On the stupidity scale, brain-dead politician take the golden scale awards. Alow me. Because there is a real need to keep the public safe from all dangers in life. The government must get involved in everybody’s lives to protect them from themselves. We all know the dangers of guns in the publics hands, and out in public? Because of gun deaths of children in schools of late. So it is only natural for the government to have a knee-jerk-reaction. Or is it?
Well lets see. Kids are getting killed in school, kids getting to fat in school (leading to diabetics)… in turn early health haszerds….even death. In both of these cases state governments, federal government got involved. On the kids getting diabetes… by drinking too much soda! Solution ban large and supper size soft drinks, like New York did. but soda isn’t the only thing that leads to being over weight. Besides drinking smaller drinks, but more of them doesn’t accomplish much either. But the public perception is government cares about the smallest of all Americans. Though that perception is false, it doesn’t solve anything or control anyone in changing their behaviours.
Banning guns doesn’t solve issues with safety in schools either. The lawless don’t follow laws, don’t care about rules, and find the easiest victims in gun free zones… like schools.
When governments local, state, and federal make regulations, laws, that do little to promote a change of choice in people who have already chosen to be lawless. There is no increase of safety! In fact there is a decrease of safety. Because the law enforcement can’t be everywhere at the same time, there is a lag in reaction by law-enforcement in confronting criminals.
The FBI came out with a report that stated that other weapons are more dangerous than guns. Why? Why hasn’t government also engaged the public in debate on these new dangers? Read the report below:
FBI: MORE PEOPLE KILLED WITH HAMMERS, CLUBS EACH YEAR THAN RIFLES
By AWR HAWKINS, Breitbart.com
According to the FBI annual crime statistics, the number of murders committed annually with hammers and clubs far outnumbers the number of murders committed with a rifle.
This is an interesting fact, particularly amid the Democrats’ feverish push to ban many different rifles, ostensibly to keep us safe of course.
However, it appears the zeal of Sens. like Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Joe Manchin (D-WV) is misdirected. For in looking at the FBI numbers from 2005 to 2011, the number of murders by hammers and clubs consistently exceeds the number of murders committed with a rifle.
Think about it: In 2005, the number of murders committed with a rifle was 445, while the number of murders committed with hammers and clubs was 605. In 2006, the number of murders committed with a rifle was 438, while the number of murders committed with hammers and clubs was 618. And so the list goes, with the actual numbers changing somewhat from year to year, yet the fact that more people are killed with blunt objects each year remains constant.
For example, in 2011, there was 323 murders committed with a rifle but 496 murders committed with hammers and clubs.
While the FBI makes is clear that some of the “murder by rifle” numbers could be adjusted up slightly, when you take into account murders with non-categorized types of guns, it does not change the fact that their annual reports consistently show more lives are taken each year with these blunt objects than are taken with Feinstein’s dreaded rifle.
Another interesting fact: According to the FBI, nearly twice as many people are killed by hands and fists each year than are killed by murderers who use rifles.
So should we outlaw blunt force trauma objects/weapons or the hands that would deliver the blow to the victim? Taking all of the firing pins from weapons that the public has, leaving them with the possession of their beloved weapons, could also leave them with a more lethal weapon by statistical comparison if used as a club.
Yet with knee-jerk-reactions silly arguments are often made to make a point, that results in a pointless, meaningless, statistical outcome. Look to prohibition in history. The results were a higher crime rate, more societal problems, and a re in statement of the legalization of alcohol. Even with all of the drunk drivers in the world still today, that are also killing people at an ever higher rate then guns or rifles at least. The governments answer to this problem is taxation, the profit motive, over public safety. Even a week knee-jerk-reaction of outlawing parking lots at bars would be better to give a concerned perception of public safety.
statically speaking; the government isn’t going to do anything that wouldn’t also increase their power over the people as a whole. safety be damned! Because there is no provision in the constitution to being able to take the people’s weapons by the government. Any such law would be unconstitutional. Unless the people would volunteer to give up their weapons. Aw! The motivation for government to use any tools at their disposal to change the publics minds with emotional pressures, in changing the total mindset.
Remember that all law enforcement agency’s have the policies of takeing control of a dangerous situation by meeting force with force of equal or superior means. In the time that it takes for law enforcement to arrive after your 911 call. What weapon of choice would you like to use, in meeting any criminal force against you, or your family? A knife in a gun fight? Fists of furry against a saturday-night-special? Or being able to freely choose for yourself, meeting force with force of equal or superior means by the weapon of your choosing? No matter what your personal choices may be.
To have a weapon or not! We must always remember the right to bare arms was to protect us against a criminal acting government using the power of ternary to rule the day over us.
If motivation is to protect our kids in school as the motivating factor by government to do anything. Let them put law enforcement into schools to keep the peace. After all having law enforcement in any city doesn’t eliminate crime…. it reduces it!!! Taking guns away from law-abiding citizens makes an unarmed victim of opportunity for the lawless! Just ask the victims family’s of crime in Chicago how crime has been reduced because of the gun laws?
No need to have a knee-jerk-reaction with all of the deaths caused by blunt force trauma then. Or we may get a government willing to support mass amputations of hands, or at least opposable thumbs, in the name of public safety!