Entries Tagged 'Gun Control' ↓

Complete Insanity!

As I have joked in the past, some in legislature need to be evaluated for mental illness, and while I was being ‘sarcastic’ when I see crap like this, I sometimes wonder;

State lawmakers are proposing legislation that would allow people to carry concealed handguns without a permit in South Dakota.

The so-called constitutional carry legislation was introduced Friday. The proposal languished under former Republican Gov. Dennis Daugaard, but new GOP Gov. Kristi Noem offered support for such a law during her campaign.

Republican Rep. Drew Dennert is sponsoring a constitutional carry bill in the House. He says backers have the promise of the governor and support from the public and both legislative chambers.

Support from the Public? Bull . . . . sh*t!

How do you think this will make us safer? Allowing anyone to have a gun without a permit, or a permitting process is complete insanity. Also, how do you think this will help with tourism? If I was a major player in the Tourism industry, the Education system, or heck any business person in this state I would find a way to put a halt to his frightening legislation. We are not living in the Wild West anymore, and if my memory serves me, it wasn’t a very pleasant time. More guns, and especially guns in the hands of people who are not properly vetted is a horrible idea. How do these clowns get elected? Baffling.

Should there be a city ordinance for locking up guns?

While our City Council is concerned about potty mouth people at the council meetings, maybe they should look at REAL threats to our community. What should we do with LEGAL gun owners who don’t either secure their guns in their homes (the best idea) or secure them in vehicles by keeping the doors locked and out of view. The Sheriff and Police Chief take issue with it;

With a growing problem like this, we asked what is being done for prevention? Both Police Chief Matt Burns and Milstead say there’s not much that can be done, besides remind gun owners to use common sense.

Both men agree creating laws to punish a gun owner who leaves the weapon in an unlocked car is not the answer.

“South Dakota law is very clear and prohibits municipalities from having any sort of regulation on firearms and things like that. So that’s a bit of a stretch there to believe that some sort of law or sanction would be in place that a victim, who’s the victim of a crime themselves, would face some sort of penalty,” said Burns.

“You know, because you would be taking legit, lawful gun owners and making them criminals because we’re trying to prevent other criminals from stealing their guns. I hate to make lawful gun owners into criminals,” said Milstead.

Milstead says he would much prefer gun owners just do what they’re supposed to; which is lock up the dangerous weapon they don’t want being used to hurt others.

“You’d feel horrible if your gun was stolen out of your car, where you’d left it unlocked. And ultimately it ends up being used by somebody to kill somebody, to rob somebody, to commit a violent crime,” said Milstead.

Sioux Falls City Councilor Pat Starr has suggested a city ordinance that would fine a citizen who didn’t secure a gun in their car by locking the doors and concealing it. It seems there is an issue with State Law, and we know our State Legislature, they would NEVER pass a law like this, in fact, their solution to gun control is MORE guns.

Yeah, they are idiots.

But I wonder if you could get savvy with the ordinance. First off, I would never make it a felony, I would just have a simple fine like a speeding ticket. But instead of naming ‘guns’ specifically, maybe you could phrase the ordinance like this;

If stolen property taken from an unsecured vehicle is used in a crime you will receive a $250 fine and the property will be kept for evidence.

So this could be anything. A knife, gun, tire iron, wrench, etc. This way the gun nuts can’t say we are going after their guns, we are simply telling them, if you own something that can be used as a weapon and you are storing it in your vehicle without securing it, and it is ACTUALLY USED IN A CRIME, you will be accountable. This game of ‘reminding’ people to lock their cars is NOT working. This would be a pleasant reminder.

There should be stricter penalties for irresponsible gun owners

Here we go again, having to explain to hayseeds why it is important to lock the door of your car and your house.

I have often felt one key piece to better gun control without infringing on the 2nd Amendment rights of others is having stricter penalties on irresponsible gun owners.

If your gun is stolen because you don’t properly lock it up or secure it, aren’t you partially liable? I think so.

I think if your gun(s) goes missing (because you didn’t lock them up) and you report it missing there should be a $500 fine for each gun and gun license revoked for 5 years.

