Shootings and funerals occur by the thousands in our country. The president is coached about them and guns and receives millions from the NRA. The NRA sells numerous guns so the president supports guns by default. The NRA even comes to the U.S. Capitol to advise the president regarding firearms.

All the shootings in cities, schools, churches and elsewhere seem to not be much of a concern for the president. He is more interested in a national bankruptcy and war.

When you shot and killed someone or more, the firearms are checked out as the murder weapon, but the thousands of murder weapons from the NRA are not checked.

The president says that people kill and not guns, so he claims that guns are not killing thousands. He feels that the NRA and the president seem to see no gun problem.

The situation worsens for U.S. residents of all ages but is better for the NRA and the president with their funds. Congresspersons and governors, etc. accept NRA bribes. Many NRA members want fewer big guns, magazines, etc.

Funerals abound.

(45) comments

DLJohnson

Mr. Allen you would attract more support if your writings were based on fact instead of emotionally charged hate and hysteria. The NRA does support gun owner rights and the Second Amendment but you portray it as a retail outlet for purchasing guns. Your puppet master has you dancing to the insane tunes of the far left. You actually attach human traits to an object trying to sell the story that the gun is at the root of the killing.







You are not brave enough to put the responsibility where it belongs.......on the disturbed person who picked up that gun, loaded it, pointed at people and then pulled the trigger. You point the finger at the President as being at fault because of your hate for him based on your political stance.







You refuse to point the finger at people who refuse to report threats seen or heard or threatening behavior witnessed because it is not politically convenient for you. May be that is because you are too much like them and you relate that to pointing the finger at yourself. And that makes you uncomfortable.







I think background checks are good and will work on the people trying to purchase a gun legally. I also know that it is not cure all.







I agree that there are far too many funerals from gun violence. I also know that there are far too many funerals due to abuse of opioids, Drunk Driving, and suicides. And what about the abortions?







You criticize the President for having a different belief on an issue than yours and then chastise him for also being concerned about the economic issues of the country. It is not the issues you have a problem with. You have an issue with the man who has the job.







Why don't you take a stand and advocate that current gun laws be fully enforced. Why don't you take a stand and advocate for advancement in the treatment of the mentally ill. Why don't you take a stand and advocate for crime reform that takes away the revolving door that puts more and more criminals back on the street.







Or, you can just continue to hate the President.


dmilroy

DLJohnson does not have a rational reply to Mr. Eugene Allen so he insults him. The NRA represents gun manufactures more than hunters and sportsmen. http://vpc.org/investigating-the-gun-lobby/blood-money/ Gun violence is not a far left issue or a far right issue but an American issue. Mr. Johnson refuses to acknowledge the President of the United States plays a role in reducing gun violence. Mr. Trump made promised to stand-up to the NRA after the Marjory Stoneman Douglas shooting and then caved. Trump has flip-flopped on background checks. Trump's lack of leadership has the Senate twiddling its thumbs while more people are gunned down. Mr. Johnson's only solution is enforcement of the lack gun laws already on the books.


DLJohnson

dmilroy- explain how a factual reply is not rational and how it is an insult? The NRA does not sell guns but it does support gun dealers and supporters of the Second Amendment. The President has as much involvement in gun violence as you do. You cannot stand that he does not see things the same way that you do. You cannot stand that his insight of the issue has a different assessment of what needs to be done and it's not what you want. Why don't you work on reducing your reckless pushing of hate and hysterical rhetoric?







You seem to push the idea that anyone who supports gun ownership has blood on their hands. So does that mean anyone who supports abortion has blood on their hands? Does the Democrat's unequivocal support of Roe. V. Wade mean all democrats have blood on their hands? In 2015 there were 638,169 abortions reported to CDC and there were 36,000 deaths attributed to gun violence in the United States for that same year. If we use your standard of determining accountability we can determine, based on those figures, that Democrats are a far more dangerous organization than the NRA.







It might be wise for you to start wearing a warning sign that you are far more dangerous than the NRA.


chromedome42

Tell me Eugene, how do you feel about the 1,100 people that died today due to a direct link to tobacco. Shouldn't we completely outlaw tobacco? How about the 300 people that died today because they took their prescription medicine as prescribed? Because gun deaths are more violent, and because our lame-stream liberal media keeps hammering about guns and not about the other issues, we desensitize ourselves to the other issues. If the liberals want to regulate causes of death how about starting with big pharma and big tobacco as neither one of those are guaranteed in the Constitution.


dmilroy

Chromedome42 comment is a red-herring because he cannot ore will not address the actual arguments about gun violence. Chromedome42 concern about tobacco and prescription medicine is a seemingly plausible, though ultimately irrelevant, diversionary tactic. Chromedome42's logical fallacy and his attempt to blame the media for gun violence are not strong arguments. Claiming deaths due to gun violence is "guaranteed in the Constitution" is pure nonsense.


chromedome42

dmilroy, you are delusional, it's not a diversionary tactic. I never said deaths due to gun violence is guaranteed in the Constitution and you did. You love putting words in people's mouths don't you? The deaths by tobacco and meds is only the tip of the iceberg. You equate passing a law with actual gun control. Are you going to go take these guns away from criminals or do you just want to take them from the law abiding citizens? Trust me if the millions of legal gun owners in this country were the problem, we would know it already. Pass all the laws you care to. Unfortunately criminals by definition don't follow the law.







