It’s easier to buy bullets than OTC meds
Created by Dan
Your daily Letter to the Editor — Jan. 6, 2013
I must admit I know very little of the technical details about the shooting in Newtown, simply because when I read or hear about it, I usually start crying and my heart aches. I am the mother of a 3-year-old and a 5-year-old.
I do know, however, that the ability to amass large caches of weapons and ammunition in our country is crazy.
I do not understand why, in any situation except the military and law enforcement, a citizen needs body armor.
I went to the store the other day to buy pseudoephedrine and had to present identification and sign a registry to purchase an over-the-counter drug so the government would know I am not amassing large quantities to make meth.
I can go into a store and buy bullets with less hassle.
I grumble about the drug-buying hassle but do it, and it only seems logical that a person purchasing items designed to kill should do even more.
The argument that gun laws infringe on citizens’ rights is illogical. The death of 26 innocent people infringed on their and their families’ rights.
Our nation’s children are not safe. Is there any other discussion?
Rebecca Shelley
ROANOKE
January 6, 2013 - 4:18 PM
“I do not understand why, in any situation except the military and law enforcement, a citizen needs body armor.”
Did you just miss several school shootings? If a shooter is wearing boody armor to protect him from a shooting, wouldn’t it logically be sensible for a victim to be allowed to do the same?
And didn’t the gunman kill himself, rendering the conversation moot?
Ms. Shelley need not worry about the easy availability of ammo. I may be way off, but my guess is this is the direction that the Biden led task force will go with more empty feel-good legislation for outrageous taxes and restrictions on the purchase of ammunition. They know that they can’t confiscate some three million guns without starting a civil war, so the next best approach is eliminating the ready availability of the ammo for them. All the shooting enthusiasts here on Dan’s humble blog might rethink your next three to four hundred round afternoon at the range unless you’ve got a boatload of ammo to spare or plenty of money to replace it with. That is, if you can find it to purchase. That is the coming reality I believe.
Original post:
“I went to the store the other day to buy pseudoephedrine and had to present identification and sign a registry to purchase an over-the-counter drug so the government would know I am not amassing large quantities to make meth.”
So instead of lobbying to eliminate this nonsense, she whines about guns? Two wrongs don’t make a right.
If marijuana were decriminalized, I bet the demand for meth would drop off.
Lobby for that.
You will never convince the insane, paranoid people in this country that they don’t need a personal arsenal. They wave and salute the American flag at every opportunity, but hate and despise it’s government. Go figure.
Huntersdad,
3 million guns? Surely you jest. If the government confiscated 3 million guns, 99 percent of them would still be out there.
Well John, let’s think. she’s pissed off at having to sign a bunch of crap to make a routine purchase for her kids cold and it dawned on her that anyone who wants to buy ammo to kill someone doesn’t have to go through that. That’s why she wrote that.
Missed the ” hundred” behind the three. And three hundred million might not even be close to what’s out there. Thanks for the correction.
15,000 meth deaths in this country every year. http://recoveryfirst.org/the-facts-about-meth-addiction-in-the-us.html/
75,000 alcohol related deaths http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6089353/ns/health-addictions/t/alcohol-linked-us-deaths-year/
Where are your knee jerk related stories trying to ban these drugs? Why don’t we ban everything sit in the corner all day and Barack will take care of everything? People will die everyday. It is awful what has happened to the town of Newtown. It was the result of an evil individual who wanted to inflict his insanity on those poor people. It could have been a bomb it could have been a cut brake line on a school bus. It was not the gun. It was the individual. Check out human history people have killed people all throughout time. Check out how many unarmed people have been carted away and killed in countries where guns are not allowed.
Yep. I got carded for Nyquil the other day. I went through the auto check out, and was told that the item was not available for automatic check out.
Full on having the flu, I had to expose myself to a manager and a different check-out lady just to get some sweet relief.
I hope those meth dealers are happy forcing me to give other people the flu!
Very few reasonable law abiding citizens with good mental health want assault weapons, high capacity clips, and large amounts of ammo to feel safe. There is no reasonable argunent against tighter gun control.
