sits on ‘Stand Your Ground’ law repeal panel
by Samantha Dietl, Nebraska Examiner
WASHINGTON — Six lieutenant governors from across the country, including Lt. Gov. David Zuckerman of Vermont, joined gun violence prevention advocates Tuesday, October 24 to share their stories and offer solutions at a policy discussion event.
The Democratic Lieutenant Governors Association hosted the gun violence prevention policy summit, which was the first event of its kind. The organization partnered for the event with the gun violence prevention advocacy groups Everytown for Gun Safety, March for Our Lives and Giffords, as well as the labor union American Federation of Teachers.
Many of the speakers were survivors of gun violence themselves, and they shared their stories throughout the panels, which prioritized different angles on the topic of gun violence.
The six lieutenant governors in attendance were Garlin Gilchrist of Michigan, Austin Davis of Pennsylvania, Peggy Flanagan of Minnesota, Aruna Miller of Maryland, Sabina Matos of Rhode Island and David Zuckerman of Vermont.
Kevin Holst, the assoiation’s executive director, moderated the event’s three panels.
The first panel focused on justice for victims of gun violence and holding the firearms industry accountable for its role in perpetuating gun violence, while the second panel highlighted ways to help youths to feel safe in their communities, including at school. The third panel concluded the event by focusing on “disarming” hate.
The panelists discussed policy solutions at the local, state and federal levels. Some called for federal actions such as the tightening of background checks and a national ban on assault weapons.
More broadly, panelists said tackling a variety of issues, such as poverty, access to quality education and more, are necessary steps to preventing gun violence.
Gilchrist said gun violence is an issue that “confronts literally every American.”
“There’s not an American you can talk to who does not have some direct connection to the issue of gun violence and doesn’t have an interest in having fewer people die in gun-related deaths,” Gilchrist said.
Guns and democracy
Holst guided the event’s first panel to dissect what he called “the nexus of guns and democracy.”
Speakers at the first panel included Gilchrist, Giffords Law Center Chief Counsel and Vice President Adam Skaggs, Oregon Treasurer Tobias Read and Jessie Ojeda, a guns and democracy attorney fellow at Giffords Law Center.
Gilchrist said that “in the face of this loud and dangerous minority of people who frankly believe more in guns than they do in voting,” it is important to show voters that “this system can be strengthened to be more robust.”
Ojeda said she had two “core” policy suggestions for state legislatures to pass.
First, she called on states to prohibit the open and concealed carrying of guns at or near polling places. She said that 12 states have these types of policies in place.
Her second recommendation was for states to expand anti-intimidation laws to acknowledge firearms.
“No state currently has a law that expressly recognizes the inherent intimidation of firearms at polling places,” Ojeda said.
Gilchrist talked about his experience on April 30, 2020, when armed protesters entered the Michigan State Capitol calling for an end to the state’s COVID-19 safer-at-home order.
He said that at the time, the Michigan Capitol was one of two state capitol buildings in the country that allowed people to bring firearms into the building. That has since changed, he said.
“We still see people sort of bumping up against that policy,” Gilchrist said.
Gilchrist described seeing people line up — with guns — along both sides of the sidewalk on his usual path into the Capitol building.
Holding the firearm industry accountable
Gilchrist, who highlighted his state’s recent passage of background checks and storage laws, said there “absolutely needs to be accountability” for those who make, manufacture, market and distribute firearms.
Skaggs said the “irresponsible marketing and advertising” of specific gun companies have promoted white supremacist and extremist logos.
“We have gun companies that are kind of appealing to the lowest common denominator, if you want to think of it that way,” Skaggs said.
Skaggs said that because governments are “significant consumers” in the firearm industry, governments should then look at their suppliers. Those suppliers may then, in turn, “hold themselves to higher standards,” Skaggs said.
“I think passing these kinds of laws that open up the courthouse doors to litigation on behalf of victims of gun violence, on behalf of communities that have high rates of gun violence, that really has the opportunity to transform the way the industry behaves,” Skaggs said, “and the standards to which the industry holds itself, and to which we as communities and as a nation hold them to those standards.”
