Michael Bloomberg and America’s guns
Email 
Print
— Bernd Debusmann is a Reuters columnist. The opinions are his own —
New York’s billionaire mayor, Michael Bloomberg, is stepping in where President Barack Obama fears to tread — confronting America’s powerful gun lobby. In the country that holds a commanding global lead in civilian gun ownership, it promises to be a hard fight.
No matter how it goes, America’s position at the top of the list of gun-owning nations looks secure. Up to 280 million guns are estimated to be in private hands and the arsenal is growing year by year. On a guns-per-capita basis, the United States (90 guns per 100 residents) is way ahead of second-ranked Yemen (61 per 100), according to the authoritative Small Arms Survey issued by the Graduate Institute of International Studies in Geneva.
Obama has been a sore disappointment for advocates of tighter gun controls, and a boon to gun manufacturers and dealers. Predictions that his administration would swiftly work towards greater restrictions helped spark a huge run on firearms after his election. The National Rifle Association (NRA), the country’s biggest gun lobby, said its members reported widespread shortages of ammunition.
Supply and demand are back in balance and those who rushed to stock up need not have feared an Obama assault on gun ownership. The president has shown no eagerness for stepping into the political minefield of gun legislation. On the contrary. Obama rowed back in haste after his attorney general, Eric Holder, prompted alarm among gun lovers by saying he wanted to reinstate a ban on assault weapons that was allowed to lapse under the Bush administration.
There are no signs either that Obama intends to fulfil campaign pledges on other hot-button gun legislation issues such as closing the so-called gun show loophole that allows private citizen-to-citizen sales without background checks, or the Tiahrt amendment, which limits disclosing information on the sale of guns used in crimes.
Josh Sugarmann, head of the Washington-based Violence Policy Center, a group advocating tighter controls, describes Obama’s attitude so far as “deeply disheartening” and says the president broke campaign promises on gun legislation.
Why? History provides an explanation: the last time the United States had a Democratic president, Bill Clinton, and Democrats controlled both houses of Congress, the party aggressively pushed gun control legislation and suffered crushing defeats at the polls, in part thanks to opposition stirred by the NRA. The Republicans took control of Congress in 1994 and held it until 2006.
Enter mayor Michael Bloomberg in New York, a city where he is popular and guns are not. In 2006, Bloomberg and Boston Mayor Thomas Menino formed Mayors Against Illegal Guns (MAIG), a group that wants to make it more difficult for criminals to get their hands on guns. MAIG’s growth has been explosive: from 15 in 2006 to 250 in 2007 to 451 now.
BATTLE OF GIANTS
That makes, as a headline in the Washington Post put it, for “a battle of goliaths” pitting Bloomberg and his group against the NRA, whose four million members tend to see restrictions such as unregulated sales from private citizens (through the gun show loophole) as an assault on the U.S. constitution’s second amendment.
It says: “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.” Exactly what that means (arms for militia members? for individuals?) was one of the most passionately disputed legal questions in the United States for decades until the Supreme Court last year ruled that it gave individual Americans the right to bear arms. The court also allowed for some restrictions on gun ownership.
In July, the U.S. Senate defeated a measure, introduced by a Republican Senator, John Thune, that would have allowed licensed gun owners to carry hidden, loaded weapons from states with weak gun laws to states with tough ones. The proposal failed largely because of energetic lobbying by Bloomberg’s mayors. It was a rare setback for the NRA and Bloomberg made clear he would remain on the offensive.
“If you want to beat the NRA,” he said on a television show this week, “you have to go out and get your message out. And it costs money to do that … You know, the NRA doesn’t spend that much money. If you look at what the real numbers are, I think that we can pull together here and raise enough money.”
Bloomberg has spent almost $3 million of his own money (Forbes estimates his personal fortune at $16 billion) on the mayor’s group. The NRA’s annual budget is around $200 million.
For Wayne LaPierre, the NRA’s Executive Vice President and CEO, talk about money is beside the point. “Bloomberg is clearly out of step with the majority of Americans,” he said in an interview. “Our membership has been increasing by 40,000 to 50,000 a month since the middle of last year. We hope to reach five million before too long.”