You mistake me pointing out your disingenuous arguments for gun control that ignore reality as me saying that there is nothing we can do about gun violence. I know that there is a lot we can do about it. It's just not as easy as passing more unenforceable meaningless legislation. If passing laws were all that it took cities like Chicago, Washington DC, and Baltimore would be the safest cities in America. But guess what? They are far from it.


dmilroy

Chromedome42 wrote "If the liberals want to regulate causes of death how about starting with big pharma and big tobacco as neither one of those are guaranteed in the Constitution." The clear implication of his words is deaths caused by big phrama and big tobacco and not guaranteed by the Constitution but deaths caused due to gun violence somehow are. Chromedome42's phony talking point that gun laws don't work because criminals don't follow the laws is refuted by our regulation on machine guns. Since the 1930's we've drastically reduce gun violence due to machine guns. Chromedome42 claims to know that there is a lot we can do to reduce gun violence but in the next sentence writes taking action is useless. The failure of tough gun laws in Chicago, Washingtion D.C. and Baltimore is due to the weak gun laws in other cities and state. You can drive to Chicago with a truck load of AR-15's purchased in South Dakota in nine hours.


Iman

Might want to take writing class there Eugene.


dmilroy

Iman, people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.


Iman

speaking of stones . . . didn't I see you in a box of rocks?


dmilroy

Iman mistakes insults for rational debate.


dmilroy

DLJohnson, Asserting Eugene Allen's letter was "emotionally charged hate and hysteria" is insulting. Claiming the President of the United States can do nothing about gun violence makes no sense especially when the Senate is waiting on Mr. Trump to act. https://www.newsweek.com/senate-gop-waiting-trump-approval-gun-control-1458606 Mr. Trump needles Republicans for not standing-up to the NRA and then caves to the gun lobby when push comes to shove. https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/08/trump-nra-background-checks Mr. Johnson replies to an argument I did not make. The only person to write "anyone who supports gun ownership has blood on their hands" is DLJohson. Mr. Johnson imitates Chromedome42 and attempts to change the subject to abortion. DLJohnson claims he wants to protect others from gun violence but can't even discuss the topic without straw-man arguments, red-herrings, and insults. Mr. Johnson has nothing constructive to offer on the subject of gun violence.


DLJohnson

dmilroy- If a person’s writings come across as emotionally charged hatred and hysteria, that is how they will be perceived. It is not insulting to point out what is perceived.







You cited the article, http://vpc.org/investigating-the-gun-lobby/blood-money/ Gun violence. Aren’t you relating blood-money to having blood on their hands? You implicated that by innuendo. If you do not believe in that relationship, then why did you cite the article? And now you want to cower from making that relationship. Please do not trip while back peddling.







I never claimed that President Trump can do nothing about gun violence, you are claiming that. You claim that Senate is waiting on President Trump to act….awaiting his approval on gun control. Are you claiming that the Senate and Congress want the President to do their job, legislate? I find it troubling that you are not in lock step with the President on these issues if you believe that he has such enormous influence over everyone and that congress can do nothing without the President doing it for them.







Showing the huge difference in deaths from abortion and deaths from gun violence is to point out the flaws in your thought process on the subject. It is an act that stops life. The object (tool) cannot stop life by itself; it has to have human interaction to stop life. Therefore, it is a correct statement that guns don’t kill people, people kill people.







The Democrats want to penalize all persons who own AR-15s because of the few who miss-use them. You might as well say that we have to get rid of all cars and pickups because some people miss-use them killing people due to drinking driving and reckless driving. When do you want to start turning in your car(s)?





dmilroy

DLJohnson, Eugene Allen's letter is direct, calm and factual. You percieve it as "emotionally charged hate and hysteria" because you wish to lessen the impact of Mr. Allen's arguments without actual addressing what he wrote. The article I link to is about how the gun industry dollar fund the NRA. The phase "blood money" is an idiom which means: The money paid to the family of someone who has been murdered. Only DLJohnson writing "anyone who supports gun ownership has blood on their hands." DLJohnson wrote, "The President has as much involvement in gun violence as you do" then complains "I never claimed that President Trump can do nothing about gun violence..." Mr. Johnson is a man of contradictions. If DLJohnson bother to follow the link I provided, then he would see "Senate Republicans remain in a state of limbo on gun control as they await President Donald Trump to take a definitive stance on which — if any — gun control measures he supports so the party can move forward in considering legislation aimed to curb future gun violence." Mr. Johnson goes back to his abortion red-herring attempting again to change the subject. No driver ever killed 58 people and wounded another 422 because he was drunk driving through a country music festival. One obvious step we could take the reduce gun violence is regulate weapons of war like AR-15s and AK-47's like we regulate machine guns. The owners could keep their weapons but we would be able to keep them out of the hands of criminals.


Ar223

There is no more a problem with guns in this country than there is with drinking and driving, texting and driving,bullieying, ABORTION, opioid use and drug use in general. We have created a country of people who have no accountability for there actions. Wake up people. A gun is no more dangerus than a speeding car, a tiny pill or a can of beer. MADD got rules in place and started to educate people years ago but it hasnt stopped death and injury from drunk drivers. Guns will be a part of this country and peoples lives hopfuly for many years to come. The media needs to stop sensationalizing every gun related incedent and giving sick people there 5 min. of fame and giving the special interest groupes more fuel for the fight. Just wait.....take the guns away and crazy people bent on hurting others will start making bombs and then lets see were we point fingers.


dmilroy

Ar223 argument is fallacious. Because America has many problems does not mean gun violence should be ignored. His fatalistic argument that nothing can be done to reduce gun violence is a gun lobby talking point. Because MADD did not prevent every drunk driving death does not mean stricter laws and education have not reduce deaths due to drunk driving. Ignoring the mass shootings in Sandy Hook, Las Vegas, Parkland, Omaha, Odessa Walmart, Dayton, etc... is cowardice. https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2019-08-03/united-states-mass-shootings We are not cowards we have the power to reduce gun violence if we no longer choose to be helpless.







