Let’s limit guns to sane, responsible gun owners

Terrified by an intruder who had broken into her Walton County home earlier this month, Melinda Herman grabbed a .38-caliber pistol to protect herself and her two children. As the intruder drew closer to their attic hiding spot, Herman called upon her handgun training, practice and motherly protective instinct and fired six shots, five of which struck her target. The barrage drove the wounded intruder out of her home, where he was later arrested and hospitalized.

I do love a happy ending.

You can debate the statistics about how often guns kept in the home are used for good or evil. You can point out the many instances in which such weapons end up in the hands of children or criminals, or in which people mistake a loved one for an intruder, with tragic consequences. Those are facts that every would-be gun owner ought to know and weigh in their personal decision-making. But in this case, for Herman and her family, access to a firearm and the training to use it wisely worked out well.

Since the incident, opponents of gun-safety laws have seized upon Herman’s story as some sort of counterweight to the tragic mass murder of young children in Connecticut that is now driving a reassessment of our national gun laws. But the connection is tenuous at best. No serious gun law proposal in the wake of the Connecticut tragedy — and certainly no gun law that I would ever support — would attempt to disarm Herman or deny her the right to protect herself and her loved ones. That is simply not at issue.

Herman is a law-abiding, rational, trained adult, not a criminal or a person with mental-health problems. Likewise, a .38 pistol kept for home defense is not a semi-automatic high-velocity assault weapon with a large-capacity magazine being marketed as a cure for those insecure in their masculinity. Those distinctions are critical and easily drawn, both in law and in logic, and it’s important that they be recognized.

In other words, let’s keep this reasonable and rational, on all sides of the issue.

Here in Georgia, for example, state Rep. Paul Battles of Cartersville has announced legislation that would allow an administrator in each school — at the discretion of school district leadership — to undergo annual state peace-officer firearm training and be certified to carry a weapon at school. I don’t have a serious problem with that approach, in large part because it is voluntary for districts and because it meets the basic common-sense test of limiting guns to responsible, trained people.

The biggest danger of such an approach is the false sense of security it might create. In the infamous 1999 shooting at Columbine High School, an armed police officer was on duty at the school but found himself outgunned by the two student perpetrators. Of the 13 innocent people killed that day, 11 died after the killers’ initial engagement with armed law enforcement.

The tragic case of Keith Ratliff, a self-described “gun nut” who was found murdered in his Carnesville office earlier this month, surrounded by high-powered weaponry, further demonstrates that guns, like laws, are at best an imperfect defense. There is no solution to such violence; no single answer.

However, limiting gun possession and ammunition purchase to responsible citizens who are trained in their proper use — people such as Melinda Herman — would go a long way in reducing the carnage and heartbreak. In fact, if I could pass just one gun law, it would be a law barring the sale of ammunition to anyone who cannot demonstrate that had taken and passed a gun-safety course within the last five years.

I don’t know why that’s so hard.

– Jay Bookman

902 comments Add your comment

USinUK - not very ladylike (and former Girl Scout)

January 11th, 2013
10:34 am

… and limit the KINDS of guns they can have …

and WHERE and HOW those guns are stored – so that any yahoo (or child) can’t stumble on them and steal / use them

Adam

January 11th, 2013
10:34 am

And by “sane” we should define that as “not a hothead and not paranoid that imaginary Hitler is going to take over America”

USinUK - not very ladylike (and former Girl Scout)

January 11th, 2013
10:34 am

woo hoo!

two firsties in a row.

Keep Up the Good Fight!

January 11th, 2013
10:34 am

Well I don’t know that I would agree on the one gun law choice but requiring regular gun safety training certainly should be part of the effort

barking frog

January 11th, 2013
10:35 am

The lady was lucky the intruder did not use a gun.

stands for decibels

January 11th, 2013
10:35 am

if I could pass just one gun law, it would be a law barring the sale of ammunition to anyone who cannot demonstrate that had taken and passed a gun-safety course within the last five years.

Jay, amend “one gun law” to “one FEDERAL gun law” and you’ll have me saying “This, this, a thousand times, this.” If such things matter to you.

I think it can’t be stressed often enough that individual state laws, while having some purpose, really can’t accomplish much. There has to be a holistic, national approach if we’re at all serious about this.

Erwin's cat

January 11th, 2013
10:35 am

Keep Up the Good Fight!

