magazines, we will have this carnage.
In the old days, the NRA stood for hunting and gave classes on proper usage of guns. Then that meant the National Rifle Association. These days the NRA is the sales arm of the gun manufactures. So they are now Not Really Anything. Wayne talks his nonsense to scare the begeebers out of you to sell guns. Simple as that. He knows that the gun is an extension of your penis and for some men, this is the sex they are being deprived of. So by all means, lets not loose the right to bear arms, lets just do it responsibly without trying to out macho one another. The girls like us without the sight of the AK strapped on our backs. Don't be so scared.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/05/14/how-cliven-bundy-and-the-land-rights-movement-are-screwing-native-americans.html
Wow boss man, just 15 school shootings! We should stand proud for that number. I am sure the children of those schools will not have any kinds of issues as they reach adulthood suffering friendly fire. Do we call it friendly fire or domestic terrorism? What do you think?
Gun walking wasn't a problem until Obie got elected. Trillion dollar deficits weren't a problem until Obie got elected.
I'm not defending it, just providing actual information instead of the false numbers Mike did
I see a couple of priests got mowed down in Arizona. Churches now give out AR-15's like candy to their gangs that go hear the hate messages. I guess the chickens do tend to come home to roost. In the priests case, I do not know if Catholic Churches do those kinds of raffles and giveaways, but the fundies sure do. Nothing says love like Jesus with an AK.
From WAPO--There have been at least 37 shootings on school grounds this year, which is just barely half over. All told, there has been nearly one shooting per week in the year and a half since Newtown. Everytown identifies a school shooting as any instance in which a firearm was discharged within a school building or on school grounds, sourced to multiple news reports per incident. Therefore, the data isn’t limited to mass shootings like Newtown—it includes assaults, homicides, suicides and even accidental shootings. Of the shootings, 35 took place at a college or university, while 39 took place in K-12 schools.
Debunkers claim if it was self defense,it doesn't count. Or if it was a gang related shooting on school property,that doesn't count. Next they will say a school shooting ONLY counts if it is done by a white,hetero-sexual,all-American type kid using only American made guns and ammunition and possessing an NRA card who has pledged total abstinence until marriage and is registered as a true-red wingnut.
Wapo's commentary ends just before the sentence starting with Debunkers.
The best way to reduce school shootings is to ban government schools and turn the education of kids back over to their parents. Banning guns is school hasn't worked.
I'm not defending it,just providing factual numbers instead of false information like El Hefe did. Works both ways,don't it?
Spoken like a true American Taliban Mr. Sibson. Keep kids out of school and in particular, the girls. Education is not necessary for the future of the country is what you are thinking and we certainly do not need smart young people who can think outside the box.
One thing though Mr. Sibson, the guns are in the homes of the parents, now what?
No Steve the best way to get rid of school shootings is limit the availability of guns so these kids can't get them.
Home schooling isn't the answer.
I'm not against the second amendment. Let's have some common sense gun control
Jerry, I know. My dad had guns, and the last thing that came to mind is that I should run around shooting people with them. And education is not about giving kids that capability to think. It is about creating human capital for the corporatist's global economy.
Banning guns will not stop murder. Banning guns will open up the possibility of eugenics. All we need it single payer healthcare so we all will be on a database.
My opinion is that home schooling isn't the way to go, it's not the way the world works, hidden in your homes with your parents teaching you. Maybe in the frontier days that would be sufficient enough, but these aren't the 1800s. Homeschooled kids miss out on so much but most of all, on socialization. I think there is a danger of a child becoming antisocial if one is homeschooled their entire life. A kid needs to learn to interact with other human beings, other races and nationalities, etc.
Private schools are not for my kid either. The world is not a homogenous one caucasian color with just upper class kids that think they're special.
Public school all the way for this parent. Public schools prepare your kid for the real world
As much as I love Australia, if I were Tony Rudd, I'd want all firearms banned too right about now...
"Public schools prepare your kid for the real world"
Yes they do, the Crony Capitalist's global economy.
Mr. Sibson, you were lucky that your parent did not have Fox News to accompany the voices in his head. I will say this again, I own guns and have been around them since I was first educated by my father and the NRA when I was a kid. I am not for banning guns, I am for controlling them in that not everyone should have one or have access to one.
Without public education Mr. Sibson, where would you be educationally? I think on one side of your mouth, you claim to have critical thinking and on the other, not so much. One side being from public education and the other from who knows what. Confusing as it is, without public education, most of us would be dead. Without the critical thinking that came from public education, we would have never had the discoveries we have made or the trips we have taken outside our solar system. Thank a teacher for that.
As far as a database goes, that train, perfected by an educated engineer team, left the station the day you first drew breath Mr. Sibson. Time to move on past that.
I never said to ban guns. The kid who shot up the school the other day brought in a AR15 assault rifle with many extra clips.