If your gun(s) is stolen and used in a crime, there should be a $5,000 fine for every gun stolen and used in that crime. License should be revoked for 10 years.

If your gun(s) are stolen and used in a crime in which someone is injured, you should get a $20,000 fine each gun stolen and up to a year in jail for each count. Gun license revoked for life.

If your gun(s) are stolen and used in a crime in which someone is killed, you should get a $100,000 fine, 5 years in prison and license revoked for life.

I have often said it isn’t the responsible gun owners that are the problem in this country, it’s the irresponsible ones and the criminals that take advantage of their stupidity and laziness. They should suffer the consequences or just choose to be responsible. The 2nd Amendment is a right, but that doesn’t mean you can abuse that right.

I encourage everyone to watch this video

You can have your opinions about Trump, but this was an amazing conversation, I learned a lot (not from him).

One of the comments that stood out was one of the victim’s brother said we need to have and open conversation and bring everything to the table and all ideas even the controversial ones, because that is how we will come up with solutions.

I would have to agree, our First Amendment may be the solution to fixing our Second Amendment to the Constitution.

You will have to FF to about 25 minutes;

Gun Violence Network (GVN)

After yesterday’s shooting it is probably safe to say, Trump will most likely go down in history as the ‘Gun Violence’ president (I’m sure there will be some other titles he will garner along the way to).

But why just stop with the President? Maybe the cable networks need to have a 24/7 news network dedicated to just gun violence? They could talk about the current mass shootings (seems like there is one about every other week these days) they could do historical pieces on past shootings, they could show feature docs about gun violence like ‘Bowling for Columbine’.

Along the bottom of the screen they could stream the names of everyone killed in the past 24 hours due to gun violence, whether that was an accident, suicide or homicide, than maybe pick one of the victims and do a feature story about them.

But I think the kicker of the day they could stream all the names of Federal and State lawmakers who receive money from the NRA and other gun groups, they could also attempt to get comments from them about the ‘latest shooting’. You know, like when Thune gave us all the great advice to ‘get small’.

I’m sure with all the talent in the cable news business they could easily put together such a network, and I guarantee it would probably be more watched than HLN, CNN and MSNBC combined.

We love our guns in the United States, but what we love even more is denial that we have a gun violence problem in this country.

Just let the NRA and Gun Manufacturers continue to control the conversation, and we can keep watching the body count rise.

When are we going to get serious about Gun Control?

As we both know, the best advice we get from A+ Rating from the NRA senator John Thune is that people need to learn how to dodge bullets;

“I think people are going to have to take steps in their own lives to take precautions,” he opined. “To protect themselves. And in situations like that, you know, try to stay safe. As somebody said — get small.”

Thanks John for your leadership.

Some wonder why our DC representatives are so scared of gun control? Well the first reason is obvious, the gun lobby and the NRA owns them.

But as others have pointed out, years ago when someone poisoned a handful of people using non-childproof Tylenol bottles, we childproofed them and required seals.

When terrorists flew planes into the World Trade Center, we created the TSA and have restricted every kind of cutting device you can imagine, shoes and even shampoo.

But for some reason, we don’t want to restrict guns.

It would actually be quite simple. I have suggested a few of the things we could do;

We could limit the number of guns people can legally have and rounds of ammo. I don’t think anyone should be allowed to own more than one rifle, one shotgun and one pistol.

I think everyone who owns a gun should go through an extensive mental health and criminal background check, along with a gun safety course (you have to know how to safely operate a gun, lock up a gun, etc.)

You must have a license that says you passed these tests and it should be renewed each year with a renewal fee.

People have a 2nd amendment right to own a gun, but that doesn’t mean we cannot limit that ownership legally. If we can prevent felons from voting, we can prevent them from having a gun.

But I think one of the most blistering criticisms comes from Rosanne Cash, who has been a gun control advocate for decades;

“For the past few decades, the National Rifle Association has increasingly nurtured an alliance with country music artists and their fans,” Cash wrote. “You can see it in ‘N.R.A. Country,’ which promotes the artists who support the philosophical, if not economic, thrall of the N.R.A., with the pernicious tag line ‘Celebrate the Lifestyle.’”