After the terrorist explosion in Oklahoma City, no one said bombs don't kill people, people kill people. The NRA didn't advocate for more people to has access to bombs. We were appalled and took steps to keep explosives out of the hands of people want to commit mass murder. We need to be equally appalled by our epidemic of gun violence.


DLJohnson

dmilroy: You write, One obvious step we could take to reduce gun violence is regulate weapons of war like AR-15s and AK-47's like we regulate machine guns. (By the way---only an idiot would take an AR-15 to war instead of an M16 or an M4). The owners could keep their weapons but we would be able to keep them out of the hands of criminals. That is contrary to what your Democrat Presidential hopefuls declared at their last debate. Beto O'Rourke: 'H*ll yes' we'll take your AR-15 and your AK-47. You cannot even keep straight your party’s intent on the subject. Are you now going to claim the Democrat Presidential hopefuls are betraying you and are pushing an agenda that you don’t support?







Can you say with 100 % certainty that criminals do not possess machine guns in this country? Can you say with 100% certainty that regulating AR-15s and AK-47s will keep them out of the hands of criminals? I can say for a certainty that you would be regulating the law bidding citizens, the ones who don’t break the law and who are not out there killing innocent people, and not the criminals who are breaking the law and are out there killing innocent people. Your battle cry appears to be, “I did everything I could to reduce the ability of the law bidding citizen to defend themselves from criminals and defend themselves from an out of control government.”







You claim; "blood money" is an idiom which means: The money paid to the family of someone who has been murdered. It also means money paid to a hired killer. I believe that through innuendo, you intended the later based on the content of your writings.







You write: "Senate Republicans remain in a state of limbo on gun control as they await President Donald Trump to take a definitive stance on which — if any — gun control measures he supports so the party can move forward in considering legislation aimed to curb future gun violence." So you believe it is the Republicans who are responsible for considering gun control legislation aimed to curb future gun violence. So you would not be satisfied if the Republicans consider a crime control legislation approach aimed at curbing future gun violence? So it appears that you are really in lock step with Beto O’Rouke on taking away guns from the law bidding citizen.







You write: No driver ever killed 58 people and wounded another 422 because he was drunk driving through a country music festival. That is very true. However, in 2017 a person died every 48 minutes in the United States due to a drunk driver. That is 30 people dead every day of the year. There we 2,746,000 people injured in motor vehicle crashes in 2017 or 7,523 daily, a good portion of those daily injuries caused by drunk or reckless drivers. It’s all a matter of perspective. By the way, how many car manufacturers and alcohol producers have Democrats in their hip pocket?





dmilroy

There are many ways to reduce gun violence we are not betrayed by those who are looking for solutions but by those who block solutions. Cynicism and fatalism leads to cowardice. We cannot let cowardice win again. The M-16 and M4 are variants of the AR-15 capable of automatic fire. Both the AR-15 and the AK-47 were design for warfare. We know people own thousands of fully automatic machine guns but due to regulations hardly any machine guns are used in crime. Because criminal may get his hand on a machine gun does not mean the laws regulating have been any less effective in reduce deaths by machine guns. Extending the regulations to cover semi-automatic weapons designed for war will reduce gun violence. In our system of government both the House and the Senate need to past a bill and the President needs to sign it. The House has already past a universal back ground checks. The Senate is controlled by the Republicans. The Republican leaders in the Senate are waiting on leadership for Donald Trump before they will act. I am in favor of Mr. Trump and the Republicans in the Senate getting off their [censored] and acting. Auto accidents and drunk driving are significant issues that should be address but that does not mean the epidemic of gun violence should not be address. We as Americans can deal with more than one thing at a time. We can reduce gun violence.


DLJohnson

dmilroy: You write: " Because criminal may get his hand on a machine gun does not mean the laws regulating have been any less effective in reduce deaths by machine guns. Extending the regulations to cover semi-automatic weapons designed for war will reduce gun violence". You admit that the regulation would not keep the guns out of criminals hands. Your regulations would only be effective on law bidding citizens. Seeing as how the law bidding citizens are not out there killing innocent people and causing gun violence, explain how your regulation will reduce gun violence.







You write: " I am in favor of Mr. Trump and the Republicans in the Senate getting off their CENSORED and acting". That is not quite accurate based on your prior writings. You are in favor of the President and Republics doing what you and your party want done. Universal background checks has some good points but is lacking based on the Democrat version. Yet, that is what you hang your hat on. Taking weapons away from law bidding citizens is not the answer either. Yet that is what you and the Democrats are hanging your hat on.







You write: "Both the AR-15 and the AK-47 were design for warfare". If we use your logic, the shotgun has been a weapon of warfare since World War I due it's prowess at close quarter combat and trench warfare. It's power-fullness in jungle warfare was even more evident in Vietnam. Again if we use your logic, extending the regulations to cover these weapons suited for war will reduce gun violence. Does this means the Democrats will be coming after those too?