Why does this kid have access to this gun and if it was his parents who had the gun why do they even have a gun like this?
No not every shooting will end but maybe we can make it a little tougher to do.
Public schools don't teach Crony Capitalists economy
Wasn't there a time when Steve S supported the "stand your ground laws" in SD? That could work really well with "open carry" laws. Now under the "stand your ground" law when you have a reasonable fear of being killed or suffering serious bodily injury, you have a right to kill whoever is threatening you. With mass shootings occurring so frequently, it seems reasonable to fear anyone you see with a open carry weapon. Thus, you apparently can kill anyone who open carries a gun, especially if it is an assault rifle. Perhaps this is the intended free market solution to our gun problem? If we kill anyone and everyone we see carrying a gun, then wouldn't that solve the mass shooting problem?
I am nor for banning guns, but for controlling them or banning only ones I don't like. So upon what standard do we base the Second Amendment? Note I asked "what", not "who".
And Jerry, I have learned far more outside of school than I have inside school.
And the stand your ground law requires a threat to bodily harm, not simply shooting anybody who has a gun, knife, or tire changer.
I completely support a well regulated militia so that those that have guns, including me, would be subject to an examination and further training if needed. There is a training that is happening right now in South Dakota for the National Guard that keeps them up to the standards of responsibility to not only have weapons, but also to keep them trained in what they do militarily. What would be wrong with that? You could still keep and bear arms, but follow what the Constitution says regarding the Second Amendment.
If you drive a car, you have to renew your licence don't you?
With all these responsible citizens owning guns why is it I don't feel any safer?
Steve, apparently law abiding employees in Texas felt a reasonable "threat of bodily harm" when open carry guys tried to bring their assault rifles into various restaurants.
http://www.guns.com/2014/05/07/open-carry-event-at-texas-jack-in-the-box-draws-police-response-video/
Indeed, the article states "open-carry event ended up with more than a dozen officers on scene and the restaurant staff hiding inside the store’s walk-in freezer.
“They locked themselves inside a freezer for protection out of fear the rifle-carrying men would rob them,” said Sgt. Ray Bush, with the Fort Worth Police Department, of the May 1 incident."
Had one of these employees fired on the men with the assault rifle and killed them, wouldn't they be protected from prosecution?
I guess because of this Jenny.
"PETE SESSIONS: Insurgency, we understand perhaps a little bit more because of the Taliban. And that is that they went about systematically understanding how to disrupt and change a person's entire processes. And these Taliban -- [is] an example of how you go about to change a person from their messaging to their operations to their frontline message. And we need to understand that insurgency may be required when the other side, the House leadership, does not follow the same commands, which we entered the game with."
~Rep Pete Sessions, March 2009 to National Journal Hotline
I'm sure that Mr. Sibson, Ms. NOem and the rest of the tea party agree with the man who may replace Cantor in the US House.
bear: good to read you.
Jenny and what happened in Texas demonstrates how the left use fear mongering about guns to cause undue paranoia.
And yes Jerry, I agree with Dave Brat's premise that the federal government should follow the limited principles found in the Constitution, including the 10th Amendment. Unfortunately those principles along with the Second Amendment have been put aside. I don't below they are going to be restored. This thread demonstrates why.
I would have hid in the freezer locker also. There's not much that is scarier than a bunch of Toothless Texan Tea party gun carryin' rednecks comin' in to a harmless restaturant.
Restaurants are fer pleasant eatin' and drinkin' coffee and tea, not to be carryin' around yur guns. That's just a statement ya'll lookin' fer trouble.
Mr. Brat also wants to get rid of Social Security, you for that as well Mr. Sibson?
Thanks Larry!
Steve, do you think the "undue paranoia" might be a result of the actual shootings that we have been reading about on a regular basis? For example, if two police officers are sitting down for lunch in Murdo and they see a man and woman carry weapons into the restaurant, would it be "undue paranoia" for the officers to worry or fear that they might be murdered because they are part of the hated government, after the recent killings by the Millers?
Jenny thanks for backing up my point with your intolerant bigotry.
Thanks, Jenny: sometimes you just have to throw a grenade into the hole in which Sibby lives.
And there are a lot of car crashes everyday that kill masses of people. So every time I see a car, I am going to run and hide?
Jerry, I will take what I have paid in and the employer match and cancel the retirement annuity that begins at 62.
Steve, on the car crashes, why not just "stand your ground" and shoot to kill everyone driving a car that you think threatens your safety, such as those crazy kids who text and drive, or speeders, etc? Or do you think maybe the 2nd amendment might permit the government to regulate our conduct in using guns to prohibit that type of "self defense"?
Then you would be a fool Mr. Sibson. Unless you know that the rapture is coming and your day to die is on the calendar. By the way, if you do know that it is coming and your day, can I have your stuff?