LaPierre is confident that the NRA will prevail in future legislative wrangling, not least because “there has been a sea change in the center of the Democratic Party.” Ironically, the vote that defeated the Thune amendment gives backing to that view. The bill required 60 votes to pass. It fell short by two. Of the 58 votes in favor, 20 were from Democrats. (Editing by Kieran Murray)
Comments RSSPost Your Comment
-
Author Profile
-
I am a pro-gun democrat who believes Bloomberg is out of step with the majority of the country. The idea that easy access to guns is the cause of violence in America is failed thinking. To continue to beat the gun control drum ignores the root causes of violence in America:
Broken families, a lack of positive role models for youth, the refusal of public officials to condemn certain behaviors, or choices made by prominent personalities as being “wrong” and handcuffing an education system so that they cannot teach morals, or ethics to a generation of young people who are not getting it at home or from MTV.
If Mr. Bloomberg really wants to do something positive he should stop trying to find easy excuses and tackle those tough issues. But that would be truly “heroic” and he wouldn’t do that: he might have to tell some of his exciting chums that their own behavior is adding to the problem, not helping it.
I am a democrat and a gun owner. I think my party is coming back to its roots, which are blue collar, midwest, pro family, pro church, pro labor, and pro gun/pro hunting.
At least the last elections cycles seem to shoe that. The democrats who won in places like Virgina, Missouri, Montana, and Nebraska were moderate to conservative in their views and all of them were pro gun candidates.
Mr. Bloomberg and the Eastern elitists would do well to keep their opinions in New York City. If they don’t it will spell disaster for the Democratic Party in future elections.
I’ll make Mayor Bloomberg a deal … I’ll drop my support for the Second Amendment when he lets me borrow his armed bodyguard whenever I want.
Definitely hypocrisy of the highest order.
It’s pretty clear what it says – “The right of the people to keep and bear arms”. How else could that ever be interpreted?
90 guns per 100 residents – is that really necessary? Bloomberg and other mayors’ efforts to prevent people from carrying anywhere and everywhere are completely sensible.
August 13th, 2009 11:50 am GMT – Posted by Steve T ———— Dude, that’s hilarious. Could not agree more. In fact, I take every opportunity to shore up support for the second amendment. I used to believe in gun control but not anymore. If I changed my mind, then there has to be others out there that just need an education and a better understanding of this issue.
With 280 million guns in private hands you would think we would have MORE violence, if in fact Mayor Bloomberg were correct.
The United States has more guns in private hands than second place Yemen and yet we have an orderly society; you can travel from one end of the country to the other without a permit, boys and girls have equal access to education, if you are sick you will receive medical treatment even if it is at the local emergency room, incidents of violent crime are down in our major cities and you are safer in downtown Los Angeles than you are in downtown London, at least that’s what statistics data suggests. So why the talk about more gun controls?
I don’t own a gun, but I have no problem with my neighbor having one, if for no other reason than it probably deters burglars from breaking into houses on my street in the middle of the night.
The powers behind the anti-gun movement truly want a world wide subservient working class that is so afraid they will follow blindly. Time after time it has been shown that in areas where legal concealed carry has been permitted violent crime has dropped. No, you can not prevent an insane person form committing murder. The press is quick to point out these instances where a gunman opens fire on a crowed of unarmed individuals then kills themselves. My point is that if the people of this country were armed first you would have fewer insane people shooting up the place and when they did they would not have the time to kill themselves. It is flat wrong to create huge populations of sheep. I would rather have my gun and freedom than a police state where the sheep now fear everything because the wolves have just changed clothes.
That said there should be a national standard for concealed carry. Licenses from compliant states would be good nation wide.
Oh yea I hate to inform you, Mr. Debusmann but no the supply and demand balance is not back. There are shortages of ammo and reloading supplies. I reload ammo for fun and it is great therapy. It also allows you to match the round to the firearm and in some cases it is cheaper than buying rounds. One would hope that this President and Senate will not ratify that horrible treaty the UN keeps pushing which will effectively disarm us and prevent us from reloading.