January 11th, 2013
10:35 am

It’s a “firster conspiracy”…. Call Darryl Issa. We need an investigation.

Joe Hussein Mama

January 11th, 2013
10:36 am

td, extensive response for your downstairs on the topic of “well-regulated militia,” sir.

USinUK - not very ladylike (and former Girl Scout)

January 11th, 2013
10:37 am

Keep Up the Good Fight!

January 11th, 2013
10:37 am

Of course, some posters have ridiculously claimed that the gun was a deterrent for Herman….. they apparently do not understand what “deterrent” means.

Joe Hussein Mama

January 11th, 2013
10:38 am

I like your idea, Jay. It’s like renewing a driver’s license.

However, I’d apply it to firearms *and* ammo.

Adam

January 11th, 2013
10:38 am

This is so well written and has so many paragraphs for me to cite to my gun nut friends that I just have to give Jay standing applause for this one.

Aquagirl

January 11th, 2013
10:41 am

You know Republicans would oppose this because “sane and responsible” eliminates so many of them.

Adam

January 11th, 2013
10:41 am

You know Republicans would oppose this because “sane and responsible” eliminates so many of them.

*chuckle*

barking frog

January 11th, 2013
10:42 am

Jay
At one time ammunition that could be used in a handgun required
a signature for purchase and the signatures were supposed to
be reviewed by law enforcement but like the assault weapons
ban it went away. Shouldn’t be too hard to implement your
law

Joe Hussein Mama

January 11th, 2013
10:45 am

I have a question that hopefully, someone can answer.

Let’s take Andy Average, an average American, homeowner, married, has a decent job, pays his taxes and all that. Also a gun owner and occasional hunter, and compliant with the law, properly licensed, it’s all good.

For whatever reason, let’s assume that Andy Average is adjudged mentally ill, either by competent medical authority or by a duly appointed judge.

Isn’t it the case that Andy Average no longer meets the standard to purchase a firearm? Would he therefore no longer have the right to *possess* the firearms he already owned?

If not, why not?

And if so, does law enforcement do anything about that (like come and confiscate them, for example)?

Adam

January 11th, 2013
10:46 am

barkign frog: From before, I don’t think I would register Republican today, but Independent. I can’t put myself down as a Democrat just yet until I’m satisfied they’ve grown a spine and they stop whining about not getting their way as though some outside influence is going to come and settle the issue as a mediator or mom and dad or something….

Definitely think I’m more liberal though.

Adam

January 11th, 2013
10:48 am

JHM: Oh, nice set of questions. I sure can’t answer them or I would try. But I also kind of don’t want to touch those. I suspect my method of speech/writing would not lend itself well to the argument anyway.

the cat

January 11th, 2013
10:48 am

JHM-that is a good question and I hope there is reasonable discussion. To go a bit further to your point, what about a returning veteran that has PTSD?

Erwin's cat

January 11th, 2013
10:48 am

In fact, if I could pass just one gun law, it would be a law barring the sale of ammunition to anyone who cannot demonstrate that had taken and passed a gun-safety course within the last five years.

and that might just save 500-1000 lives a year…maybe….not to sound cold, but small potatoes

skipper

January 11th, 2013
10:49 am

My biggest regret is that Ms. Herman did not kill this scum-suckin’ maggot. Now, as if it has not been argued back and forth on this blog enough about money, taxes, etc. the public will have to pay for this snot-rag’s medical care, and the “defense” that an attorney will be handsomely paid for when he should be gone! I’m all for the poor, etc. having a proper defense, but the guy did what he did….period. The money spent defending this maggott could feed alot of hungry folks……..
Yeah, I know. I’ll get screamed at, but a guy like this needs to go………………..

indigo

January 11th, 2013
10:49 am

It was many years after automobiles were introduced to Americans before licenses were required.

Now, few people would think requiring people to be tested before being allowed to legally drive is a bad ides.

Why can’t we have a system for testing people’s competence with guns, along with a background check, and then issuing them a license to own a gun?

http://www.ehow.com/about_5552087_history-drivers-license.html

TaxPayer

January 11th, 2013
10:50 am

and that might just save 500-1000 lives a year…maybe….not to sound cold, but small potatoes

Unless it’s your younguns in the mix.