You write: " We as Americans can deal with more than one thing at a time". It is obvious that you are paying attention to what is going on with the Congress. I care that they are wasting my tax dollars on bullsh*t and not taking care of business for we the people. They are more interested in their political infighting instead of doing the job they were elected to do.


dmilroy

If you demand laws and regulation be 100% effective before they are issued, then you will have no laws or regulations. We know the regulations of machine guns have succeeded. Very few crimes are committed with machine guns while keeping them in the hands of responsible law abiding gun owners. The same can be done for AR-15s and AK-47s. You are mistaken. The bill passed by the Democratic controlled house establishes new background check requirements for firearm transfers between private parties (i.e., unlicensed individuals). Specifically, it prohibits a firearm transfer between private parties unless a licensed gun dealer, manufacturer, or importer first takes possession of the firearm to conduct a background check. The prohibition does not apply to certain firearm transfers, such as a gift between spouses in good faith. The Republican controlled Senate and Donald Trump continue to stall passage of the bill. Shot guns were not designed for war. Their design predates WWl by 180 years. The shotgun remains a standard firearm for hunting throughout the world for all sorts of game from birds and small game to large game such as deer. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shotgun#History Your point about action being stalled in Congress and the Senate is valid. As long as we have Senators and Congressmen and a President who are in the pocket of the gun lobby, they will continue to ignore mass shootings just as the ignored Sandy Hook, Orlando, Omaha, Charleston, San Bernardino, Las Vegas, etc... Cynicism and fatalism are the gun lobby's biggest allies. We have the power to change that and reduce gun violence.


Ar223

Any gun can be converted to a gun of war. Maybe we need to take all sharp objects away and ban cell phones and alchahal. Heck while we are at it lets just wrap ourselves in bubble wrap so nothing hurts us. Jezzzzzzzzzzzz people need to grow a set and man up.


dmilroy

Like machine guns, weapons designed for kill and wound people in warfare like the AR-15 and the AK-47 are not like weapons designed for hunting or for sport shooting. For example: These weapons are designed to fire off bullets very, very quickly. Some manufacturers boast that an experienced shooter could fire as many as 45 rounds in one minute. Magazines containing fresh ammunition can be swapped out in a matter of seconds. The specifications of assault-style rifles vary depending on ammunition, but many tests put the muzzle velocity of a standard round from an AR-15 at 3,200 feet per second, making it accurate up to 500 yards ― more than a quarter-mile. This makes rounds from an AR-15 or other assault-style weapons far more devastating than those designed for hunting like shot guns or those designed for shooting sports.



Ar223 writes we need to "grow a set and man up" an accept the mass shootings and the growing epidemic of gun violence as a fact of life. Ar223 sounds hard-bitten and macho but his fatalism and cynicism has rendered him helpless. It takes courage to reduce gun violence. We are not powerless unless we choose to be.


DLJohnson

dmilroy: A 2013 analysis by The Mayors Against Illegal Guns identified 93 incidents of mass shooting. Of those only 14 involved a weapon with high capacity magazine or an assault rifle. You concern yourself only with 15% of mass shootings because of the political propaganda drummed into you head by your puppet masters. You disregard the other 85% because they do not fit your agenda. That is the major problem of your position on the issue of gun violence. How can anyone take you serious when you disregard 85%?







You Write: The specifications of assault-style rifles vary depending on ammunition, but many tests put the muzzle velocity of a standard round from an AR-15 at 3,200 feet per second, making it accurate up to 500 yards ― more than a quarter-mile. This makes rounds from an AR-15 or other assault-style weapons far more devastating than those designed for hunting like shot guns or those designed for shooting sports. Most of the reported mass shootings occurred at fairly close ranges and personal with the shooter looking into the faces of their victims. There are few mass shootings that were at long distance from a sniper's perch. But there you go concerning yourself with the long distance capabilities of a weapon when that is less significant than other factors in mass shootings.







Why aren't you and your group crying out to regulate, ban or confiscate the weapons used in the 85% of mass shootings?





DLJohnson

dmilroy: A 2013 analysis by the Mayors Against Illegal Guns identified 93 mass shootings, 14 of which involved high capacity magazines or an assault weapon. That accounts for 15% of the mass shootings. You and your group concern yourself with those 15% because of your political puppet masters and discount the other 85%. How can the rest of us take you and your group serious when you focus on a minority factor relating to gun violence. You pretend to want effective measures to reduce gun violence while only concerning yourself with a factor present in 15% of the mass shootings and disregarding the the factors in 85% of them because it does not fit your agenda.







You write: The specifications of assault-style rifles vary depending on ammunition, but many tests put the muzzle velocity of a standard round from an AR-15 at 3,200 feet per second, making it accurate up to 500 yards ― more than a quarter-mile. This makes rounds from an AR-15 or other assault-style weapons far more devastating than those designed for hunting like shot guns or those designed for shooting sports. (I take it that your don't think rifles are used for hunting?) Very few mass shootings involve long distance shooting where the perpetrator engages his victims from a sniper's perch. Most mass shootings are committed at relatively short ranges where the killer can look his victim in the face. You say it takes courage to reduce gun violence. Are you admitting that you do not have the courage to address the factors in the 85% of mass shootings?