“I got carded for Nyquil the other day…I hope those meth dealers are happy forcing me to give other people the flu!”
Comment by scott — January 7, 2013 @ 12:09 am
scott, you do realize that Nyquil can’t prevent you from giving others the flu, don’t you? For the sake of the public’s health I hope so!
“…unless you’ve got a boatload of ammo to spare or plenty of money to replace it with…That is the coming reality I believe.”
Comment by Huntersdad — January 6, 2013 @ 7:26 pm
It sounds like Huntersdad is not too happy that ammunition makers may lose the subsidy that the public health sector has been forced to provide them.
An old co-worker and friend,(rest his soul) once gave me the crud-from-Hell with a cheerful “it’s no fun if you can’t share it!” RIP, Chuck, you old bastard.
HEY, Swingle, I think meth is already outlawed. Do you know something I don’t?
Look, Teresa, if you’re not prepared to take a whole army of bad guys, then you’re just not fulfilling your manly responsibilities to protect your family from invading hordes.
“Very few reasonable law abiding citizens with good mental health want assault weapons, high capacity clips, and large amounts of ammo to feel safe.”
Ah… the old “All sane people agree with me” argument.
If you have ever been to a gun show, you realize you are surrounded by all of those things and you never see a massacre at a gun show. If those things don’t make you feel safer, why do police carry them? More people are killed by blunt force trauma (bat, club, brick, etc) than with a rifle. So why go after rifles?
Teresa, would a reasonable argument be, say, IT’S NOT WORKING!!!!
Don’t mean to get all cap and shout on you, but are you really expecting more empty words written on some paper somewhere in DC to change much, when the stacks of them already on the books have had little or no impact on stemming the violence in this country? I don’t own an AR, a thirty round clip for anything and don’t see the need for it either. But I don’t fear the citizens that do own them, at least the law abiding ones, and those are the ones that more and tighter gun laws will effect the most IMO.
gdad, while we’re at it, maybe we should be performing our own surgeries too. Why should we trust doctors to do it for us? Law does not compel them to perform surgery on us or our families, and we should be prepared to shoulder that responsiblity ourselves.
HEY, Swingle, I think meth is already outlawed. Do you know something I don’t?
Comment by gdad — January 7, 2013 @ 8:20 am
He knows that banning meth doesn’t rid America of meth and that there are still 15,000 meth-related deaths annually.
Criminals… you’ve gotta love how they obey the law.
Yeah, Kristen and Gdad, let’s leave all the defending ourselves to the police officers by turning in all our lawfully owned weapons. Then you can issue the nice police officers rubber gloves, mop buckets and bleach so they can clean up the carnage after the still armed criminals come in and wipe out you and your family. There truly is NEVER a policeman around when you REALLY need one…geez. I mean really, what percentage of the time is it that the police show up at a violent crime scene after the crime/killing has occured? I can’t put a number on it, but I’m not going out on a limb by saying almost always.
It’s easier for a 13 year old girl to get as many abortions as she likes without her parents knowing than it is for a hard working, tax paying, honest husband and father with no criminal record at all to legally purchase a gun. I don’t recall seeing an amendment in the bill of rights constitutionally guaranteeing anyone’s right to kill their unborn child.
From a judicial standpoint, a drunk driver can be convicted of murder if his victim is a pregnant woman and her unborn child dies. Yet, if this same woman has an abortion that is her right and is perfectly legal, not murder. There is no rational explanation, but since a gun inst involved in either the drunk driving or abortion, that makes them ok.
Jack, your absolute desperation is showing because that is a crock!
Sorry that was not meant for Jack, I apologize. It was (o\ ! /o) — January 7, 2013 @ 11:23am that I was calling out. For us purists, there is no amendment in the Bill of Rights constitutionally guaranteeing anyone’s right to any gun they want for self defense either.
But since I mentioned Jack… Are you actually saying because the meth ban is not as effective as we would like, we should give it up? Speeding? Drunken Driving? Robbery? Rape? Murder? They are all “banned” and they keep happening. Should we give up those bans too?
Huntersdad, please point out to me where I’ve ever said we should “leave all the defending ourselves to the police officers by turning in all our lawfully owned weapons.”