Ojeda said gun companies often target children and young adults in their marketing, and he drew a comparison to how tobacco companies have similarly targeted that demographic. This youth-targeted marketing of firearms is unregulated, Ojeda said.
Youth safety
The event’s second panel highlighted survivors of gun violence, including Abbey Clements, executive director and co-founder of Teachers Unify to End Gun Violence executive.
“Gun violence lives in classrooms across the country,” said Clements, who is a teacher and survivor of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in 2012 in Newtown, Connecticut. A gunman entered the school and killed 20 students and six adults.
Clements said there is a “love” and “deep connection” between herself and her students who also survived.
“They’re heartbroken, really, with our generation,” Clements said.
Clements raised concerns about how lockdown drills in schools inflict further trauma upon students. She said drills need to be “trauma-informed.”
Davis said that when he was a kid, he had a defining experience with gun violence. There was a shooting outside his home, where he was with his mom.
“I remember the look on her face, and how terrified she was,” Davis said. “And I think that was the first time where she felt like she couldn’t protect us from what were outside forces.”
The impact of gun violence on his community inspired him to get involved with activism.
“As I’ve traveled my entire career, I’ve seen that same look in the face of mothers and community members’ eyes all across Pennsylvania, and really all across this country,” Davis said. “That same feeling of hopelessness, that same feeling of being trapped in a community.”
Davis said that in order to curb gun violence, greater investments are needed in community-based programs and “attack the root causes of poverty.”
This means investing in education systems and workforce development programs, Davis said.
“We’re only going to tackle this if we take on all those things and take over a comprehensive approach to prevention,” Davis said.
Flanagan said it is important to invest in mental health care for students both inside and outside of school. She said it is also important for schools to have the financial support they need to hire and keep mental health professionals.
Flanagan said her state of Minnesota has spent “hundreds of millions of dollars” on projects based in “communities of color and Indigenous communities.” She said this money was used to create infrastructure for mental health and wellness centers, community organizations and an Olympic-sized swimming pool in Minneapolis to give people opportunities.
“These things matter and it’s also part of how we tackle gun violence prevention by making sure there are robust places in communities, created by communities themselves, to create these spaces where people feel seen, heard and valued, and protected,” Flanagan said.
March for Our Lives board Chair Tre Bosley, who lost his brother to gun violence in 2006, said the government needs to take a “holistic approach to gun violence in Black and brown communities.”
Bosley said violence prevention “looks different” in his community in Chicago. He said his organization took a group of kids “who had never been off their block” to downtown Chicago.
“That’s not gonna be covered by certain policies, certain grants, but that is violence prevention,” Bosley said. “I’m showing them the different side of the city they live in that they would never experience, to make them look at life differently.”
Removing guns
During the third and final panel of the event, panelists discussed the banning of assault weapons, the intersection of domestic violence and gun violence, as well as the repealing of “Stand Your Ground” laws.
This panel included Miller, Matos, Zuckerman and Monisha Henley, the senior vice president of government affairs of Everytown for Gun Safety. Brandon Short, a gun safety activist and former NFL player, also sat on the panel.
Short, who played for the New York Giants and Carolina Panthers, turned to activism after his pregnant daughter was shot and killed by her partner.
Homicide is the leading cause of death among pregnant women, and these deaths are often attributed to firearms, Short said.
Short said there are currently 28 states in which a convicted domestic abuser can own a firearm.
“I don’t think that there should be a state in our union where you should be able to have a firearm and be convicted for hurting a woman,” Short said.
Matos highlighted a law in her state that allows judges to have guns taken away from individuals convicted of domestic violence. She said to other policymakers in the room that if they implement a similar policy, they should make sure this process is automatic. Otherwise, domestic violence survivors may have to request for this to happen.
Henley and Short said that “Stand Your Ground” laws need to be repealed. These laws often allow people to shoot or kill someone when they feel threatened, but this is often difficult to prove, Short said.