You and your like thinking liberals are the only ones rendered helpless. That is because you argue for small elements of the issue and steer clear of the larger elements. Why don't you take on the factors leading to the violence in people. Remember, guns are not causing the violence. It is just one of the tools violent people turn to.





dmilroy

DLJohnson thinks the devastating firepower of weapons of war like the AR-15 and AK-47 are only effective as long ranges. We have seen they are very good at killing both at long ranges and close up. DLJohnson implies I don't "...do not have the courage to address the factors in the 85% of mass shootings" because I show how regulating high powered military style weapons will reduce gun violence. As I have explained to him before in this comment section https://www.yankton.net/opinion/editorials/article_5ef4dcb8-b7fb-11e9-809b-a745b16ec2b6.html, there are many common sense steps we can take to reducing gun violence: Namely, Closing background check loopholes to keep guns out of dangerous hands. Banning military-style assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. Making schools safer. Increasing access to mental health services. Extreme Risk Protection Orders: a process by allowing families, household members, or law enforcement officers to petition a court directly for an extreme risk protection order (ERPO) which temporarily restricts a person’s access to guns. Allow federal research on gun violence and many more... https://www.preventioninstitute.org/focus-areas/preventing-violence-and-reducing-injury/preventing-violence-advocacy DLJohnson asserts the epidemic of gun violence is political issue, when it is actually an American tragedy. All Mr. Johnson has to offer is gun lobby a silly talking points that the solution to gun violence is more guns and that guns don't cause gun violence.



Mr. Johnson cites the gun violence statistics from Mayors Against Illegal Guns but ignores their message: 1) Advance enforcement strategies that ensure public safety for residents in communities disproportionately affected by gun violence, 2) Advocate for gun safety legislation at the local, state, and federal level, Collect data to better understand gun violence in our communities, 3) Advance policies and practices that reduce firearm suicides, 4) Invest in victim services and neighborhood-level violence intervention programs, 5) Implement comprehensive tracing of crime guns, 6) Implement strategies to minimize shootings by police, 7) Use the courts to advance gun safety, and 8) Use purchasing power to improve gun safety. https://everytown.org/mayors/


dmilroy

https://www.sandyhookpromise.org


DLJohnson

dmilroy: You write-1) Advance enforcement strategies that ensure public safety for residents in communities disproportionately affected by gun violence. Here's the facts-Chicago has some of the strictest gun laws in the nation while having an over burden court system and overcrowded prison system. Criminals are turned back to the streets before the ink is dry on their arrest reports. How can you ensure public safety with a system plagued by revolving doors?







You write- 2) Advocate for gun safety legislation at the local, state, and federal level. The reality is gun safety education has been placed in schools but failed to achieve an expected level of effectiveness. In part due to lack of follow up reinforcing lessons. And, collect data to better understand gun violence in our communities. The facts- each state collects data on gun violence as part of its crime reporting. This data is shared with the Federal authorities ( FBI and ATF) and is used to develop strategies and tactics.







You write- 3) Advance policies and practices that reduce firearm suicides. The facts- this is a mental health issue not necessarily a firearms issue. Stress and feelings of hopelessness that feeds suicidal tendencies must be addressed and treated. Part of the treatment is removing the person from access to firearms through adjudication of that person's mental illness.







You Write- 4) Invest in victim services and neighborhood-level violence intervention programs. The facts are every State has victim compensation services and victim advocacy programs. Areas plagued by gang violence have expanded violence intervention programs. Many large cities have specially trained gang units within their police departments and neighborhood implanted social organizations. The government alone can not make it successful. The public must get involved.







You Write: 5) Implement comprehensive tracing of crime guns. The FBI and ATF already do this. Why implement when it is already being done?







You write: 6) Implement strategies to minimize shootings by police. This is an ongoing process. Police officers are constantly exposed to training on shoot don't shoot, use of force escalation and deescalation and situational awareness. The officer does not have 100% control of the actions of a person he/she is dealing with until that person is cuffed, searched and in custody.







You Write: 7) Use the courts to advance gun safety. Are you suggesting that judges arbitrarily change the Constitution through court rulings instead the amendment process? Or, are you suggesting locking up criminals who use guns?







And you write: 8) Use purchasing power to improve gun safety. Are you suggesting only rich people can own guns? Is that your take on privilege in America?







You didn't give much forethought to this before you latched onto these 8 points, did you?


dmilroy

Mr. Johnson cites the gun violence statistics Mayors Against Illegal Guns he did not under stand their message before quoting them. 1)Advance enforcement strategies that ensure public safety for residents in communities disproportionately affected by gun violence. Chicago is not an island. Weak gun law is place outside Chicago impact Chicago. 2) Advocate for gun safety legislation at the local, state, and federal level. Gun safety legislation has pasted at the local and state levels for example: https://lawcenter.giffords.org/gun-laws/state-law/connecticut/ However, federal laws have been blocked in the US Senate. 3) Advance policies and practices that reduce firearm suicides. While firearms are used in less than six percent of suicide attempts, over half of suicide deaths are with firearms. https://everytownresearch.org/firearm-suicide/#foot_note_11 4) Invest in victim services and neighborhood-level violence intervention programs. Does not assume "The government alone can not make it successful." In fact it is a calls on the public must get involved. 5) Implement comprehensive tracing of crime guns. Police Departments fail to regularly trace guns used in crime. https://www.thetrace.org/2018/12/police-departments-gun-trace-atf/ 6) Implement strategies to minimize shootings by police. 7) Use the courts to advance gun safety. For example: https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/03/18/lawsuit-mass-shootings-225812 8) Use purchasing power to improve gun safety. Cities purchase guns. By only purchasing from responsible gun manufacturers and middle men, they can positively impact gun safety.