Of course everybody knows Obama conspired to have gun toting retards waltz into a restaraunt and then orchestrated the waitstaff to lock themselves in the freezer in fauxknee fear to give wingnuts talking points for the day.Obama loves playing with Sibson's mind.
The guy that walks around a store with a rifle strapped to his back is the same as the guy who stands in the park and yells at everyone that they are going to hell unless they repent. Both are annoying asshats that are abusing their God given rights.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/second_amendment
The right wing of this blog might do well to read this.
The majority carved out Miller as an exception to the general rule that Americans may possess firearms, claiming that law-abiding citizens cannot use sawed-off shotguns for any law-abiding purchase.
mfi wonders if this is a new,legal definition of the word purchase-similar to the various uses of the word several? Or could it be a misprint. It is mentioned twice,I believe. Any legal scholars out there?
Obama orchestrated the mis-spelling of restaurant,as well. :)
El: the CNN article conveniently redefined, narrowing the inquiry to school shootings "like Newtown" to manipulate the number down to 15. Yes, Virginia, the US had 74 school shootings since Newtown. 74.
Facts are stubborn things.
One is entitled to ones opinion, but not ones facts.
It's long past the time to enforce pre- and post constitution adoption gun control.
http://wyofile.com/wyofile-2/historic-perspective-on-gun-control-in-wyoming-2/
cranky....for some reason nobody wants to address issue no 2....
I thought I did answer question 2 very well. I can also address Mexico and will say this. If we continue to have the relaxation of the cannabis laws that is going on at present, we will solve the "thousands of tons of drugs" (what part of the body did that figure come out from) coming across the border as there is not a need for them. We can grow our own thank you very much. In fact, we are seeing that illegal market dropping like a rock.
Simple way to put an end to illegal border crossings, make them legal. Why not utilize the labor legally and be done with it. Right now, we have illegals employed in all 50 states including South Dakota and we are okay with that. The immigrants work in jobs that no one else wants at wages no one else can live on and yet they do. We actually know of where they work and we keep our noses out of that because we do not want to interfere with those businesses. The thing about these folks is that they do not seem to get into to much trouble here with the law. So they are pretty good citizens that pay for their services and mind their own business. They do have a real problem though, they are not white for the most part. That is where the rub comes in. Brown people and black people are to be feared so we can load up on AK's and other automatics. You know, they might come after our gals, and then what?
"Steve, on the car crashes, why not just "stand your ground" and shoot to kill everyone driving a car that you think threatens your safety, such as those crazy kids who text and drive, or speeders, etc?"
That is the logic of those who believe anyone with a gun is an eminent danger.
Tim, the collective rights attack on individual rights contained in the Bill of Rights took form in a 1939 Supreme Court ruling. That was the court freemason FDR created to destroy America's Constitutional Republic. Ready yourself for a totalitarian one-world system.
Freemason FDR, holy buckets Mr. Sibson, you are really reaching. Did you watch the Terminator last night on Netflix or do you have that in your collection? Time to dust off the Indiana Jones movies as well. Dream world time of a one-world system, and you would stand up to that right Mr. Sibson?
Jerry, you can't claim that I never warned you.
Warned me of what Mr. Sibson? That you enjoy fantasy movies and like to live that theme out? The only thing you warn me of is the extremism of a tea party that has completely unraveled. Your offer is theocracy and a radical combination of church and state, no thank you sir.
Jerry, you have me confused with someone else. I am not a member of the tea party and I have rejected reconstructionism and/or dominionism. I firmly believe that mankind cannot fix these problems. Sadly, many who do are got in the trap of those who do want control of the entire world.
Throw up our hands and let God take care of everything?
Wasn't it dumbass dubya who specifically claimed he talked to his father before starting his useless wars and that father wasn't dumbass bush the first? How did that work out for everyone?
In response to the "stand your ground" danger of being shot because you open carry, Steve says "That is the logic of those who believe anyone with a gun is an eminent danger."
Steve, isn't the whole point of "open carry" to posture yourself as "an eminent danger?" If you are a good guy, you want the bad guys to know you are an eminent danger if they try anything in your presence. If you are a bad guy, you want to scare the bejeebers out of the good guys. Either way, since you don't wear a uniform, no one knows whether you are a good guy or a bad guy, and either way you present yourself as eminent danger to those around you. Hence, it is only logical that under your favored "stand your ground" law, someone who sees you with that AR-15 or shotgun or semi-automatic pistol in your hands should be permitted to blast away since it is reasonable to conclude that you pose an eminent threat to the lives of those around you.
bearcreekbat, it is no mistake that these open carry dudes do not do their little stunt in some parts of Dallas, Texas as an example. They would find out right quick like what you are saying. They are only sinister around whites and places that are commercially successful. Wimps with mommy problems for these domestic terrorists that live in mom's basement while she goes to work to support their dumb ass.