Henley said that once gun violence prevention policies are passed, leaders have to do more to “bring stakeholders together” and have public service announcements so that people can know and understand these new laws.
“The last piece is to have a reporting mechanism,” Henley said. “So really understanding how it’s working, so that if you need to do adjustments, you need to learn from it, all those things are existing together.”
Republished from the Nebraska Examiner under Creative Commons guidelines
Categories: Gunrights
If Lt. Gov. Ponytail really wanted to reduce gun violence he would insist on:
-enforcing existing statutory laws and coming down hard on violent criminals
-enforcing our EXISTING, TOUGH federal gun laws by locking up the offenders
-enforcing our EXISTING border laws to keep dangerous migrants and fentanyl out
Thank you, Mr. Zuckerman, for taking some proactive steps to curb gun violence. None of the topics summarized above abridge the rights of gun ownership by responsible citizens.
RE: “During the third and final panel of the event, panelists discussed the banning of assault weapons,” Or as our LE community defines, “Patrol Rifles.”
There was a time where responsible Vermonters elected candidates of proven, superior judgement. Successful entrepreneurs, retired senior military officers, physicians, engineers, etc. Can anyone tell what Zuckerman has done with his life that would assure me of his superior judgement? Within my circle of friends and counterparts, if someone of Zuckerman’s caliber entered the room, no one would acknowledge him.
Regardless of party affiliation, it’s beyond time candidates are recruited that will return Vermont to a path of prosperity that assures home ownership, a married woman to stay home and raise her children, and a secure retirement. Alternatively comrade, you can dig rutabagas on Zuckerman’s cooperative farm.
There are already very stringent federal regulations for who should not be sold or possess firearms. Criminals and those who have beaten their wives or girlfriends up don’t care about federal, state, or municipal regulations, or they wouldn’t break the law.
So let’s make even more laws which criminals won’t obey anyway, but which make it harder for law-abiding citizens to defend against those who care not one whit about others’ lives.
18 U.S.C. S.922(g) – possession of a firearm or ammunition by a felon, fugitive or drug user – 10 yrs.
18 U.S.C. S.922(j) – possession of a stolen firearm – 10 yrs.
18 U.S.C. S.922(I) – shipping, transporting or receipt of a firearm across state lines with intent to commit a felony – 10 yrs
18 U.S.C. S.924(a)(1)(A) -carrying, using or possessing a firearm in connection with a federal crime of violence or drug trafficking – 5 to 30 yrs. consecutive mandatory minimum sentences
18 U.S.C. S.924(j) – for committing murder while possessing a firearm in connection with a crime of violence or drug trafficking – Death or up to life imprisonment
18 U.S.C. S.924(e) for a “prohibited person” who has three prior convictions for drug offenses or violent felonies – 15 years mandatory minimum
18 U.S.C. S.924(g) – for interstate travel to acquire or transfer a firearm to commit crimes – 10 yrs.
John – How are any of these “laws” going to curb gun violence? A law only works when people follow it. Last I heard and experienced, the mentally ill and the criminally minded don’t follow laws. Don’t hear of too many cases of responsible gun owners misusing their weapon do you?
And “none of the topics summarized above abridge the rights of gun ownership by responsible citizens”? How about banning a weapon that has been termed “assault” which is utterly, ridiculously absurd?
All of these things that people are fooling themselves with, trying to stop the mentally ill and the criminally minded, do not address the root cause of the problem. Which to be fair, is multifaceted. In a nutshell, our civilization is sick. Deranged. Needs to be pruned and then treated with tender loving care, none of which will ever occur. We will likely implode or be invaded and decimated before we “solve” the “gun violence” in this country. Those are just the facts. I don’t make ’em up.
Zuckerman, another black-eye for Vermont, all this amounts to is him running his liberal agenda, showing just how unknowledgeable he really is when it comes to firearms and laws, but he’ll probably spout how safe Vermont is, no thanks to him !!!
Agreed, the blind leading the blind.
I believe he is a remittance man. Go to your Funk and Wagnalls.
Bingo in the first row !