I’d wait for your link to that but I don’t have forever to hang around.
“It’s easier for a 13 year old girl to get as many abortions as she likes without her parents knowing than it is for a hard working, tax paying, honest husband and father with no criminal record at all to legally purchase a gun.”
Bug, you’re just getting sillier and sillier. It would be pretty difficult to detail all the fallacies in your post, but let’s start with just the fact that there are a very limited number of places to get a legal abortion whereas there are eleventy million legal places (and private individuals) from which you can buy a gun.
“It’s easier for a 13 year old girl to get as many abortions as she likes without her parents knowing than it is for a hard working, tax paying, honest husband and father with no criminal record at all to legally purchase a gun.”
This is total BS. Not in Virginia (and MOST other states) it’s not.
“It’s easier for a 13-year-old girl to buy marijuana without her parents knowing than it is for her to legally purchase alcohol.”
At least this statement is true. But so what, in terms of the gun debate?
…let’s leave all the defending ourselves to the police officers by turning in all our lawfully owned weapons.
Comment by Huntersdad — January 7, 2013 @ 11:02 am
Actually, the police aren’t there to defend or protect you. See Warren v. District of Columbia and DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services.
Sandi Saunders:
“But since I mentioned Jack… Are you actually saying because the meth ban is not as effective as we would like, we should give it up? Speeding? Drunken Driving? Robbery? Rape? Murder? They are all “banned” and they keep happening. Should we give up those bans too?”
The possession, use, or making of meth is not haming anyone else. Speeding and drunken driving are dangerous activities on public roadways, and robbery, rape, and murder are all crimes agianst someone else in a tangible way.
Why do you lump them all together?
OK Gdad, you busted me putting words in your /Kristen’s mouth. It seemed she was suggesting that we leave the surgeries/protection to the professionals, doctors/police. Nowhere did you mention giving up our lawful weapons. My apologies to you both. Think of the money we could save if we were of capable of doing both ourselves.
But since I mentioned Jack… Are you actually saying because the meth ban is not as effective as we would like, we should give it up? Speeding? Drunken Driving? Robbery? Rape? Murder? They are all “banned” and they keep happening. Should we give up those bans too?
Comment by Sandi Saunders — January 7, 2013 @ 1:26 pm
I do not know that there is anything that one can do with meth that is legal, so maybe there is no reason to have it? I don’t know. I think the war on drugs makes things worse. I’m not an expert in that area, and I won’t pretend to be. I don’t give a lot of thought to the illegal drug stuff. I’ve never tried any illegal substances, and I haven’t really been involved with anyone who has, and I have so many other things I think about that I won’t pretend to have put much thought into it. So forgive me for not saying too much in response about it other than the fact that it is illegal, yet it is still here and still a problem.
As far as robbery, rape and murder, they should all continue to be illegal. You are infringing upon someone else’s rights by committing those acts. However, the mere possession of a firearm does not infringe on someone else’s rights.
If I have an AR-15, that doesn’t hurt you in any way, shape or form. If I shoot you with it, that is a different story and should definitely be a serious crime.
Speeding and drunk driving should remain illegal, I would guess… more so drunk driving than speeding. They restrict behaviors so that the rest of us can be safe. Those laws aren’t restricting ownership of the item (the car), only the use of it so that you don’t hurt other people. Similarly, they do the same thing with guns by restricting where I may fire my gun so that it mitigates the risk of inadvertently shooting someone. For example, I live in Roanoke County and it is illegal for me to walk into my back yard and discharge my firearm.
*Should* that be illegal? Maybe so. I’m okay with that because it would be a nuisance for one thing, and not very safe. If I lived out in the country, and I could shoot safely and without bothering anyone, that is a different story. Should owning the gun itself be illegal? No.
“The possession, use, or making of meth is not haming(sic) anyone else…Why do you lump them all together”
Another patently wrong claim by John Wilburn
Meth use costs all the rest of us too, in the same way that chronic tobacco use, excessive drinking and gun violence does. We have to absorb (subsidize) the costs in public health expenditures. Why do you not go beyond only the most obvious first line of cost accounting?
