@Val Killmore,
Quote:The NRA does not speak for everyone who owns a firearm.
And I've pointed that out repeatedly. The NRA doesn't even speak for many of its members who do want more sensible gun control measures.
Quote:I think you'll find that nearly all gun owners or rushing to get guns under the threat of a ban, are merely advocating choice, and not more guns as the solution.
I'm not quite sure why all those people are rushing out to snap up assault weapons and high capacity ammunition clips, and neither are you. Some of them do see more guns as the solution. Some of them do fear that the government will ban them and they do want to stockpile them--so they can use them against the government if need be. And that's clear if you read the comments on some of the pro-gun Web sites. They also are discussing whether they can put their weapons in trusts, so the government can't confiscate them and their children can inherit them. Others might be buying them so they can re-sell them--at a profit, if the supply dries up. Others might be buying them for someone else--acting as straw purchasers. Others might own one and just want another, or want the high capacity clips, for future use. There might be all sorts of reasons, but this sudden run on these guns and ammo is being motivated by fears about new gun controls. And not all who are making these purchases might be responsible, or stable, or law-abiding, either now, or in the future--and that's what creates a problem.
Quote:Also, Adam Lanza did not use an "assault weapon,"...
Yes, he did--but, as oralloy incessantly points out, it lacked certain "cosmetic features" so it avoided being labeled as such.
I think that any new assault weapons ban will re-define the term "assault weapon" so that it focuses on the semi-automatic capacity of the gun and not just on "cosmetic features".
Quote:I am just merely advocating that people have a choice to protect themselves, and not have to depend on others for it.
Who is saying that people don't have a choice in how to protect themselves? There are many ways of protecting yourself--including avoiding dangerous conditions and situations. There are ways of protecting yourself that don't involve the use of any weapons. There are ways of protecting yourself with weapons other than guns. There are ways of protecting yourself with a gun that don't include assault rifles with 100 capacity clips.
People already have choices--plenty of choices--when it comes to self-defense--but the issue is whether some of those choices should be limited if they endanger the general welfare or the public health and safety. And that's what a good part of the legislative gun control debate is going to focus on.
While the NRA certainly does not speak for everyone who owns a firearm, and it might not speak for you, it certainly seems to speak for oralloy and BillRM, both of whom regurgitate the NRA party line, talking points, and propaganda, incessantly, with no recognition, at all, of why some common sense gun control measures should be instituted to try to deal with our problem of gun violence--and the shocking number of mass murders, by firearms, that have occurred just this year. Responsible gun owners, who do not agree with the NRA's positions, are speaking out--including those who are members of Congress, or who hold other elected offices.
It is about choice, and moving to enact better gun controls and regulations is also a choice. It's a choice that should seek to find a balance between allowing personal possession of firearms and having enough regulation over that to protect the general welfare and the public health and safety as much as possible.
Consider how we regulate even the use of Mace/pepper spray--which are defensive weapons. While legal in all 50 states, there are state and local restrictions in place. For instance--
Wisconsin - 10% Pepper spray without UV dye is allowed.
Michigan - 2% Pepper spray allowed. Can be combined with tear gas formulation.
New York - Defense sprays only available through licensed firearm dealer or pharmacist.
Massachusetts - Possessor must have a Firearms Identification Card (FID).
You cannot carry pepper spray aboard a commercial airliner--it is a federal crime.
You might have problems carrying pepper spray into some secured buildings, like federal or state buildings, or through security checkpoints, even where specific laws are not in effect.
Stun guns or tasers cannot be sold to those under 18, and I don't think they can be sold, used, or owned, in New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Wisconsin, Michigan, Hawaii, or Rhode Island.
So firearms are not the only class of defensive weapons subject to regulation.