“That wholesome public relations veneer,” she continued, “masks something deeply sinister and profoundly destructive. There is no other way to say this: The N.R.A. funds domestic terrorism.”

Cash went on to claim that “a shadow government exists in the world of gun sales.”

I agree 100%, not just because it is true but has been blatantly obvious for years.

“The stakes are too high to not disavow collusion with the N.R.A,” she concluded. “Pull apart the threads of patriotism and lax gun laws that it has so subtly and maliciously intertwined. They are not the same.”

Some say gun control won’t work, they of course have stood by this mantra for years, because the NRA has been giving them their talking points and loads of cash.

I say, “What’s the harm in trying?” things certainly are NOT getting better with our current policies.

Jaber incident reveals our lack of gun restrictions in South Dakota

I won’t get into whether or not Mr. Jaber is innocent or guilty (I guess if he had a fair judge and or jury, I could see the decision going either way). I do agree with some that Jackboots is using this as political grandstanding.

Also don’t get me started on the 3 cousins pissing match over who’s religion is the BEST! People wonder why I am non-religious, watching the 3 cousins clown around is one of the main reasons. You are all descendents of Abraham, you all worship the same God. Get over it already, put the f’ing guns down and give each other a group hug.

Some would say the police did not act accordingly, believe it or not, I will defend the SFPD on this one. Our gun laws in SD are so lax, they had no choice then to let Mr. Jaber go. His possession of multiple assault weapons and pistols in his vehicle is perfectly legal in SD. AND, he probably bought them all legally.

If good, God fearing South Dakotans should be scared of anything, it’s not radical Muslims, Jews or Christians they should worry about, it’s our hazardous and troublesome lax gun laws in South Dakota that allow a person to carry around an arsenal in their mini-van. You’d think Mr. Jaber was preparing to drive through the middle of Baghdad instead of sleepy old Sioux Falls.

Thom Hartmann: The Second Amendment Was Ratified to Preserve Slavery

snookigun

Big ‘B’ found this interesting article from 2013;

The real reason the Second Amendment was ratified, and why it says “State” instead of “Country” (the Framers knew the difference – see the 10th Amendment), was to preserve the slave patrol militias in the southern states, which was necessary to get Virginia’s vote.  Founders Patrick Henry, George Mason, and James Madison were totally clear on that . . . and we all should be too.

Little did Madison realize that one day in the future weapons-manufacturing corporations, newly defined as “persons” by a Supreme Court some have called dysfunctional, would use his slave patrol militia amendment to protect their “right” to manufacture and sell assault weapons used to murder schoolchildren.

If congress was to actually uphold the true meaning of the 2nd Amendment, none of us would have guns, except cops and the military.

Documentary worth checking out

posters_509760

This was a real eye-opener for me. Especially when it comes to mental illness and suicides in our country. The leading causes of gun violence in our country? Alcohol abuse and Domestic violence, not mental illness.

Tri-Valley first to pull a stupid

Well, we all knew it was coming, eventually, some po-dunk school in South Dakota would take up the state legislature on the School Sentinel law;

The Tri-Valley School District is considering a policy that could change the look of school safety in South Dakota.

On Monday night, the school board passed the first reading of a school sentinel policy that would allow the district to arm certain employees.

I guess I never expected a school that large to take up the suggestion. Either way, whether you are for or against this (I’m against it) it seems the school board was being sneaky about the way they went about it.

Like I said, there is mountains of evidence why this is a very bad idea, but let’s not talk about that.

The school board decided to try to sneak this under the radar;

The second and final reading of this policy will be on April 11, which is open to the public. 

Yes, they mentioned it in some agendas, but notice they took the first reading without any input. It should have not gotten to first reading if the media would have known about their intentions ahead of time.

Cory also points out the continuing secrecy;

The icing on this bad policy is the secrecy clause. Parents will have no right to know which staff are carrying deadly weapons in school. Parents get no check on the board’s decision, no opportunity to say, “Good grief! They let that yahoo carry a gun? I don’t think so!” Parents get no opportunity to pull their children from an armed teacher’s classroom and demand that their children be placed in classrooms where no guns are present.

I’m willing to bet that most parents would be against an armed sentinel at Tri-Valley, but I guess we will wait and see.