DLJohnson

dmilroy: Where to begin replying to your rant. You cite news rooms, ( The Trace is an independent, nonpartisan, nonprofit newsroom dedicated to shining a light on America's gun violence crisis), as authority on whether or not police trace guns used in crimes. During my 31 year law enforcement career, it was common to run a trace on guns used in crime to determine the pedigree of the firearm to provide the prosecutor with as much information as possible to answer the questions concerning the firearm and it's history. While there are documented shortcomings from some law enforcement agencies on running gun traces, that is the exception rather than the rule. You cite the article in an attempt to show that guns routinely are not traced by the police when in fact that is not the case.







You write: Gun safety legislation has passed at the local and state levels for example: https://lawcenter.giffords.org/gun-laws/state-law/connecticut/. However, federal laws have been blocked in the US Senate. Here is an example of Federal Law:







Most federal gun laws are found in the following acts: National Firearms Act ("NFA") (1934): Federal Firearms Act of 1938 ("FFA"): Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (1968): Gun Control Act of 1968 ("GCA"): Firearm Owners Protection Act ("FOPA") (1986): Undetectable Firearms Act (1988): Gun-Free School Zones Act (1990): Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act (1993): Federal Assault Weapons Ban (1994–2004): Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act (2004): and the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (2005)







Ineligible persons: Gun Control Act (codified at 18 U.S.C. § 922(g),(n),(d)[29][24]) makes it unlawful for certain categories of people to ship, transport, receive, or possess firearms or ammunition, to include any person: convicted in any court of a "crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year"; who is a fugitive from justice; any person under indictment for a "crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year, who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act,[31] codified at 21 U.S.C. § 802); who has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution; who is an illegal alien; who has been discharged from the Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions; who has renounced his or her United States nationality/citizenship; who is subject to a court order restraining the person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner or child of the intimate partner; or who has been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence.







The above categories are addressed on the ATF Firearms Transaction Record 4473 background check form.[33] According to the US Sentencing Commission, approximately 5,000 to 6,000 people a year are convicted of receiving or possessing a firearm against one of the prohibitions above.In 2017, over 25.2 million actual background checks were performed in total.







You write: Under use of the courts to advance gun safety you cite the following article , https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/03/18/lawsuit-mass-shootings-225812, that the plaintiffs argued they could to sue the gun manufacturer under the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act (CUTPA). The ruling of the Connecticut Supreme Court , published in March 2019, reversed and remanded the trial court ruling for further proceedings under (CUTPA). They pointed out that the plaintiff huge hurdle to overcome to be successful.







It will be interesting to see how this ruling will impact marketing and trade on other objects that are manufactured and sold.







I don't understand your position on, 8) Use purchasing power to improve gun safety. Cities purchase guns. By only purchasing from responsible gun manufacturers and middle men, they can positively impact gun safety. At least in South Dakota, purchase of guns by police departments must be made through licensed gun deals and subject to a bid process. So, your position does not make sense.


dmilroy

You make the unsupported assertions that guns used in crimes are commonly trace by police. The Mayors Against Illegal Guns who you quote says there is a failure to trace guns is a problem. The report from The Trace supports the Mayors concerns. The gun regulations that have past on the state and local level like Universal Background Checks and extreme risk protection orders are being held-up on the Federal level by President Donald Trump and the Republican controlled Senate. You failed to understand the postitions of the Mayors Against Illegal Gun before you used them as a source. Where is the police department not part of city government? All Mr. Johnson has to offer is gun lobby a silly talking points that the solution to gun violence is more guns, violent video game are problem and that guns don't cause gun violence.


Ar223

I wish people would truly explain what an "Assult Rifle" is. Is it based on the muzzel velocity of any caliber, the size of magazine it can hold, the style if stock it is fitted with? What? You can buy most any rifle and replace the plain wood stock with an after market plastic one and now it looks like an assault rifle but started out as a hunting rifle. A gun has never killed anyone, a pissed off person has, a person high on drugs has, a drunk person has, a bullied teenager has. The gun was just a tool used. No differant than nitrogen fertelized and diesel fuel are tools used in farming but put together can create great damage to inocent people. And I think if people are bent on hurting peoplr they will do it, be it with a gun, car or explosives.


dmilroy

Ar223's assertion that because people are murdered without guns, gun violence should not be reduced is irrational. We didn't sit on our hands following the Oklahoma Bombing or 9/11. We shouldn't do nothing about mass shootings. American's are brave and powerful. Fatalism is cowardice.


DLJohnson

dmilroy: I understand this subject more than you do. My understanding comes from exposure to crime involving gun violence and a career gathering evidence of crime. I have investigated crime that involved firearms; I have completed reports on crime and testified in court on crimes of violence involving guns. I've utilized Federal resources running traces on firearms used in crimes.







I've seen safety, including gun safety education to students through the Eddie Eagle Program implemented into the Yankton Safety Town Program from its inception. The name of the local program has since changed. Its curriculum has been changed from the National Safety Town guidelines. I am not sure if the Eddie Eagle Program is still part of this local education program for children.







