Sponsored by

Comments on

Background check bill signals new era in Congress

The United States Senate is now poised to debate a background check bill. The real story of Thursday's demolition of a filibuster threat by Republican senators is that the NRA no longer has unchallenged veto power in Congress. That's a big deal. ... Read more»

have your say   

3 comments on this story

1
9 comments
Apr 12, 2013, 4:39 pm
-0 +1

The fact is A Minnesota Law Professor released the results of his research yesterday April 8th 2013, the results are fascinating, in areas that vote Republican there are 2.1 gun murders per 100,000 people, in areas that vote Democrat there are 12.2 gun murders per 100,000. Think about what this research tells us! THINK! What clearly is shown is a tale of two communities, one who has gun murders at an acceptable rate balanced against Constitutional Rights; the other Community is being overwhelmed by gun murders at a rate 650% higher than the other!

Eureka! This study shows me that there isn’t one problem with two extremes at odds at how to solve it, there are two problems one of violence the other of an erosion of Constitutional Rights. Both are valid and an honest debate would show both as such. But our President and the Democrats are not interested in debating honestly or solving a problem they are interested in politics as usual and making as much political hay out of their distortions and misleading as they can, they won an election doing such certainly they figure they can fan the flames of gun control with ginned up emotion and pass law that addresses no problems but that’s OK because it is against the Republican communities, so what if it doesn’t as usual address the real problem that so clearly lies in the Democrat communities, he can win and keep this Democrat mob ginned up.

What strikes me odd is that the problem as it is cleared up by such research clearly exposing this tale of two communities, isn’t receiving the bipartisan attention it deserves to work together for a solution. Let’s review Republican communities have a gun murder rate of 2.1 per 100,000, Democrat communities have a murder rate of 12.2 per 100,000 or a murder rate 650% higher than in Republican voting communities. I am going to ask you, what would you do, encourage moving the laws that Democrats are using which result in a 650% increase in gun murders to the Republican communities or would you say “hold up, why the discrepancy, let’s study what the Republicans are doing in their communities and see if it holds any fruit for our own problems!”  Logically the data shows us that the Republicans are more successful in their communities controlling gun murders, the question is why! Right?

So we are down to why do the Republican communities have a gun murder rate 650% lower than the Democrat communities. The answer to that question needs to be answered before we push forward passing laws that we don’t know what they are designed to do, only what we HOPE they will accomplish which is basically World Peace, that won’t happen. What we should agree on is that any laws passed should be designed to have impact in the communities that are having the troubles! What logic is there to push laws that will work only where the problem is 650% lower, you know the people already following the law? That is the lie the Democrats are trying to use to drive their anti-gun agenda, emotion over valid objective planning to achieve a goal which should be to lower the gun murder rate in problem areas not to just attack those in communities who don’t share the problem. 

In a nutshell the Democrats see a big problem because THEY have a big problem in their communities; the Republicans see a threat to the Constitutional Rights as a bigger problem than gun murders because they have a gun murder rate 650% lower than that in the Democrat communities. What not to do is to ramrod more gun laws into the Republican communities which don’t have a problem just because you can, like passing a Healthcare Bill we can read after passing and figure it out. What’s the plan? I can tell you with 100% certainty that plans that are not focused on the 650% larger gun murder problem in the Democrat communities like a laser are for political fodder only.

Stop being used by this President and the Democrats; we can solve the gun violence issue at least to match what the Republican communities are experiencing, how? Seems to me that defining what the difference is between the communities and how to apply what is working from one to the other would be a prudent place to start, not treating this issue like it is one universal problem which it clearly is not!

2
9 comments
Apr 12, 2013, 4:50 pm
-0 +1

300,000 died last year from cancer, 3,000 from guns, priorities don’t seem to be big deal for left leaning wingnuts. Same old baloney, blame instead of a focus on the problem, which is mental health. I guess since the left have so many psychos that a focus on mental health would eliminate so many of them? The mentally ill vote Democrat so we keep blaming the gun instead of the wacko’s using them to kill! There is not one politician that claims the new laws they are passing would have prevented any of the gun tragedies we have experienced, yet you praise their actions like they have done something when in fact all they did is the same old crap, kick the can down the road! If you want to stop gun related tragedies don’t bother going to gun shows looking for the perpetrator, hang out a the shrinks all those murderers had in common was the fact they were crazy, in fact our biggest domestic mass murderer didn’t even use a gun he used kerosene, a U-Haul truck and fertilizer, making this issue about extended magazines and weapon types is making us less safe, like that restaurant owner that posts “NO GUNS ALLOWED” on their door!  Crazy rules!

3
25 comments
Apr 12, 2013, 8:13 pm
-1 +1

I’d really like to read the study you reference. It’ll be interesting to see how the author correlates murder to party affiliation.  Perhaps we can all cut the murder rate simply by getting a new voter ID card.