If a gun owner sells a small arm to another citizen why should he be responsible for insuring the buyer has a background check? I don’t need one to sell a car and they kill more people each year in this country than guns. Hell, I can sell a car without even seeing the buyer’s driver’s license.
As for the NRA I am not a member because the NRA can’t keep to just firearm laws but insist on getting involved with other political agendas in which I do not agree with their position. Drop the other agendas and I will sign up tomorrow.
I do hope that more Democrats disassociate themselves from the anti-gun movement. It is a non-issue.
Yemen is not “apples to apples” comparison. Women over there can’t own guns or, for that matter, anything at all – it’s them who are owned by their husbands. If you counted only men, the math would change. Besides there’s no such a thing as gun collector in Yemen. The guns are owned there for their intrinsic purpose – to kill. One must see a difference between an antique silver-inlaid hunting gun, or even a WW2-vintage Parabellum on one hand, and a run off a mill AK-47 on the other.
as a gun owner and member of the NRA the only thing it came to my mind about cities with high index of crime is not about guns,is about local politicians and council members that no help their task police force, to the contrary their only job is to stay playing wanna be do nothing rather then figth for budgets and take care of crime, try to put the blame on gun owners,who legally enjoy for sportmanship,so anyway hard sounds soft, impossible is means more logical and not to re-write the the constitution second admenment.
Stan:
re “Mr. Bloomberg and the Eastern elitists would do well to keep their opinions in New York City.”
Have a look at the Mayors’ website and you’ll see there are plenty from Texas, Arizona, Louisiana, Tennessee,Montana. Is this where Eastern elitists congregate these days?
I say three cheers for Bloomberg for doing something President Obama hasn’t got the guts to do. Making it hard for criminals and unhinged citizens to get guns is the right thing to do. The Thune amendment would have made the country less safe.
I am female, over 65, a member of the NRA and licensed to carry concealed. Recently we had a serial killer operating in our area and I have to tell you that I was glad to have a handgun with which to protect myself if he headed to my house. Handgun control isn’t the answer to a society out of control or children being raised with no rules or respect for themselves or anyone else.
hmmmmm wonder why the story left out the mayors who are under indictment for crimes…seems mayor Bloomberg has a strange value system on crime when it suits his needs.
Elvira,
Yes a number of mayors from big cities are on board with Bloomberg, but guess what, they don’t get to run the rest of the country. If they want to try to place tighter controls within their cities and if those control will pass constitutional muster, so be it, but don’t be surprised if their is a voter backlash.
As for my party, The Democrats, we need to stay away from the issue because it is a non starter. With more guns than people in this country, if they were as dangerous as Bloomberg believes, we would all be dead by now.
I am a life long Democrat and a life long gun owner/collector/hunter and I don’t need any politician telling me how to live my life or handle my guns.
Oh and I am also a 25 year veteran of a California Sheriff’s Office and my peers feel safer with the good people having guns rather than only the bad people having them.
“90 guns per 100 residents – is that really necessary? Bloomberg and other mayors’ efforts to prevent people from carrying anywhere and everywhere are completely sensible.”
Greg B:
Then presumably you won’t have any issues if we restrict your 4th, 5th or 6th Amendment Rights as well?? I mean if you’re not doing anything wrong why would you need a right against self incrimination..right??
It’s almost believable that a handgun can serve as protection against assault or home invasion. But what are assault weapons good for?
Iraq – even under Saddam Hussein, had a surprising number of gun owners. What good did it do them against assault by the state security apparatus? Every Afghan seems to have the big guns and they don’t seem to stop the Taliban.
And all the talk about values oriented education and ethics doesn’t seem to do a thing because it appears no one can really agree on them. Especially the religious based values. Ownership of weapons of any kind isn’t even mentioned in the Ten Commandments is it? As I recall from Christian education classes no where did Christ advise his followers to arm themselves to the teeth. Didn’t someone mention hypocrisy above?