I have experience with firearms training having been a Police Firearms Instructor for over 20 years. I have experience training police officers on marksmanship, firearms safety, use of force, escalation and de-escalation of force, situational awareness, shoot don't shoot, and sources of police liability. I understand the diligence police departments use to train their officers to prepare for the dangers they face while keeping the safety of the public, their fellow officers and themselves paramount. If you can't tell, I am offended that your writings try to depict the police as having a "Turkey Shoot" on the innocent public.







I have experience dealing with the mentally ill through response to persons threatening homicide, persons threatening suicide, to responding to attempted suicides and completed suicides and completed homicides. Some of them involving firearms. I have been involved with emergency committal process from simple transport to a mental health facility on a transport order to completing affidavit and petition asserting need for emergency intervention of a mentally ill person from initial contact, detention, transport for certification by a mental health profession, to transport to the mental health facility for committal. I've seen the successes and the failures of the mental health system.







You are the one that brings forth your opinion without the benefit of knowledge gained through experience and exposure. I am sure that you are adept at reading articles from news rooms and then deem yourself an expert on the subject. You argue from that same view point, no experience. You read and then your imagination takes over to make the narrative fit your political view.







Please say hello to the mouse in your pocket, you know the one you refer to when stating, "We are not helpless, we can reduce gun violence if we want to".


dmilroy

DLJohnson is offended by something I never wrote. The only person to write anything about "the police as having a "Turkey Shoot" on the innocent public" is Mr. Johnson. Mr. Johnson with your experience you should have known AR-15s and AK-47s were weapons designed for the battlefield. You should know the shot gun was designed prior to WWI for the purpose of hunting. You should realize the NRA has strayed far from its traditional role teaching gun safety and sport shooting. Your experience should have made you an advocate for keeping firearms out the hands of citizens whose mental illness make them a danger to themselves and others. You should realize repeating gun lobby talking points like "guns don’t kill people, people kill people" is pure horse-[censored]. With all your experience, you can offer nothing to reduce gun. I don't know if its your love of guns or your political worldview but waiting for the next shooting before we do anything is no rational. We are not helpless, we are not cowards, we can reduce gun violence if we want to.


DLJohnson

dmilroy: The only thing you got right is that I have experience and you don't. I am an advocate of keeping firearms out of the hands of those with mental illness by enforcing the laws currently in place. You refuse to admit that the shotgun became a weapon of war because it does not fit the narrative of the garbage you are trying to sell.







You seem to think that the NRA should have stuck strictly to teaching gun safety and sport shooting and not advocate for gun owner rights. You should use your own logic then and stick to being a silent citizen and not voice your opinion on anything you support. But you don't do that, you demand you right to voice your opinion. Isn't that being a hypocrite on your part? You are the one spreading horse-[censored]. Are there any other rights you want to restrict on other people, (the NRA is made up of people), but not on you?







The phrase "guns don't kill people, people kill people" is a fact. You can set a loaded firearm on a table in the middle of a room that is full of people and no one would be harmed. It takes a person with ill will or recklessness touching the firearm for someone to get hurt or killed. That's a fact. The firearm does not have a will, does not have a personality and does not have an evil thought. Those are all traits people have.







And yes, you did imply that the police were out shooting innocent people in the public through innuendo. Look at the latest outcry in St. Paul, MN concerning the officer involved shooting. The police officer is automatically wrong in the eyes of the protesters. Watch the video that was released by the Chief. Then put yourself in the police officer's shoes....would you have responded in the same manner? Or would you have just decided to die? Reading about something doesn't make you an expert.







The mouse in your pocket, "We", must be doing well because you refer to him/her a lot. He seems smaller, has he been on a diet or is it from all the exercising of his rights that you and he don't think other people should exercise?


dmilroy

DLJohnson giving your experience, you're woefully uninformed about guns or gun violence. You claim the shot gun is a weapon of war because they were used in WWI. Shotguns were designed for hunting and predate WWI by nearly 200 years. The NRA's current role is not to advocate for rights of hunters and other gun owners but to advocate for gun manufactures. https://www.npr.org/2018/03/13/593255356/how-americas-gun-industry-is-tied-to-the-nra DLJohnson insist on relying on inane gun lobby talking points like "video games are to blame" and "guns don't kill people, people kill people" because he has nothing rational to offer. Mr. Johnson claims he is being silence because I have pointed out the weakness of his arguments. Your attempts to change the topic to a police shooting in St. Paul is another red-herring. The only person to write anything about "the police as having a "Turkey Shoot" on the innocent public" or "that the police were out shooting innocent people in the public" is Mr. Johnson. Despite all his experience DLJohnson is paralyze from even considered steps to reduce gun violence. The American public is fed-up with the endless mass shootings and wants to take action. https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2019-08-19/poll-majority-favor-gun-control We can reduce gun violence.


DLJohnson

dmilroy: You are the uninformed one or better yet the misleading one. You forgot to include that the shotgun was also used in war during WW2, the Korean Conflict (War), Vietnam, the Dominican Republic, Lebanon, Grenada, Panama, the first Gulf War, Somalia, Haiti, Afghanistan and Iraq. The fear caused to your enemy from the sound of operation of the action is priceless. Its power is unsurpassed for riot/crowd control and breaching. Go ahead and stay with your docile picture of a hunting weapon because when you describe it that way it fits your political narrative.







Why can’t the NRA advocate for gun manufacturers? Isn’t that also advocating for the 2nd Amendment? Are their actions infringing on your right to not keep and not bear arms? Are their actions infringing on your right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? Do you fear good guys with guns, bad guys with guns or anyone with guns? Do you cower in a corner to the shadows on the wall?