He’s definitely in somebody’s pocket
Yea, and the pocket he’s in is the pocket of the tax payers, as I can feel my wallet getting lighter every day due to this socialist’s politics .
Yea, that’s what I’d do, send a guy that does not know the difference between a MSR, and a blunderbuss to firearms conference . Now if this was a conference about carrots..
It’s unfortunate that comments such as Mr. Finnie’s are considered appropriate for a public discussion on a serious topic.
Nothing wrong with his comment, he’s absolutely correct. No one who doesn’t have a clue about firearms should be discussing polices.
So you would recomend censoring me ? What are you afraid of ?
feq people can be funny and deadly serious at the same time, but you’re one of them
The truth isn’t always pretty but it’s still the truth
Freedom of speech!
In the words of Daniel Patrick Moynihan, “You are entitled to your opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts.”
Well-spoken comrade, we at the Front Porch Forum concur and would never let Patrick Finnie’s sarcastic comments see the light of day.
John, I am curious as to what you found inappropriate about Mr. Finnie’s comment.
Another prime example of the blind leading the blind. No one and I mean no one without a proper understanding of firearms should have a hand in any decision making. All the time and money they spend on this garbage could be used to deal with gender disphoria and the mentally ill that are allowed to run free on the streets.
By reading the article it is clear that non of the attendees has any clue of the laws already on the books.
As always with the anti gun politicians it’s let’s go after the manufacturer and not the criminals or crazies.
The anti gun people always blame it on the manufacturers not the criminals or addicts and crazies.
Judging from many comments in this forum, Colt, Remington, and Winchester , and the gone lobby are laughing… all the way to the bank.
Do you mean to say that Mr. Zuckerman is in the running for Vermont Gun Salesman of the Year?
Comrade don’t forget:
556 Tactical
Adams Arms
Adcor Defense
Anderson
Arctiier
Armalite
Auto-Ordnance
Avidity Arms
Barne’s Bullets
Barrett
Beretta
Bear Creek Arsenal
Bond Arms, Inc.
Bravo Company
Browning
Bushmaster
Charter Arms
Christensen
Colt
Cooper
Crimson Trace
CZ
Daniel Defense
Del-Ton
Diamondback Firearms
DPMS Panther Arms
Fierce
FN Herstal
Freedom Arms
Glock
Heckler and Koch
Henry Repeating Arms
Heritage
Hi-Point
Horizon Firearms
H&R Firearms
Infinity Firearms
Inland Firearms
Ithaca
Israeli Weapons Company
Kahr Arms
Kalashnikov
Kel-Tec
Kimber
LaserLyte
Lazzeroni
Les Baer
Leupold
LWRC International
Magnum Research, Inc.
Marlin
Masterpiece Arms
McWhorter Rifles
Mossberg
New England Firearms
North American Arms
Otis/Shooter’s Choice
Palmetto State Armory
Panther Arms
Patriot Ordnance Factory
Promag
Pro Arms
Redfield
Remington
Ruger
Savage
SCCY
Seekins Precision
Shadow Systems
SIG Sauer
Silencer Co.
Smith & Wesson
Springfield Armory
Staccato
Steyr
STI International
Sticky Holsters, Inc.
Streamlight
SWORD International
Taser International
Taurus
Thompson Center
Trijicon
Umarex
Unified Weapons Systems
US Optics
UTAS
Volquartsen
Vudoo
Walther
Weatherby
Wilson Combat
Windham Weaponry
ZRO Delta
“These laws often allow people to shoot or kill someone when they feel threatened”
No that’s not what so-called stand your ground laws do. What they do is remove one element of self-defense–the duty to retreat. All of the other elements are in play, including innocence, proportionality, reasonableness, etc. Journalists don’t understand the law, then instead of educating themselves, they repeat left-wing lies. Of course, that left-winger in Denver shot a man to death for macing him, and whaddaya know? He walked away a free man. Leftists spiked the football in response.
I wonder if mr zuckyman was adamant about drug users lying on their ATF Form 4473 to ILLEGALLY obtain a firearm or said drug user discarding a firearm within a school zone….yeah didn’t think so.
