Holy Kaw!

All the topics that interest us.

Bringing to light conflicted gun owners

Interesting article about gun owners who support gun control. “Clearly, not all gun owners are Second Amendment absolutists. Many recent surveys show that majorities of gun owners do favor certain gun control proposals, like making private gun sales subject to background checks. But the extent to which gun owners feel of two minds about owning guns is something polls and surveys typically do not address.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/10/us/gun-owners-arent-always-gun-lovers.html

Photo credit: Ben Sklar for The New York Times

_(Shared using #DoShare) #HolyKaw _

Posted by

59 Comments

  • Everything sounds like a good idea till life shows you the truth…

  • Very good point Guy. I'm generally in favor of less legislation, but it's possible to be to strongly opinionated to a fault. There is such thing as reasonable legislation.

    Something needs to be done. I hope the moderates prevail.

  • Like the focus on neuroscience, as in the case with +Charlie Rose last night. The brain's the problem, followed by a flawed belief system albeit what people tend to challenge other people with. While this country enjoys freedom, there's the constant stigma to test it, that overrides actual issue, people become so demented they forget to wipe their butts in the morning after pooping.

  • Guns to protect life and possession, guns to take life and take what's not theirs. Guns just laying there harmless, becomes a deadly weapon when picked up, fine line between love and hate.

  • Yeah there are indeed 3 sides to every coin….
    You got the face value…
    The opposite face value…
    Then if you stand the coin on it's "side" you have the truth…

  • “I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue! ” Goldwater

    Shall not be infringed. Very clear and succinct. I’m a 1st to 10th extremist. The feds have no business mucking about in gun control in any form, including the laws from 34 & 68, it’s time to go on offense in support of liberty and force the control freaks onto their heels.

  • I'm a gun owner.  Here's a question for you:  do you believe that someone who is mentally ill should be able to own a gun?  Why?  Why not?

  • Thanks for posting this article, Guy. I grew up in a home loaded with guns. Shotguns for shooting skeet and hunting ducks but also a handgun. Dad, a hunter but also an attorney, county prosecutor, and judge, taught us how to handle and shoot guns while instilling a healthy respect for the serious damage they could do. I'll always remember his words, "Never point a gun at someone unless you intend to kill them."

  • +Adam Sweet Before one can answer that one must define "mental illness."

  • +Shon G. well the government uses a strict definition with PTSD as an example of it

  • The US Surgeon General defines mental illness this way:
    "Mental disorders are health conditions that are characterized by alterations in thinking, mood, or behavior" http://goo.gl/qP47K

  • This is just silly any responsible gun owner wants stronger gun control proposals.  However that does not mean take our guns away from us. How about we START enforcing the laws that we already have. I disarmed society with armed drones…. something is wrong with that.

  • Absolutely, thoughtful, responsible gun owners do us all a great service, by building understanding, bringing the sides together and helping move the NRA towards the center.

    The reverse is true, too. There are attitudes that truly stun me. At a recent gun control talk in Sudbury MA that attempted to be conclusive, a gun instructor responded to a question by pointing out that if he kicked somebody, his foot was a weapon, too. What?!?! In the wake of 26 deaths, drawing parallels between your foot to an assault weapon is ludicrous. We don't kill 26 people with a booted foot, nor can or should we consider legislating against feet — seriously.

  • Ah, I feel the same way, gun control is important, but taxing or removing the right to own and bear firearms by law abiding citizens is unconstitutional and detrimental to our freedoms and way of life. Many law abiding citizens own firearms for no other reason than hunting, home defense or personal defense. My point being why punish the good for the sins of a few, why can we not put our efforts and tax payer dollars towards funding better law enforcement, more border patrols, better security for buisinesses and schools and public buildings and events. A few well trained and motivated officers can make a bigger impact in my opinion against criminals than a whole slew of laws that require billions to implement and carry out and only adds more to the work load of our current officers and service members.

    Gun control is good, taking away guns BAD. Simple as that.

  • Are other countries more or less successful than the US in reducing gun violence?

  • The problems with guns and gun control….will not be fixed right…clean-up the streets first….if you can't control criminals ….you have no control !!! Just me.

  • +Adam Sweet that's a pretty vague definition. Just about anything could be termed a mental illness with that.

  • Ok..I believe in the gun laws…but why take guns from people who don't abuse them…if you don't clean -up the streets first..anyone can still get ahold of em…just defeats. The purpose…again no control….or is it just to make it look like somethings being done ?!?

  • Living in a country where pretty much no one has guns except for policemen and hunters, one can't help but wonder what you need to defend your home of, specially if criminals would have not such an easy access to guns either.

  • Well Adam I don't think people with mental illness should not own guns…and for good reason…if they were in right. Thinking it would of never come into question in the first place

  • They should not own guns…for there protection and ours

  • You have to have a driver's license to drive not per car why not have a gun license to have a gun not per gun. Take a test, be trained, that's it. Add it to your license like a boat, car, motorcycle, truck, even a tank.

  • Some states do…gun laws are state to state…not across the board…could be interesting

  • Ya know I really believe if the goverment and law inforcement don't clean up all our streets…its really point less…..when I can walk up the street and get whatever I want as guns…its just. Point less to take it from home owners…hunters…

  • It's Gabe!

  • +Tom Sweet I was legally allowed to drive a tank before I was allowed to drive a car. Totally off topic, I know. :-D

  • my question is, why do people keep referencing "taking our guns" ? the old AWB took no guns from anyone, and the one being debated takes no guns from anyone….. why not debate honestly and leave the fear by way of distortion out of it?

  • +Steve Lauber take a hard statistical look at great Britain and Australia…

  • when it comes to protecting your home and loved ones would you wanna bring a knife to a gunfight?