In fact pushing religious based values in a public education system is almost guaranteed to get everyone to go for his gun. And how gun ownership is going to restore family values, extended family networks or whatever seems to be lacking to those who think guns will save them, somehow reveals a real disconnect between and ideal and practice.
But really – what are the assault weapons’ purpose except to take on an army? Are supporters of the private ownership of assault weapons expecting to start community based military exercises North Korean style? Have they got plans to launch community purges to bring back “core” values by blowing away the “social deviants”?
Obviously – ownership of weapons and political freedom are not exactly synonymous. They just seem to sound like they are.
The gun manufacturers are smart to make money from the gun lobbyists. It is sad, however, because categorizing people as “elitists” and claiming that guns are needed for protection is the sound of FEAR talking. Unfortunately, more people carrying more guns does not ensure the safety and security of anyone. I guess we will have to wait in this country for the current generation of gun lobbyists to pass on so that real reform for a safer country can happen. The next generation can learn that more arms solves nothing.
Elvira, I agree. Making it harder for criminals and unhinged people to get their hands on guns would be nice. But, how do you do that without infringing on the rights of the rest of us? It’s a well known fact that violent crime does go down in areas where legal concealed carry is instituted. The criminal acts you are worried about are not being committed by legal gun owners/carriers. Criminals can and do carry guns to commit their crimes. (thats what they do) The rest of us will simply have to protect ourselves the best we can within the law. So why should the law abiding citizen have to allow our lawmakers to make us defensless???
PAUL,
Sounds like your solution is ban guns and let everybody act like savages, without any sort of rules or reasonable standards of behavior.. Brilliant
I think I will take my sons to the rifle range and not only teach them responsibility, but listen to what they have to say and make sure they are on the path to growing up to be the men i want them to grow up to be.
And if you want my guns Paul I will gladly give them up when you take away everyone elses recreational sports equipment, golf clubs for example..
After reading these comments, Americans must still think they are in the wild west!
Guns just bring death and destruction.
Grow up!!
I don’t think it matters one way or the other if we restrict gun access or promote it. If guns really made us safer, we should be the safest nation in the world. We’re not. If you restrict them, black market gun runners will celebrate. Prohibition of guns will be as successful as alcohol and marijuana prohibitions. I think the only cure for violence is community. We’ve got to get out of our media shells, seeing everything through the lens of a camera, hiding behind our tv screens. The media fills us with all types of irrational fears, and it’s this hyper-awareness of danger that leads us to lash out in violence. The only way to stop the violence is for people to learn to trust one another.
Another librial not telling the truth or bendint it for his own purpose. Mr. Debusmann states the following “In July, the U.S. Senate defeated a measure, introduced by a Republican Senator, John Thune, that would have allowed licensed gun owners to carry hidden, loaded weapons from states with weak gun laws to states with tough ones. False statement! Or a lie? He knows that the bill said nothing of the sort!
My family has owned guns for many years of all varieties and currently we own versions of several former military weapons under permit. We own an AK47, an FN FAL, and an M14, two of those are automatic. Recently we also purchased a semi automatic derivative of an M16. Along with that we have a 1903 Springfield. We also own several handguns and a shotgun. I trust President Obama enough to not commit such political suicide by trying to put in any new gun laws. They’re the last thing on his mind when he’s got the economy and Afghanistan to worry about.
Maybe not enough people listened to the lady from Killeen,TX when she testified before a senate commitee. She saw her father murdered because she had left her pistol in her car. She finished her testimony by informing the members of the commitee that the 2nd Amendment didn’t have anything to do with duck or deer hunting it was included in the Constitution to protect us from them!
Jim – I asked a simple question that you haven’t answered. What do you need assault weapons for?
I don’t want your guns. You do what you like with your sons.
You also haven’t suggested how gun ownership protects your freedom? Isn’t that the mantra of the ARA?
I also don’t understand the connection between gun ownership and recreation sports equipment?
And since when have people who don’t own guns, or weapons of any kind been accused of savage behavior? I guess you have to watch those Buddhists, they can be real maniacs? I almost forgot, They invented the martial arts, didn’t they. But they are anything but savage.