You cannot read! I never claimed to be silenced. You think too much of yourself if you think you can silence me. You want the NRA and its members to be restricted to gun safety education and sport shooting and to not advocate for gun owners rights guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment. You make the voice of the NRA and its members stronger and louder every time you and your political cronies use your negative tactics on the subject.







I am not paralyzed on considering steps to reduce gun violence. I am not locked into your narrow view of what steps should be taken. I choose to focus on steps that will have a broader impact to reduce violence at its core.







I touched a nerve when I pointed out that through innuendo you believe that the police are out there shooting the innocent public on a wholesale basis. Own it; you intended it when you mentioned implement strategies to minimize shootings by police. It’s the subject/suspects actions during the encounter that determines the response. It’s all on the police officer that his/her response has to be reasonable based on the totality of the circumstances.







We are all sick and tired of mass shootings. And your implication that people who support the 2nd Amendment and gun owner rights do not want to reduce gun violence is disgusting.


dmilroy

In a prior thread you falsely asserted the AR-15 was not designed as a military weapon. Variants of the AR-15 are the standard infantry rifle of armed forces around the world. You mistakenly claim shotguns are weapons of war even though they were designed for hunting. None of the world's armed forces use shotguns rather than rifles as there standard issued weapon. You claim you are not not paralyzed on considering steps to reduce gun violence but you have offered no solutions. Claiming the 2nd Amendment and gun owner rights prevent us from acting to reduce gun violence is disgusting and false. We are all sick and tired of mass shootings. We have the power to reduce mass shootings if we are not side tracked by fatalism, cynicism, false claims and gun lobby talking points.


DLJohnson

dmilroy: I never said that the shotgun was the standard issued weapon used instead of the rifle in the military. I said it is also used by the military. You turned to the Democrat handbook, when you don't have facts to back up your story just turn other people's words around to fit your narrative or just lie.







I never claimed that the 2nd Amendment and gun owner rights prevent us from acting to reduce gun violence. That's what you claim. Yet another lie by you. Still using the Democrat play book. Adam Schiff must be your hero because he lies on the national stage.







You are the one filled with fatalism, cynicism, false claims and lack of knowledge and experience on the subject.







It's a coin toss to whether you are brain washed or if you just like to lie. Evidence in your writings could point to either one. I am not sure which one you are.





dmilroy

DLJohnson claims to be sick and tired of mass shootings and claims he is willing to considering steps to reduce gun violence but instead of offering any solutions all Mr. Johnson has to offer is insults.


Ar223

The shotgun is the only thing I would want to use as personal defence. It is very intimidating just to hear the sound of the slide being racked. The pattern is much better than a pistol or a rifle. I would much rather have 10 to 30 buckshot going down range than 1 pistol slug.


DLJohnson

dmilroy: Evidence is mounting that you just like to lie. Taking your lessons from Hillary and Schiff?


dmilroy

You assert "Evidence is mounting" that I've written something false but provide none. You claim to be sick and tired of mass shootings, but provide way to reduce gun violence. False accusations and an unwillingness to address mass shootings are not the signs a well-reasoned, sincere person with a desire to consider steps to reduce gun violence.


dmilroy

Mr. Johnson, You assert "Evidence is mounting" that I've written something false but provide no evidence. You claim to be sick and tired of mass shootings, and will to take steps to reduce the carnage but provide no steps. False accusations and an unwillingness to address mass shootings are not the signs a well-reasoned, sincere person with a desire deal with gun violence.





DLJohnson

dmilroy: You wrote: “You assert "Evidence is mounting" that I've written something false but provide no evidence”. Well, I have provided the evidence from your latest posts, and there is more in your previous posts. It is sad that your political stance is built on the tactic of pushing lies and deceit. You are a Zealot; fanatical and uncompromising in you political extremism. You have tunnel vision and discount everything that is not within your narrow view of the problem and your perceived solution.







I wrote: “You forgot to include that the shotgun was also used in war during WW2, the Korean Conflict (War), Vietnam, the Dominican Republic, Lebanon, Grenada, Panama, the first Gulf War, Somalia, Haiti, Afghanistan and Iraq. The fear caused to your enemy from the sound of operation of the action is priceless. Its power is unsurpassed for riot/crowd control and breaching”.







You wrote in reply: “You mistakenly claim shotguns are weapons of war even though they were designed for hunting. None of the worlds’ armed forces use shotguns rather than rifles as there standard issued weapon”. Even though I did not indicate the shotgun was used in place of the rifle, you try to insinuate that I did. This is just another example of your lies and deceit.







I wrote: “Why can’t the NRA advocate for gun manufacturers? Isn’t that also advocating for the 2nd Amendment? Are their actions infringing on your right to not keep and not bear arms? Are their actions infringing on your right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?” I also wrote: “You want the NRA and its members to be restricted to gun safety education and sport shooting and to not advocate for gun owners rights guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment".







You write in reply: “Claiming the 2nd Amendment and gun owner rights prevent us from acting to reduce gun violence is disgusting and false”. The lies and deceit continue. Where did I claim that the 2nd Amendment and gun owner’s rights prevent action to reduce gun violence? That’s right, you only believe in taking guns away from law bidding citizens as a solution to reducing gun violence, as stated by your hero Beto O'Rouke.







You and your like thinking comrades are the “thieves of night” that our parents and grandparents warned us about.


Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.