Pages Menu
Categories Menu

Posted by on Jan 30, 2013 in Featured, Guns, Politics | 2 comments

Gabby Giffords to Senate: ‘You Must Act’ on Gun Violence

Gabby Giffords to Senate: ‘You must act’ on gun violence (via AFP)

Ex-lawmaker and shooting victim Gabrielle Giffords made a brief but impassioned appeal in Congress Wednesday, telling lawmakers “you must act” to find ways to reduce gun violence. “Violence is a big problem. Too many children are dying,” Giffords, a former congresswoman who was shot in the head two…

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2013 The Moderate Voice
  • petew

    This is a great summation of the problems at play in this debate. I particularly liked Senator Schumer’s reminder that ignoring guns as one of the problems involved in gun crime would be like refusing to discuss cigarettes as a cause of lung Cancer. Also of note was the Administration’s reminder of the logical fallacy involved when denying that strong background checks can make a real difference.

    It is true that previous gun laws have not been adequately enforced, but I would think that part of the problem with that, would include the activities of the NRA and the rampant influence of gun lobbyists themselves. Besides, pointing to past flaws in legislation is no argument to make for refusing to improve them in the future.

    To me, it is particularly poignant to realize that virtually all of the victims of gun violence—whether they come from the most violent neighborhoods, or, if they are parents whose innocent children have been murdered by high power weapons—rapidly become convinced of the need to protect citizens more fully by enacting sensible legislation. Former Reagan press secretary, Jim Brady, who was critically injured by the shooter who attempted to assassinate his President, and who struggled valiantly to overcome his crippling injuries for the rest of his life, also became a fervent supporter for tough gun laws. So, its funny how those who have experienced devastating attacks by armed shooters, instantly can grasp the importance of regulations while many of us without that background are fervently opposed to stricter gun laws.

    It also reveals a bit about our American mentality concerning guns, to realize that after 911, even though President Bush made the case for having to deny some of our Constitutional rights in exchange for the greater good of defeating terrorism, none of us were expected to suffer restrictions on our personal weapons—this despite the fact that terrorists would obviously be helped by easy access to guns. In short, assault weapons should justifiably be known as WOMDPBMS—Weapons of Mass Destruction Preferred by Mass Shooters!

    How wonderful too, that Gabby Giffords has survived to be a living testimony, representing one more American that has survived the worst effects of gun violence!

    If NRA members would just quit being so overly defensive about being “To blame for gun violence,” then perhaps they would begin to listen to the many practical reasons to limit which kinds are used, and what other helpful measures we might ensure!

  • I am SO tired of the argument that “only law abiding citizens will obey laws”.

    A) why have any laws at all then? This is an argument for anarchy.

    B) in a democracy, laws are agreed-upon principles controlling behavior that is harmful to society. High-power, high-caliber, rapid-fire, high-capacity firearms — having no other purpose than killing lots of people — are harmful to society. Therefore, the law should reflect that.

Twitter Auto Publish Powered By :