I appreciate Steve Showalter’s explanation of the history of the Second Amendment. I think he did a fair and accurate summary of its history. I would add that one other factor in the Supreme Court’s 2008 Heller decision is that the other nine rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights are individual rights. Hence it stands to reason that the founding fathers intended for the Second Amendment to be an individual right as well.

I think we should also clarify the often used/misused phrase “assault weapons.” The term was originally misused in 1993 to promote passage of the 1994 “Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act.” Proponents were attempting to equate guns designed for military use with ordinary guns owned by many law abiding citizens. Fully automatic military use guns have been highly regulated since 1934 and are never used in crimes (although they are frequently visible in Hollywood movies.)  Anti-gunners, though, have intentionally misled people to think that semi-automatic sport weapons that look like military weapons are scary and too lethal for hunting or self-defense. This is akin to saying cars and trucks that resemble military vehicles ought to be banned because they look like military hardware. The fact is, though, that semi-automatic weapons are the overwhelming gun of choice for most sportsmen and are not as lethal as fully automatic guns.

I think any gun debate ought to rely on facts and logic instead of fear and exaggeration. Calling commonly owned, semi-automatic guns “assault weapons” is dishonest and inflammatory. Americans deserve better.

Mark Dolecki

Baytown

 

(9) comments

baytownbert

The gun debate is fueled by Democrats’ constant harping on the subject. What happens whenever they stir up the country with the threat of “voluntary” confiscation, which is what it would actually be, pro-gunner BUY MORE GUNS! They buy more ammo, more long guns, more accouterments for that hobby/industry, and more more more.







So why do they do it? They do it to spread fear and win votes because they deceitfully do not want that great tool removed. It wins votes for them and they are the first ones to bring up the suffering of children, even if there are none at that incident. I contend their constant harping on the subject actually incites the crazies.







“I think any gun debate ought to rely on facts and logic instead of fear and exaggeration. Calling commonly owned, semi-automatic guns “assault weapons” is dishonest and inflammatory. Americans deserve better.” I have a mint 1908 military rifle and a 1917 military rifle that are both assault weapons. They are in my gun safe with my other impotent firearms and my ammo is stored separately in case those old assault weapons suddenly come to life with their hidden, but very real malice...


baytownbert

The gun debate is fueled by Democrats constantly harping on the subject. What happens whenever they stir up the country with the threat of “voluntary” confiscation, which is what it would actually be, pro-gunners BUY MORE GUNS! They buy more ammo, more long guns, more accouterments for that hobby/industry, and more more more.







So why do the Democrats always keep the handle of gun violence close by? They do it to spread fear and win votes because they deceitfully do not want that great fear tool removed. It wins votes for them and they are the first ones to bring up the suffering of “the children”, even if there are none at that incident.







I contend their constant harping on the subject actually incites the violent zealot crazies.







“I think any gun debate ought to rely on facts and logic instead of fear and exaggeration. Calling commonly owned, semi-automatic guns “assault weapons” is dishonest and inflammatory. Americans deserve better.” Mark Dolecki - Baytown Sun







I have a mint 1903 military rifle and a 1917 military rifle that are both assault weapons. They are in my gun safe with my other impotent firearms and my ammo is stored separately in case those old assault weapons suddenly come to life with their hidden, but very real malice intent...


Frank

Answer one question, please. What is the most commonly used type of weapon in mass killings?


baytownbert

The sword. Ganghis Kahn was responsible for the deaths of as many as 40 million people. While it's impossible to know for sure how many people perished during the Mongol conquests, many historians put the number at somewhere around 40 million.


Frank

Cute, but irrelevant. Is that your way to avoid answering a tough question?


Frank

Since you are concerned with facts, here's another question. What happened to the frequency of mass killings during the 10 year period (1994-2004) when the assault weapons ban was in effect?


baytownbert

"There is evidence that events like Columbine can inspire other mass shootings, so without Columbine and the following “copy-cat” events, the number of shooting incidents during the Assault Weapons Ban would have been significantly lower." The Century Foundation


Frank

????? You are really grasping at straws now. Answer the question and quit trying to dodge inconvenient truths.


Alan H

Frank, you know what happens when you confront TrumpNuts with the facts, they go spastic and forget how to spell accoutrement. As for Mr Dolecki, using the proper name for assault -style weapons of war isn't the real debate topic concerning mass killings. The topic is mass murders-how to prevent them. My other big question for debate is why are drug manufacturers of opioids being held criminally liable for marketing/making addictive pills that cause mass killings through overdosing, but gun manufacturers are not liable for marketing/making assault-style rifles which cause mass killings? Do Second Amendment advocates who support mass murders with guns also support mass killings by opioid overdose? A bartender is liable for selling too much alcohol to a customer if the guy drives drunk and kills somebody. Why aren't sellers of guns liable for selling too many assault-style weapons and ammo to customers intent on mass killings? Why are gun manufacturers/sellers exempt from liability when other manufacturers/sellers aren't?


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.