See, that’s why Hunter is not guilty, because he is a drug addled criminal, he can’t be found guilty of anything a drug addled criminal can do. See ? It’s called progressive logic .
MOLON LABE
https://bearingarms.com/camedwards/2023/10/25/federal-judge-nixes-nyc-gun-restriction-in-second-amendment-win-n76492
KrisAnn Hall, JD: “If society is honest and historically accurate, the only question that has any relevance to the gun control debate is, do you trust those in government, now and in the future, to not take your life, liberty or property thru force of government? If the answer to that question is “no”, the gun control debate is over”.
Yehuda Remer: “People with ARs don’t get in cattle cars”.
I recently saw a local news report from New Orleans, post-Katrina days. Police were ordered into suburban, upper to middle class neighborhoods to confiscate all guns from the residents, by force if necessary. For those who remember the scenes played out after Katrina hit, remember how lawlessness, death and despair hit those communities broadside? I, for one, was not aware authorities ordered that residents be stripped of their 2nd Amendment right to defend themselves and their property. Katrina hit in 2005. Here we are in 2023, and the despots have not and will not relinquesh their Hellbent goal to disarm American citizens. Stand up people!
Lewiston, Maine celebrates the 2nd Amendment. How ironic that so many entries in this forum continue to worship unlimited access to weapons of war given another mass shooting last night. Of course, mass shootings only occur in states with a large population, so there is nothing to fret here. Unfortunately, Maine residents this morning are stunned given this “can’t happen here” mentality.
Many of you focus on your right to bear arms as defined by 18th century technology in the Constitution. However, Americans have the right to go into movie theaters, shopping centers, schools, and concerts without the fear of another mass shooting.
Chris wants us all to know that he is so enlightened that he used no 18th century technology to write his comment. He used a quill and ink and sent it to VDC by pony express. The technology for the machine gun was developed in the 18th century, you know how the people that want to take our guns away, like Comrade Chris are always making the argument that the 2nd Amendment only pertains to the arms being used at the time like muskets because the founders couldn’t have foreseen the development of modern weapons.
The Puckle Machine Gun was created in 1718, seventy-three years before the ratification of the 2nd Amendment which renders the argument that the founders couldn’t foresee firearms other than muskets invalid.
Then he sites all the “gun free zones” where shootings have taken place.
How are these ‘red flag laws working out for you? They should have used it fourteen times. This guy was institutionalized for two weeks for making threats to shoot up a military facility. No one took his guns away.
https://www.bangordailynews.com/2021/01/25/news/bangor/maine-passed-a-law-to-prevent-mass-shootings-police-have-used-it-13-times/
You can’t take away someone’s right to free speech, freedom of assembly or freedom of religion without first taking away their ability to resist. THE 2nd AMENDMENT DOES NOT GRANT US THE RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS. THE 2nd AMENDMENT TELLS THE GOVERNMENT IT CANNOT INFRINGE ON OUR RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS – PERIOD!
“The very text of the 2nd Amendment implicitly recognizes the pre-existence of the right and only declares it shall not be infringed”. Antonin Scalia
“The Constitution is not a living organism, it’s a legal document, and it says what it says, and it doesn’t say what it doesn’t say”. – Antonin Scalia
Sorry, my mistake I ment Comrade John. I need a program to keep track of all these Commiecrats.
Why do we judge all American gun owners and manufacturers by the actions of so few, when no other group is judged in this way, no matter how heinous and numerous are the atrocities they commit?
Yea, try judging all homosexuals and non-binary persons by the ones who molest children or commit rape in a school restroom and see how well accepted you are by the rainbow mafia…
Re: “Americans have the right to go into movie theaters, shopping centers, schools, and concerts without the fear of another mass shooting.”
Since when, John? Where is this referenced right articulated?
Amid mass shooting manhunt, Mainers are jittery, stoic — and often armed
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/amid-mass-shooting-manhunt-mainers-are-jittery-stoic-and-often-armed/ar-AA1iUPRJ
Point of correction, James: Maine has NO RED FLAG LAW.