Mr. Debusmann: A writer has accused me of a “solution” I never offered. I made a reasonable reply. In fairness to my statement you should permit me to answer him. Don’t play silly games just to raise the heat.
This story misses a key issue, which is “fingerprinting” every gun manufactured, and requiring proper documentation of sales. If all guns are “fingerprinted,” whenever you find a fired bullet, you can look up which gun it came from. It only hurts people who want to commit murder and get away with it (i.e. a vocal group of gun owners).
CURRENT KILLING ZONES
New York: 571 (down 26 on previous year)
Los Angeles: 511 (down 5)
Chicago: 447 (down 151)
Baltimore: 276 (up 7)
Washington: 198 (down 50)
St Louis: 114 (up 40)
Boston: 62 (up 21)
Also down: Philadelphia, Miami and Las Vegas
The record: New York’s 2,245 in 1990
New York’s murder rate per person: 6.9 per 100,000, making it it the safest large city in America
London’s murder rate per person: 2.4 per 100,000
Perhaps the fact that the United States provides an inordinate number of guns to Mexico, that inturn increase the strength of the drug cartels and decrease security of the US will be a strong reason to reduce the manufacture and importation and lax sales control of assault weapons. Maybe that way it will not be necessary for us to buy cannons.
Figure out a way to stop the criminals without infringing upon my personal rights and I’ll be all for the measures. Instead, there are plenty of current gun laws, most of which make it harder and harder for law-abiding citizens to get guns but have no effect whatsoever on the criminal element. Why do we need more emotionally charged legislation that will just distract us from the real governmental issues at hand (i.e. Afghanistan, Social Security/medicare reform and this atrocity known as big government in bed w/ pharma trying to push their agendas upon the people.)
Paul Rosa,
What do you consider an assault weapon? if i stabbed you with a fork, i used it as a weapon, and assaulted you. so is it now an assault weapon? you need to define what you mean by that.
And how does gun ownership not protect freedom? If you were going to rob a house, would you prefer one that has a gun-free zone sign in the front yard, or one where the owner is known for his 1 inch groupings?
The sports equipment was an allusion to how it is used as ‘assault weapons’ also… if a criminal cant afford to buy, or cant steal a gun, is he gonna give up? no, he’ll probly just use a knife or baseball bat or golf club instead. so to make gun control even more effective, we should also regulate (ban) anything else people can use as ‘assault weapons’
For your ‘christ’ argument, i seem to recall a specific passage about going out and selling your cloak to buy a sword, which was the most technologically advanced and expensive ‘assault weapon’ of the time period.
I will assume you take assault weapon to mean any big semi-auto rifle with a detachable mag and maybe a pistol grip, or a suppressor or muzzle brake. maybe even a barrel shroud. (most of which are safety features, but they ‘look scary’)
so if someone breaks into your house, trying to rob you or maybe wanting to rape someone, would you prefer to defend yourself with
A) small, single-shot pistol. maybe a .22?
B) something you know will take them down in one hit, no matter how scary it might look, even if the name scares you..
C) a bat or golf club, assuming you can legally own one.
And dan, how many assault weapons does mexico get from us? if you mean rocket launchers, grenades, or machine guns, i would love to know where in the US you can buy these? i know the gun shops in Dallas dont sell them… As to the 90% figure you’re probly thinking of, thats a rather doctored number… 90% of the firearms mexico SUBMITTED for tracing, that were SUCCESSFULLY traced were found to be from the US. they dont send for tracing anything that doesnt have SNs, or that obviously isnt from the US. Mexico almost definitely get more firearms from the Merida Initiative than from illegal importation from US gun shops.
The NRA should be renamed to the assembly of morons. I can hardly believe people can be so foolish.
Guns don’t kill people. Peoople with guns kill people with guns.
the bill that was defeated in the senate, pushed by republican senator john thune, actually allowed you to carry your gun from one state to another if they both allowed concealed carry. Nothing more than that… and yet somehow that’s been twisted into allowing me to bring a gun from texas to new york. This is simply a lie and this isn’t journalism. Read the bill before you mention it.
