patching...
Update: Click to Get Teaneck News on Facebook »
Welcome back, Patch Blogger!

Op-Ed: National Assault Weapons Ban Renewal Long Overdue

Colorado shootings more evidence for the need to ban assault weapons nationwide.

 

In many states, there is no limit on the number of guns, nor on the amount of ammunition, one can buy.

In New Jersey, however, you cannot purchase more than one gun each month and assault weapons are banned.

The state ranked second behind California on the national scorecard of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. According to the campaign, the six states with the toughest gun laws also had the lowest gun death rates in the nation last year.

Now that makes sense, doesn’t it?

Including last Friday’s mass shooting in a Colorado movie theater that claimed the lives of a dozen people and wounded 70, including a 23-year-old Sussex County woman, 20 people have been killed and 95 wounded in 22 days.

A timeline by the Los Angeles Times of the deadliest mass shootings (at least five deaths) in the country shows that since the repeal of the assault weapons ban, 122 people have been killed in such shootings. The list includes the shootings at Fort Hood and in Binghamton, N.Y. The two 2009 shootings resulted in the deaths of 13, as well as the 2007 rampage at Virginia Tech, where a student slaughtered 32.

While it is unclear what drove James Holmes to allegedly open fire in a crowded movie theater early Friday morning at the opening of the latest Batman movie in Aurora, Colo., it is abundantly clear that he was able to do so much damage because he used a semi-automatic assault rifle, among other weapons. News reports indicate Holmes allegedly bought four guns and more than 6,000 rounds of ammunition in the last two months.

He bought all that firepower legally.

Variants of one of the weapons Holmes allegedly used in the attack, an AR-15 rifle, was included in a federal ban on assault weapons enacted by former President Bill Clinton in 1994. However, the ban expired in 2004 and was not re-enacted.

Why does the average citizen need a semi-automatic weapon?

These reportedly can fire between 45 and 60 rounds per minute. Why does anyone, except a police or military officer, need to shoot so many bullets so quickly?

Hunters argue they should be able to own guns in order to shoot at wild game.

Citizens argue they should be able to own a gun in order to shoot wild robbers who might break into their homes.

The National Rifle Association argues everyone should be able to own a gun because the Constitution says so.

The Constitution also says people have the right to assemble peacefully, but there are rules for protests and police were able to disperse Occupy Wall Street protesters in cities like New York for alleged unsanitary and hazardous conditions.

The Constitution also says Americans have free speech, but that doesn’t give one the right to slander another, or, as U.S. Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. wrote, to falsely shout fire in a crowded theater and create a panic.

Yet, thanks to the demands of the NRA, the Constitution gave James Holmes the right to buy as many guns and as much ammo as he wanted. So armed, Holmes caused true panic when he brought his weapons into a crowded theater and opened fire, stealing the life from 12 people, the youngest a beautiful 6-year-old little girl.

Longer ago, and not so far away from Aurora, two students murdered a dozen others plus a teacher and wounded 24 others at Columbine High School.

These shooters always seem to exhibit either serious mental illness or psychopathy or rage or all of these. That won’t stop. But perhaps if such deadly weapons were not so readily available, there would be fewer victims.

 

Follow Patch on Facebook and Twitter or subscribe to our free daily newsletter.

Related Topics: Gun Laws, NRA, National Assault Weapons Ban, and gun control
Do you think Congress should enact stricter gun control laws? Tell us in the comments.

Jim Norman

10:42 am on Monday, July 30, 2012

Excellent opinion piece, and very well reasoned. It sickens me that these traitors (yes, I call them traitors) have seized control of our elected representatives and have twisted the Constitution to achieve their utterly warped goals. Bear in mind that the Second Amendment says, in full: "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." Thanks to the unpatriotic campaign of right wingers out to undermine American government and democracy, the "well regulated" part is all but forgotten in the debate about guns.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Jim Norman

5:57 am on Wednesday, August 1, 2012

Keith: As you request, my opinion on the Daily Kos piece you cited is that it is a long-winded, specious argument that is entirely irrelevant to my comment. Apart from that, I think the piece is meant to obfuscate, not clarify. Of all the voluminous commentary available on the Second Amendment, I wonder why you chose this one to cite. What's your point?

Comment_arrow

Keith Kaplan

1:14 pm on Wednesday, August 1, 2012

Jim, The article dealt with several aspects of the "well-regulate militia" argument. It clearly showed that there were multiple classes within the militia at the time:

From the US Militia code:
"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."

"The Founders well understood that the militia is the people, for it was not only the right but the obligation of all citizens to protect and preserve their liberty and to defend themselves from the tyranny of the government."

Therefore, I don't quite understand your point as to how the "right wingers out to undermine American government and democracy" have done anything of the sort.

In fact, if you want to look at this issue OBJECTIVELY, there's very little reason for any more restrictions on legal owners of firearms and many could be rolled-back without any rational fears.

Lastly, the other point of the article, namely that we as a people object to limitations on our rights should be first and foremost in the thoughts of those that believe in "American government and democracy" as you put it -- yet most seem content with restricting what the Constitution lays out as a right.

Keith Kaplan

11:32 am on Monday, July 30, 2012

I disagree. The math simply doesn't provide evidence for your assertion.

ANY loss of life is tragic. But if we want to have an open and HONEST discussion, you can't slant the facts to serve a pre-destined plan. And while I'm certain it wasn't the INTENTION of the author to misconstrue their point - it's worth pointing out that

1) the Fort Hood Shooter, and the Virginia Tech shooter did not use "assault weapons".
2) It is NOT "abundantly clear that he was able to do so much damage because he used a semi-automatic assault rifle" - in fact, that weapon jammed and he used a glock handgun and shotgun which are both legal in NJ for purchase.

3) The author is absolutely correct when she says "The Constitution also says people have the right to assemble peacefully, but there are rules for protests and police were able to disperse Occupy Wall Street protesters in cities like New York for alleged unsanitary and hazardous conditions."

But what she leaves out is that we HATE those rules. We, as a citizenry, fight against them. Our Courts allow detestable speech, they just ruled this very month that it's legal to claim you were a wounded soldier, invalidating the Stolen Valor act. The 9th Circ. Court of appeals said it was free speech to say that someone should shoot Barack Obama http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2011/07/19/09-50529.pdf
Comment_arrow

Reply

Dave Brown

10:28 am on Tuesday, July 31, 2012

Regarding Holmes's purchases of so much fire power, ammo, gas mask, gas canisters, and swat-like clothing in a short period of time.....purchases in person and online....there should be technology out there that could send up a red flag that this was happening. There are so many regulations in the banking world...cross checks about frequent large deposits......there should have some way that Holmes's purchases sent up a red flag.

Reply

Leave a comment