By the way, why the namecalling?
It’s called a Yellow Flag law in Maine. I guess it’s Red Flag lite.
As far as the name calling, “You are what you is, you is what you am”. – Frank Zappa
John –
Above, you stated that “None of the topics summarized above abridge the rights of gun ownership by responsible citizens.”
Let’s review.
This committee discussed banning “assault weapons”, which is an inaccurate moniker for semi-automatic firearms.
I conclude that you support the idea that responsible, law-abiding citizens SHOULD NOT, EVER, be able to own or buy semi-automatic firearms, when semi-automatic firearms are unquestionably the best means of self-defense.
Perhaps you have no concern for your own safety, the safety of your friends and family, or the safety of your neighborhood / community. Perhaps you put all your faith in your safety in the Police.
Just curious: For the millions upon millions of “responsible citizens” who own such firearms currently, do you expect these law-abiding citizens to just comply and give them up when we have a constitutional right to own them?
Are you aware that when NY and CT banned certain semi-automatic weapons, but they were allowed to keep what they had if they registered them, that over 1.3 MILLION CT and NY residents refused to register?
As you consider that, please remember that every one of those purchasers required a background check to ensure that they were an honest and law-abiding citizen. Does it concern you at all that in the face of unconstitutional laws, over a million people opted to become felons who were otherwise law-abiding citizens, just because they wanted to own a firearm that is ideally suited for self-defense?
Are you aware of the Heller, MacDonald, Caetano or Bruen cases, and what they mean for the 2nd Amendment? Are you aware of the constitutional challenges now underway concerning things like mag bans, assault weapons bans, and waiting periods; that all have been found unconstitutional by certain courts and that it is only a matter of time before the Supreme Court finds them all unconstitutional as not being able to pass muster under the clear text and history of the 2nd Amendment?
This committee discussed justice for victims. Where is justice when we do not hold perpetrators accountable under existing laws that were designed to impose consequences, but instead let violent offenders walk free with no bail? As an honest and law-abiding citizen, that doesn’t impact me?
The committee discussed holding the firearms industry accountable for its role in perpetuating gun violence. Just curious: Where is your outrage at all the damage, death and destruction caused by cars or the inappropriate use of cell phones, when these objects are orders of magnitude worse?
At best, attempting to sue firearms manufacturers out of existence would increase the cost of firearms, and at worst: Force them to go out of business.
But neither of those things would impact me, an honest and law-abiding citizen who only wishes to take reasonable precautions in a world that by every account seems more and more unstable?
If gun manufacturers are laughing all the way to the bank, it is because they make products that are in high demand from people like me, and tens if not hundreds of millions like me who do not want to live in fear by taking a very simple and prudent step to defend themselves.
Under your world view – what am I allowed to own to defend myself with – when it is crystal clear to anyone who pays attention that completely innocent people are being robbed, attacked, and killed every day by sick people or people with evil intent?
Very nice ! Thanks Chris !
I have been many times in places where I was completely surrounded by armed citizens, hundreds or thousands of them, yet not a single act of violence occurred. About this conference — was anyone with any different perspectives invited? How about some citizens who had defended themselves or their homes from criminals? How about some different law enforcement agencies? No? How interesting. I wonder why.
JT –
Every year I travel to Camp Perry Ohio to compete in the CMP National Matches. Thousands of people attending from all over the country and world, with almost all possessing high-power firearms with plenty of ammunition and high-capacity magazines.
It’s probably one of the safest places in the USA at that time in regards to “gun violence”.
Hey sucker men stay home I will call you when you are needed??
You Swamp 🐀 Rat period!!
Wake up Vermonters wake up!!
Are you awake yet people??
I commend Mr. Bradley for his lengthy epistle. On the other hand, he is only doing his job as a registered gun lobbyist. As to his remarks:
1. “Semi-automatic” weapons or “assault-style” weapons – same thing.
2. Safety: In homes with guns the chances of being killed by a relative or acquaintance are greater than that from an intruder.