I live in New Mexico where guns are everyday tools and our crime rate is very very low – and I never carry a gun; but if you think I would wonder around NYC without carrying – you’re nuts!
It’s not the guy in the White House…it’s the Chuck Schumer’s of this country that you have to worry about. Sneaky ba$$tard will put something into a bill; at the last second, knowing the bill is sure to pass. That’s the scary part.
Obamacare: The “Postoffice” of healthcare plans.
Mr Kyle: We ARE one of the safest countries in the world because of private gun ownership. Just look to any country that has restrictions to private gun ownership. The citizens (subject or slaves) are under asault by their own government daily. Look at Great Britain and their social health care system. The British government does not have to worry about changing it to a more functional system. Their subjects are disarmed and not a threat to their power. Why do you think our goverment is even considering the will of the people to not have socialized medicine here. Like Mr Chris said: The reason we have the second amendment has nothing to do with hunting. It is to give the U S Citizen the ability to defend themselves from our government. It is a tradition that started with the fouding of this country – our ability to say NO to King George.
A NYC filled with cameras on streets for population servelance is not my idea of a free state. Bloomberg loves guns for Israel going and supporting the Gaza killing fields excercise. He is a control freak. With Schumer they have made careers of scaring the bajesus out of parents. 3 bi
the NRA must have it’s eyes closed. bloomberg is not the problem. the mexican drug cartels will change the gun laws not obama.
the ammo shortage started with the cartel’s buying several thousand dollars worth of ammo at a pop. they already have the arsenal they bought in the states and they’re busy killing literally thousands of locals. that takes a lot of ammunition.
when the republican supreme court made your exposure to imminent domain contingent on your political connections, that’s when a lot of people got nervous. the gun sales and the antidepressant sales both reflect that same malaise.
Here is the thing, assault weapons are banned for all practical purposes. Only the police, private security, and special license holders can have such weaponry. So, to say that Barack Hussein Obama is a “disappointment” to gun-grabbers is pure Propaganda. Also, there is STILL a major shortage of ammunition. You guys will wake up one day and WISH that your countrymen were armed, when the offshore banks are done destroying this country. Quit being so limpwristed about guns. It is the man or woman behind the gun you have to worry about.
I have no strong feelings about weapons, per se. They\’re tools. Tools of a very particular sort, granted. Still, merely tools.
That said, the characteristic debate is reflective of many of the limitations of democracy, in which the task of \’elites\’ becomes pandering to the lowest common denominators and baser instincts — fear perhaps chief amongst them — in human nature, and of the particularly naive and atavistic characteristics of contemporary American culture.
It\’s sad that the society which first brought to the world many of the finest notions of the modern nation state is reduced to longing for past glory at any of a number of levels, and is completely unable to move forward in a changing world.
Perhaps Swift was too kind in his depiction of the Yahoos. Then again, he hadn\’t contemporary American \’civilization\’ as a source of inspiration.
Let them clutch their guns. They have only the night and their own fears to comfort them in the course of their long, sorry, and sadly inevitable descent.
Stan:
I dont understand how can you believe that the Democratic party is moving to the center based on the last few elections. Now more than ever I believe that the leaders of the democratic party are pro-big government, pro-socialim, pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage, anti-gun, pro-illegal immigrants, etc. In my opinion, most of these positions put the Democratic Party as far as they can be from what our forefathers intended this nation to be. The bible is against homosexual relationships and most churches are against abortion (remember thou shall not kill?). Did you know that the Pope didnt allow Nanci Pelosi to be photographed with him. The reason, because she supports gay marriage and abortion, and both are big NO-NOs under true Christianity. All the other top leaders of your party are also on the same bandwagon. Your Democratic President hasnt done anything (yet) about guns, but he did say that he wouldnt mind renewing the so called “Assault Weapons” bill; even though this bill didnt include a single TRUE assault weapon (i.e.-machine gun). ALL the weapons banned by this bill were semi-automatic weapons. I am sorry, but if you care about guns and church, the last place you should be looking at is the Democratic Party.