  • U got the wrong person…of course I wouldnt
    Sent from my Kyocera Rise

  • I'm a hunter and pro-guns
    Sent from my Kyocera Rise

  • The fact that this was in the New York times means it's already a slanted article.

  • And where is this at ?? Because I. Live on the other end of that

  • no more guns !

  • +Lori Quirk guess i misread the comment sorry

  • That's alright

  • anyone who thinks Diane feinstein is for the people hasnt ever lived in California

  • And as they say, this will not in the least deter the evil criminal element who have never purchase a legal gun in their lives, but instead get them from other criminals…
    Sadly & respectfully, this is nonsense! Law abiding gun owners are not the problem, the evil criminal element are and nothing is going to slow them down but legal open and concealed gun carriers and that is a fact that has been proven time and again and completely ignored by the leftist lunkheads who cannot, nor will not allow themselves to see that plain and simple fact, law abiding gun owners are not murderers, they are our protectors…

    More people were beaten by clubs, bats and hammers last year than by semi auto and single shot rifles…

    FBI: More People Killed With Hammers, Clubs Each Year Than Rifles.
    323 people were killed in 2011 by semi and single shot rifles compared to the 496 people killed by a hammer that same year…

    Lets do back ground checks on hammers aye?
    And cars that go over 75 miles an hour, and perhaps back ground checks on welfare and food stamp recipients, now there is a great cause all and of it's self I would think…

  • +Shon G. Well, a tank has a gun so…

  • And the second amendment affords us that too….

  • Why do California legislators have to implement laws that will control the citizens of the entire country? I have no problem if Diane Feinstein wants to protect her constituents, however please leave the other states to decide for themselves.

  • +Adam Sweet Who determines what mentally ill is?

  • What I find absolutely insane is that people think a call to the cops will save them and their loved ones from any and all harm.  At best, that's a seriously irresponsible bit of misplaced trust. Practically, it's just plain unrealistic.
    But, keep it up, Guy.  If you keep posting stuff like this, eventually you'll get your mind right.

  • What I find interesting in that the Constitution was being amended, the left argues that at the time the weapon of the day was a musket. If their position can has any validity, then the liberal left wing media must drop their use of any improvements for communication today. The TV, the Internet, the microphone and all types of other devices. A Quill or a press and the paper of the day and the town soap box is all that will be allowed.

    Articles written from the NY Times, make no since to those who want their guns without restriction in places like Texas, Oklahoma etc. If the left wants their citizens and cities safe, then fix the real problems.

    And first, politicians need to quit being hypocritical.

  • I can't say anything bad, I'm a gun owner too.

  • People just need to get off the fence and decide whether they want a gun or not and deal with it.  If you feel even a little reticence about having a gun in the house… For your own sanity, you probably shouldn't have one.  I wonder if the people who speak out like this realize that millions of people now have a name and reasonably searchable parameters and know what to expect should they decide to pay you a visit.  Wouldn't it have been better to not advertise your conflicted feelings to the world and have them ignorant of your weaponry and ability to meet a challenge from them?
    Not something I would have done; but, to each their own.  I guess time in the spotlight, brief as it may be, is too great a temptation.   Like a moth to the flame.

  • Have you read the Second Amendment?

  • Jacob – you mean the vague and outdated one that the NRA desperately clings to in order to make money for their clients, while feeling nothing for the hundreds of thousands of gun deaths they've enabled as they've become more extreme over the years? Yeah, we read it.

  • Jacob – you mean the vague and outdated one that the NRA desperately clings to in order to make money for their clients, while feeling nothing for the hundreds of thousands of gun deaths they've enabled as they've become more extreme over the years? Yeah, we read it.

  • The homicide rate went up in the USA after Samuel Colt perfected his revolver. Civil War soldiers were allowed to take their weapons home after the war ended.  Those same weapons were used in a 50 year spree of violence against blacks and American Indians.  It was the first time Americans owned large amounts of firearms.

  • The homicide rate went up in the USA after Samuel Colt perfected his revolver. Civil War soldiers were allowed to take their weapons home after the war ended.  Those same weapons were used in a 50 year spree of violence against blacks and American Indians.  It was the first time Americans owned large amounts of firearms.

  • +JEFFREY HARDIN add those rifle deaths with the other gun deaths and what are the percentages of total gun related deaths?

  • +JEFFREY HARDIN add those rifle deaths with the other gun deaths and what are the percentages of total gun related deaths?

  • +Ash Edwards more available guns = more gun related violence, no way around that statistical fact. And its coming out that the NRA is being accused of data suppression, and studies are showing that in areas with more gun control laws, there is generally less gun related violence.

  • +Ash Edwards more available guns = more gun related violence, no way around that statistical fact. And its coming out that the NRA is being accused of data suppression, and studies are showing that in areas with more gun control laws, there is generally less gun related violence.

  • +jamie racklyeft so anything that is more modern than this outdated document. Let's look at the first amendment, any device or improvement of the technology of the time must have a control placed upon it. Even this form of communication, G+, or any improvement of free speech must go. Because if you cannot yell fire in a theatre, right. How about the 4th & 5th?

  • +Buck Bazhaw but lets not forget that most of these new forms of communications do not allow anyone the right of free speech, by "free speech" standards they are highly restricted. they can silence anyone for any reason (or no reason ) at their will.

    even in public areas, or on private property there are, and have always been substantial limits of what one can say

  • The NRA has pretty much lost it's teeth; Having been sucked into the maw of political correctness that is a disconnected Washington DC.
    Lately, The GOA has been the leading force for holding the Libturds at bay.

  • +jamie racklyeft If we didn't listen to the Constitution all we would be is tax-clinging Communists… No offense.

Leave a Reply