3. Reference to gun owners refusing to register “certain semi-automatic weapons”: This is an oxymoron. How can one be a “law-abiding citizen” when breaking the law. As a strong proponent of law and order, these lawbreakers should be prosecuted.
4. Background checks: Tell the folks in Lewiston and throughout the state of Maine about their effectiveness.
Congressman Golden, who represents the Lewiston district, has reversed his position on assault-style weapons and apologized to his constituents. It’s unfortunate it takes tragedies such as this to convince honest, well-meaning folks, (like you), to change their positions.
John –
You believe ALL semi-automatic firearms are “assault weapons”. You cannot be so oblivious to not understand that semi-automatic firearms are what people want for self-defense.
Do you not understand that when people are made to be fearful, that those who do not want to be victims will want to take measures to protect themselves and their loved ones?
Setting aside the Constitution: Do you even acknowledge a right to self-defense at all?
And with what?
Do you not see the ridiculousness of telling people who have just learned of completely innocent people being slaughtered, that the best thing to do is for all law-abiding citizens to give up the very type of firearm that is being used to slaughter them? That that will make them safe?
With the horrendous event in Lewiston, we are dealing with a person who was committed to a mental institution for 2 weeks. While we do not know if this was voluntary or not, that fact alone made him a Prohibited Person; a person who should not legally possess a firearm. He Was A Criminal.
Red Flag; Yellow Flag; Orange flag – whatever- the system failed, yes? Honest and law-abiding citizens were NOT protected, even though there was a LAW.
You state that when guns are in homes there is a higher chance of being killed by “… a relative or acquaintance”. You forgot suicides. Making such a statement is identical to saying that homes with swimming pools are more likely to have drownings than homes without swimming pools, or that those who drive a car are more likely to be injured/killed in a car accident than someone who does not drive.
Conversely: Homes with guns in them stand a better chance of thwarting a home invasion.
Or, are you seriously advocating for not allowing anyone to keep firearms in their home?
You cannot possibly think that we could pass some law and make all those “bad” guns just go away, do you?
We are NOT Australia. We are NOT Great Britian. This is NOT Utopia. We are the United States; we have a constitution whose words have meaning, we are living in a world that is more and more unstable due to Progressive Policies, and I set aside any ridiculous debate that all I am allowed to have is a musket.
There are far too many guns out there to think that you can pass a law to make them all go away, and I attempted to tell you that in the face of unconstitutional laws, patriots will not blink.
And YOU want to prosecute those patriots? Even when the whole premise is unconstitutional?
John with-no-last-name: You are in for a very rude awakening. The 2nd Amendment has been shat upon for years and years, with no consideration what-so-ever for the phrase “shall not be infringed” due to a Supreme Court being liberal for more sad years than I can count.
John: Whether you like it or not, semi-automatic firearms are EXACTLY what our forefathers had in mind when the 2nd Amendment was written – which we must acknowledge only codified a preexisting right of self-defense.
I am only very, very sorry that there was no one on the list of Card’s victims who was carrying with the hope that they may have ended this, a thought that I am sure you will take issue with.
…apparently this guy gets ALL his info and talking points from public radio/TV and CNN…and does not live in the world of reality. Despite the awful death toll in Maine at the hands of a psychotic nut who was in violation of numerous EXISTING LAWS, those numbers are just an average weekend in Chicago, and you wont hear about that on CNN…because it “doesn’t fit the narrative”.
The number of deaths in Chicago is abhorrent. However, I don’t live in Chicago. Does Vermont have a gun problem? 6 unsolved murders in just the past few weeks. Yesterday, the windshield on a school bus carrying students was shattered by a gunshot. There are too many Yahoos out there, many perhaps psychotic, who can obtain as easy as buying a soda, If the gun lobby won’t take steps to regulate itself, the general public will. All major opinion polls show overwhelming support for more stringent gun regulations. History is on our side. The days of a modern Wild, Wild West are numbered.
most of the crimes in vermont with guns are now proven to be from outsiders and drug related. Will any law protect us from that? when caught these criminals get a slap on the wrist and are released.