I “lumped them all together” because they are all “banned” and are all not 100% effective bans. If the argument is not to ban anything if it will not be completely or 100% effective, why ban anything?
nothing is 100% effective sandi…bad people will ALWAYS find a way to cause harm..we cannot ban every single thing in this country, including guns, then they will use knives, ban them, then they will use ropes, ban them, then they will use ….you name it, most anything can be turned into a weapon..just because it isnt in your comfort zone doesnt mean it should be banned from everyone else…bu then the liberal way….
The meme about “More people die from hammer attacks each year than from being shot with rifles” made it onto THE RUSH LIMBAUGH SHOW today, folks! Perhaps Rush reads this blog!
Of course, like the old game “Operator,” Rush distorted it. He said, “I read over the weekend that more people are killed by hammers ever year that guns. That’s how ridiculous this debate has gotten.”
Go get’em Rush — with all the falsity and distortion you can!
Uhh…Dan
You were the only person to mention hammers in this thread. Are you referring to another thread where hammers are mentioned?
As far as I’ve been able to ascertain, hammers & clubs (i.e. blunt objects) are in fact a more common object of choice for murder than rifles, according to FBI statistics. Handguns remain the substantially more preferred firearm of choice for murder by firearm…yet many of the gun control proposals would target what I have determined to be simply ‘scary looking guns’, like the AR.
On a similar thread, I was reading about the murder rate in Detroit, and that the number of murders this past year were the highest in 20 years…and considering the population decline, that’s a truly terrible spike in violent crime there. But, the chief of police indicated that about 2/3 of the murders were due to druge-related transaction and trade. That opens up the issue about drug legalization, the war on drugs, and how much criminal and gang activity manifests around the black market for drugs…plus how much of the prison population is locked up for drug use and posession, but no other crimes.
Henry, yes, I’m referring to another thread.
The homicide rate in Detroit is interesting, but even more interesting is Chicago’s, where they have almost complete gun control. Chicago’s is twice what Mexico’s is, if you’d believe that.
Jack, the reason Chicago’s gun measures, like New york City’s, are currently limited in their effectiveness is because like a no chlorine section in a pool, they can’t completely overcome the guns that arrive from nearby areas that have lax oversight. That must be too obvious for you to admit.
Why don’t gun ranges try a quiet section of firing lanes right among the regular ones, for those who like to shoot but don’t want the noise, Jack? How would that differ from a no chlorine section of a pool, or gun regulation in a place surrounded by far less regulation?
“Chicago’s [homicide rate] is twice what Mexico’s is, if you’d believe that.”
–Comment by Jack
Ha, ha Jack!
Nice way to compare apples to car alternators! I’d bet you that Ciudad Juarez’s homicide rate is more than 3 times what the entire U.S. rate is, too.
At this point the gun violence rate in Newtown, Conn. is probably worse than Chicago. So what?
DC suffers from its proximity to VA as well.
Warren,
I’d typed out a long response and just deleted it to say this: Chicago’s gun measures are unconstitutional. There’s really no reason to discuss why they do or don’t work. They are illegal.
Don’t ask me, as the courts, they said so last month. I’m sure it will be appealed, but that’s where we stand right now.
They have less than six months to come up with a reasonable way for people in Chicago to be allowed to carry guns. I love freedom.
Ha, ha Dan!
Comparing the “rate” makes it a relative comparison. If he compared the total number of murders in Chicago to all of Mexico then that would not be a relevant comparison. To say the RATE (which is adjusted for the difference in total population) is higher (the number of murders per 100,000 for example) is a valid comparison between two places of different total population.
Kristen, to say the murder rate in DC is because of its proximity to Virginia would only make any statistical sense if the murder rate in Virginia were as high or higher than DC. I would argue that it is actually the other way around. Virginia suffers a higher increase in murders due to its proximity to DC (the bleed over).
Everyone calling for more restrictive gun control laws are doing so to fuel their political agenda and know that these things have no impact on actually saving lives. If that were the case, Chicago, New York, and DC would not have the highest murder RATES (i.e. adjusted for variation in total population) in the nation. The fact that CT is listed as one of the top 5 states in the US as far as gun control laws goes just proves that they did nothing to stop it. Registering a gun owner (which that is what it is, not registering a weapon) won’t stop a crazed murderer. Someone explain that piece of logic.