Stan: The democratic party is coming back to its roots of being pro-church? Are you off your medication? The leadership of the democratic party is vigorously, viciously, vehemently opposed to religion in general and Christianity in particular. The party tries its best to ignore those with religious faith. If they must address them, they seek to undermine the teaching of the church using religious language. In private, among the like-minded, their contempt for religious belief is striking. I find it incomprehensible that anyone can actually believe the thought you expressed. I guess you can always fool some of the people.
“CURRENT KILLING ZONES
New York: 571 (down 26 on previous year)
Los Angeles: 511 (down 5)
Chicago: 447 (down 151)
Baltimore: 276 (up 7)
Washington: 198 (down 50)
St Louis: 114 (up 40)
Boston: 62 (up 21)
Also down: Philadelphia, Miami and Las Vegas
The record: New York’s 2,245 in 1990
New York’s murder rate per person: 6.9 per 100,000, making it it the safest large city in America
London’s murder rate per person: 2.4 per 100,000″
Nice try, but the last two numbers are per 100,000, whereas the first ones are absolute. Bad liberal, bad!
crooks don,t care about gun laws. I will protect myself and family from these crooks that Blomdeburger wants to empower. He’ll kill off lawabidding gunowners by making them powerless. He’s got his head stuck up his okoele. How many bodyguards with guns protect him?
Hey Americans Why stop at assault rifles I think that you all should have the right to own an Abrams tank . After all why shot the person when you can blow him away. If you look at the statistics 90% of gun owners kill their families and themselves so keep buying guns it’s the only stock in my portfolio that is doing well.
Quote: It says: “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.” Exactly what that means (arms for militia members? for individuals?)
Seriously? Quite trying to mislead people. Put away your dictionaries and encyclopedias – they don’t matter. When you need to define something in the Constitution more than it is defined there, you refer to the United States Code.
In this case, the question is “What is the militia?”
The answer can be found in the United States Code, Title 10, Chapter 13, Section 311:
Sec. 311. Militia: composition and classes
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are –
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.
http://uscode.house.gov/download/pls/10C 13.txt
Soooo……If you are, or have declared your intention to become, a US Citizen, are male and between the ages of 17 and 45 years, and are “able-bodied” (the only really ‘loose’ term in the section) and are not a vet (we’re liable for Militia service to the age of 65), then you are in the Militia…and per US vs. Miller, 1939 http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/ge tcase.pl?navby=CASE&court=US&vol=307&pag e=174 there is a clear delineation stating that the 2nd Amendment applies ONLY to firearms wit a “military utility” – in effect, pretty much anything that goes “BANG!”
Now, I’m not a lawyer – I’m just a schlump. Why is it so difficult for people to simply look up the relevant laws? And that especially means lawyers and reporters – c/mon, people! This is BASIC RESEARCH!
It’s Sugarmann, not Sugarman. What’s the matter with you guys? You can’t afford proofreaders?
More people are killed each year by medical mistakes and malpractice than by firearms. Why not outlaw Doctors? Or motor vehicle collisions.. Outlaw cars next?
Guns don’t kill people… People kill people. Guns are just a tool. like a scalpel or a 4000 lb. hunk of metal on wheels. It’s the intent of the human being using the tool.
Now more than ever,Americans should be Armed..The Police are helpless in preventing home invasions..
the Police have never prevented any crime.they only can be effective post crime and regulating Traffic.BUT,the main reason for having a gun is to protect Democracy in America..No country with Armed Citizens have ever had their Democracy over thrown..Obama[during the election] said he needs a Presidential Police Force,where he would be the Commander.[This may be hearsay from the Net]Maybe,now that He is the President,he probably feels that since he has TOTAL control over the FBI,CIA,Secret Service and His Chicago Mafia Enforcers,PLUS A LAP DOG CONGRESS ,he might wait until he can totally disarm America..AMERICANS SHOULD STAY ALERT!THESE ARE SCARY TIMES..Maniacs that shoot up schools and malls would use bombs if they couldn’t get guns..