IRISH LOVE's blog: "GUN CONTROL"

Bob Livingston of Personal Leberty Digest says:

Dear Flashy,

Two days ago I posed a question to you. It was as follows:
“Given the fact that it is one’s inalienable right to own guns, and given that the Founders agreed that the Constitution should specifically ensure that that right could not be taken away by government, and given the fact that there are about 310 million non-military guns in the U.S., and given the fact that, according to Gallup, nearly half of all U.S. households own at least one gun, and given the fact that at least half of all those polled believed upholding the right to own guns was important, and given the fact that Connecticut has the fifth most stringent gun laws in the U.S. (according to the Brady Center), and given the fact that the most recent school shooter broke no fewer than six laws before he began shooting school children (including laws against being under 21 in possession of a handgun and in possession of a gun specifically banned under Conn. law), how do propose to realistically “get the guns off the streets and allow people to be safe?”

You have yet to answer it. I read the long missive you wrote in response, and the gist of it was:
1) Make it more difficult for the bad guys to get a gun. (No explanation of how this will be done.)
2) Keep them in the home for defense, but disassembled. (No explanation of how they’ll be available for self-defense in a disassembled condition.)
3) Require “national” concealed weapons permits. (Concealed carry permits already required in most states.)
4) Require mandatory classroom instruction, live fire and situational awareness training. (Already required in some states.)
You may or may not be aware that all gun crimes are committed by people who are breaking already established laws. To wit: Using a gun to commit a robbery breaks at least two laws. (The law against robbery and using a firearm to commit a felony.) Using a gun to kill someone breaks at least two laws (The law against murder and using a firearm to commit a felony.) I could go on. Lawbreakers, by definition, disobey laws. Gangbangers in Chicago mostly obtain their guns on the black market or by theft. In doing so, they are breaking several Illinois laws. (Illinois’ laws prohibiting gun possession remain in place.) Instructing them to obtain a permit and undergo training is a fool’s errand. Requiring registration and background checks before they can purchase is silly and inconsequential. As I pointed out, Adam Lanza (if he was indeed the shooter), broke several laws before he ever shot the first child. It is as yet unclear if he received any formal training in handling the weapons. We know his mother at least practiced using them. There is no evidence that requiring him to undergo mandatory classroom instruction, live and situational awareness training would have prevented his murderous (likely prescription drug-fueled) rampage. In some cases, guns used in the commission of recent mass murders were legally obtained.

So, I will ask the question again, phrasing it slightly different. What law(s), short of an outright ban and confiscation of weapons (which you say you don’t support), do you propose be enacted that the criminal element will obey that will in turn make everyone safer or prevent any future attacks? Before you answer that one; answer this one: What weapon was used in the deadliest school attack in U.S. history?

Best wishes,
Bob