Ha ha, Bug!
He compared the rate in a city to the rate in a country.
Hell, we all know the gun homicide rate is greater in the United States than it is in Britain. But, if you compared the gun homicide rate in Death Valley, Calif., to the rate in Britain, (which is higher) then you could falsely suggest the problem is worse in Britain — which we all know is untrue.
And that’s why it’s an apples to alternators comparison. Ha ha!
No one is trying to ban all guns. No one is trying to ban most guns. We are only looking to ban the guns that seem to be the gun of choice for some mass shooters, gang members, drug lords, anti-government militias and the entertainment industry. Guns like this are NOT about “self defense” and that is why the aforementioned groups like them.
We are not talking about banning guns or limiting guns in any meaningful way. As the ban we did previously proved, this is only a meager stop gap that will catch precious few killers unarmed. I have to ask then, why this push back and defense of this weapon?
http://www.bushmaster.com/index.asp
Because you can.
What the hell is the “political agenda” in wanting massive assault rifles off the streets and not widely available? Who do they “serve”?
http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?section=news/investigators&id=7841676
NEW YORK (WABC) — When a gun is used in a crime in New York, there’s a good chance the weapon came from Virginia.
That’s because the state is the number one source for illegal guns entering the city.
This isn’t DC Bug but it goes to the point I’m trying to make. VA’s lax gun laws fuel violence in lots of places with stricter legislation.
If I take a gun to New York City, it is an illegal gun. It doesn’t mean that I purchased a gun illegally. It just means that New York City has draconian gun control laws on the books.
Remember, when we’re talking about New York City and use the term “illegal gun,” you could simply replace it with the term “gun,” as all of them are illegal.
Guns like this are NOT about “self defense” and that is why the aforementioned groups like them.
Comment by Sandi Saunders — January 7, 2013 @ 8:33 pm
Sandi,
Feinstein’s ban includes semi-automatic handguns, which are most definitely used for self-defense. However, the Second Amendment is not about self-defense, that is just a side effect of it.
So local governments arent allowed to write their own legislation? Or does that just apply to gun laws.
The solution is simple. Stay out of NYC or leave your gun at home. I can’t bring my gun to NYC either and I’m ok with that.
47. No one is trying to ban all guns.
No one is trying to ban most guns.
We are not talking about banning guns or limiting guns in any meaningful way.
…this is only a meager stop gap
that will catch precious few killers unarmed.
Comment by Sandi Saunders — January 7, 2013 @ 8:33 pm
———————————–
Have you actually read some of what is being proposed by the libs? If you had, you would understand why the response is so rabid. Cuomo calling for confiscation? Arbitrary magazine limits to 10 on a handgun isn’t meaningful? Really? Diane Frankenstein’s list of hundred of guns that would be banned not meaningful? Anything short of a tube-fed .22 banned isn’t meaningful?
And the line above about it being a meager stop gap measure. That’s the kicker. Like another poster said in a post, “and that’s just the beginning.” That is why we can’t have “a meaningful conversation” about it. Your idea of a meaningful conversation is when 2 wolves and a sheep discuss what they are going to have for dinner. My idea of the 2A is the sheep being able to defend himself.
“So local governments arent allowed to write their own legislation? Or does that just apply to gun laws.”
–Comment by Kristen
Not in Virginia, they’re not. But in non Dillion Rule states they are, mostly.
Dan, 1% is 1%, regardless of if you are comparing a city to a country. If the population of Chicago experiences a 4% murder rate and the US population experiences a 2% murder rate, then mathematically the city of Chicago has a higher murder RATE than the US. Since each respective population is used as its own denominator to calculate its independent rate, then it is a valid comparison to compare each RATE of murder.
Apparently liberal schools teach math the same way they teach history…with creative liberty and a lot of important things omitted.
Kristen:
“DC suffers from its proximity to VA as well.”