Could you kindly provide your source for the information, Bill? Thanks.

Sorry, we missed your input...

You must be logged in or register to comment

Categories

news, politics & government, business, crime & safety, local, arizona, opinion, analysis, nation/world, breaking, columnist
Sponsored by

Top Commenters

  • Bret Linden: 1761
  • Dylan Smith: 534
  • Cactus Dave: 339
  • buddhaboy: 316
  • Roberto De Vido: 270
  • Brittanicus: 176
  • Quietwoman2: 172
  • EllieMae: 144
  • TucsonGirl: 116
  • janamg: 88
Sponsored by

Yes!

I want to help TucsonSentinel.com offer a real news alternative!

We're committed to making quality news accessible; we'll never set up a paywall or charge for our site. But we rely on your support to bring you independent news without the spin. Use our convenient PayPal/credit card donation form below or contact us at donate@tucsonsentinel.com today.

Donate securely with PayPal

$5,000 Newshound
$2,500 Copy desk chief
$1,000 Trusted source
$500 Correspondent
$250 Stringer
$100 Cub reporter
$50 Printer's Devil
$25 Informed Source
$10 Dear Reader
Enter your own amount (below)

OR: Subscribe and stretch your donation over time

$5/mo. Printer's Devil
$10/mo. Cub Reporter
$20/mo. Stringer
$40/mo. Correspondent
Enter your own monthly amount (number only)

TucsonSentinel.com is an Arizona nonprofit organization fiscally sponsored by FCIR.org, a 501c3 charity. Your contribution is tax-deductible.

User Guidelines

Please be respectful and relevant. Thought-provoking. Or at least funny.

We want comments to advance the discussion and we need your help. Debate, disagree, yell (digitally) or laugh, but do it with respect.

We won't censor your comments if we don't agree with you; we want viewpoints from across the political spectrum. We're dedicated to sparking an open, active discussion. We believe people with differing opinions can spark debate and effect change.

Comments are open to registered users of TucsonSentinel.com.

Keep in mind:

  • A conversation involves sharing and respect. Support your viewpoint with facts, not attacks.
  • Ask questions. Search out answers.
  • Remember that being part of a community requires tolerance for differing views.
  • We can't ensure that all comments are based in truth. The only comments we endorse are those we write ourselves.

TucsonSentinel.com does not allow:

  • Hate speech. Blatantly racist, sexist or homophobic slurs or calls for violence against a particular type of person, etc. will be removed.
  • Obscenity & excessive cursing. Sometimes a well-placed curse word - if you're creative enough to get it past our auto-censor - can express your point in just the right way. But we say '%*$& no' to cursing for cursing's sake. And lose the explicit sexually-descriptive language. It doesn't contribute to the debate and there are plenty of other places on the Internet to find it.
  • Flaming. During a heated discussion, unkind words may be spoken. We can live with a certain amount of rudeness in the name of provocative conversation, but a pattern of personal attacks (name-calling, mocking, or baiting) is not acceptable nor are threatening or harassing comments. Show some respect, please.
  • Explicit political endorsements. As a nonprofit we can't allow electioneering. Analysis and explanation of political issues and candidates are encouraged, but specific calls to vote for or against a measure or politician should be done elsewhere.
  • Spam. Solicitation of products or services isn't allowed; contact us about advertising, we'd love to talk to you. Links to off-topic sites may be deleted.
  • Copyright or IP infringement. Lengthy quotes and violations of 'Fair Use' aren't allowed. Anything you post should be your own work.
  • Overposting. Don't bore people and waste electrons with identical comments on multiple stories or repetitive comments that don't advance a conversation.
  • Trolling, sockpuppetry, and other abusive behavior. Please don't feed the trolls and don't pretend to be someone you're not.
  • Gossip. Don't bring up others who can't defend themselves. We don't give out personal information; you shouldn't either.

Comments that violate these guidelines may be removed. We reserve the right to make up the rules as we go along.

Flagging

Commentors are solely responsible for the opinions they express and the accuracy of the information they provide. Users who violate these standards may lose their privileges on TucsonSentinel.com.

Sentinel editors can't read every comment. Trolls, spammers and other troublemakers can slide under the bridge. We rely on you to help maintain a healthy conversation - more than likely, you're reading these comments before the editors.

What if you see something inappropriate? Use the 'Flag' button to send it to a moderation queue. Help us out and tell us why you're reporting it; please don't report someone just because you disagree with them. Boy who cried wolf and all that. We'll take appropriate action on violations.

We will not edit comments to alter their meaning or censor comments because of political content.

We will not remove comments solely because they are heartless, cruel, coarse, foolish or just plain wrong. Your disapproval can maintain a decent signal to noise ratio. Ultimately, however, self-policing is the best method.

Bottom line, don't be a jerk.

Sign up for TucsonSentinel.com email newsletters!

find us on facebook
Sponsored by
Sponsored by
Sponsored by