DC is the ruination of northern Virginia. Our nation’s capitol is disgraceful. It abolishes it’s own Second Amendment and is then overrun with crime both on the streets and in the ivory towers. Sad.
Since the Republican/RW/Teabag meme is how liberal MA is, and the post @54 [Comment by (o\ ! /o) — January 7, 2013 @ 9:49 pm], disparages “liberal schools” – let’s put those two “thoughts” together and explore FACTS:
Massachusetts’ assessment scores for math, writing and reading are in the top two states in the country. According to State Master.com, Massachusetts ranked first in the nation for math and reading assessments and second for writing assessments. Massachusetts ranks second for percentage of people in the state who have completed a Bachelor’s Degree as well as second nationally for percentage of people in the state who have completed an advanced degree.
http://www.ehow.com/list_5833922_top_ranked-states-education.html#ixzz2HONFY3ji
Seems (o\ ! /o) might need to go back to school and learn that before making sweeping statements about “liberal schools”, research is helpful to prevent one from looking like a fool.
Bug –
It is meaningless to compare murder rates of cities to murder rates of countries.
Dan was right to call you on it. Move on. There are much better points our side can make.
And ‘liberal’ math… really?
“Since the Republican/RW/Teabag meme is how liberal MA is, and the post @54 [Comment by (o\ ! /o) — January 7, 2013 @ 9:49 pm], disparages “liberal schools” – let’s put those two “thoughts” together and explore FACTS:
Massachusetts’ assessment scores for math, writing and reading are in the top two states in the country. According to State Master.com, Massachusetts ranked first in the nation for math and reading assessments and second for writing assessments. Massachusetts ranks second for percentage of people in the state who have completed a Bachelor’s Degree as well as second nationally for percentage of people in the state who have completed an advanced degree.
http://www.ehow.com/list_5833922_top_ranked-states-education.html#ixzz2HONFY3ji
Seems (o\ ! /o) might need to go back to school and learn that before making sweeping statements about “liberal schools”, research is helpful to prevent one from looking like a fool.”
–Comment by Hillary
Education is a liberal conspiracy. Facts also are a liberal conspiracy. Both merely confuse soft minds. Only the uneducated actually know anything.
Poster (o\ ! /o) seems to think ignorance is a virtue…
There are people from whom guns need to be confiscated. We need to pass laws that say a gang member has no right to privacy IMO. The confiscation of weapons in gang member homes on a regular basis would help DC, Chicago, LA and many other cities quickly. We have got to come to the realization at some point that the freedoms we cherish and idealized are being abused by the bad guys which is working against ALL law abiding citizens.
I cannot imagine being the mayor, or police chief in some cities in this nation and having to face what the NRA and gun advocates have wrought. Even the law abiding citizens who have a gun for self-defense and who might fight back only put a target on their back.
Yes, I am saying there are citizens who deserve to have their rights stripped BEFORE they commit violent acts. It seems to me that there are too many people who refuse to see what we are up against. I owe NOTHING to a mentally ill person who wants a gun. I owe NOTHING to a gang member or felon who wants a gun. Neither should our laws and rights protect them getting one.
If I was Cuomo, Christie, Nutter, or any other mayor or governor of these high crime, high gang, high mentally ill on the streets areas I would be begging for a ban, a confiscation program and a clamp down on “freedom” that terrorizes my city or state.
And for the record, yes, I am way past carrying that you call me a Communist, Socialist, or Dictator. This carnage has got to stop and you sure as hell are not helping by asking for more guns.
Another example of gun control not working…[sarcasm font off]:
It is virtually impossible to buy a handgun in New York City and the result is the number of murders per year has gone down. According to the US Federal Census, the population of NYC was 8,244,910 in July of 2011 – and New York City “is on pace to finish the year with just over 400 murders, NYPD historian says”.
In 1990 [...] “the city logged a record 2,245 murders”.
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/reported-shot-stabbed-slashed-nyc-monday-article-1.1209204#ixzz2HOgEo19Z
Looks like gun control does actually work, no?
And while I am being a Communist, Dictator and Socialist, let me just say that Alex Jones should be banned from having guns because he is truly and irrevocably mentally unstable.