Bill Orvis White

January 11th, 2013
10:52 am

Let me explain something: This “administration” wishes to use Executive Order to limit the rightful free flow of weaponry. Many liberal folk on here say that it’s not a big deal. It is a huge deal and now I’ll explain the common sense position on gun control. Here’s the thing: This Executive Order is just the start of the Socialist-Democrat members and secular progressives slowly chipping away at what our Founding Fathers so bravely fought for over 230 years ago. When Big Federal Gov’t issues an edict such as Executive Order, it tears at the very fabric of The United States of America. It’s funny how you liberals cry out when there are any common sense rules on abortion access. Secular progressives and UnPlanned Parenthood fools cry out that WE THE PEOPLE place rightful restrictions on abortion like parental notification — that WE THE PEOPLE are chipping away at abortion. NOW, do you hypocrites get it? Amen, Bill

TaxPayer

January 11th, 2013
10:52 am

You know Republicans would oppose this because “sane and responsible” eliminates so many of them.

Yes. But aside from that one minor point, what do you have? :smile:

godless heathen

January 11th, 2013
10:52 am

I have no problem with your proposed law, Jay. But when it doesn’t do any good, what will be next?
The reason that NRA membership has jumped by 100K in the past month, and that guns and ammo are flying off the shelves, is the rhetoric expounded daily by those that will seem hell bent on preventing law abiding citizens from their recreational activities for the sake of DOING SOMETHING.

Aquagirl

January 11th, 2013
10:53 am

My biggest regret is that Ms. Herman did not kill this scum-suckin’ maggot.

Look on the bright side: reportedly he was on a ventilator at some point and I think he still has a couple of harvestable organs.

Aim for the head, people, those heart transplant lists aren’t getting any shorter.

Adam

January 11th, 2013
10:53 am

and that might just save 500-1000 lives a year…maybe….not to sound cold, but small potatoes

Assuming that the only deaths it stops are accidental ones. What about the number of people who will be stopped from buying ammo who would otherwise be hotheaded and go shoot up someplace or kill a person that offended them? People who take training classes are much more likely NOT to lose their cool with a deadly weapon they are trained to use.

0311/8541/5811/1811/1801

January 11th, 2013
10:53 am

1) “Let’s limit guns to sane, responsible gun owners”

You start with “guns” in the title (the law already provides for that) and then you switch to “ammunition” so I’m not really sure where you’re headed.

2) In any case:

“In fact, if I could pass just one gun law, it would be a law barring the sale of ammunition to anyone who cannot demonstrate that had taken and passed a gun-safety course within the last five years. I don’t know why that’s so hard”.

3) If I could pass just one vehicle law, it would be a law that required all new vehicles (made or imported in the United States) to have a computer chip restricting the top speed of that vehcile to 65 mph. It would save thousands and thousands of lives.

I don’t know why that’s so hard.

Adam

January 11th, 2013
10:54 am

godless: But when it doesn’t do any good, what will be next?

What would be “doesn’t work” and how many days would you give before declaring it a failure? 10?

godless heathen

January 11th, 2013
10:55 am

You don’t have to have a drivers license to own a car.

Erwin's cat

January 11th, 2013
10:56 am

Unless it’s your younguns in the mix.

I am a believer in professional training. Just saying there are fatter rabbits out there than accidental gun deaths…heck, gravity kills 10x plus more people….should people show proof they have balance before they can buy a ladder too?

Joe Hussein Mama

January 11th, 2013
10:57 am

t. cat — “To go a bit further to your point, what about a returning veteran that has PTSD?”

I don’t know. Would PTSD prevent you from buying a firearm if you disclosed it on the application?

Adam

January 11th, 2013
10:57 am

Scout: If I could pass just one vehicle law, it would be a law that required all new vehicles (made or imported in the United States) to have a computer chip restricting the top speed of that vehcile to 65 mph. It would save thousands and thousands of lives.

Amend to include computer chips that are at posted speed limit areas, that interact with computer chips in cars, to limit their top speed to the currently posted speed limit, and you’ve got my support.

And anyway, only CRIMINALS break speed limit laws. Surely that means we don’t need speed limit laws, right?

Ronald Reagan

January 11th, 2013
10:57 am

I don’t think a Liberal should be making any kind of a decision on something as important as a gun! They should continue giving things away & making the working class lives miserable! Something they are experts on!

Erwin's cat

January 11th, 2013
10:58 am

Adam – People who take training classes are much more likely NOT to lose their cool with a deadly weapon they are trained to use.

If you are gonna resort to making shyte up…go big

td

January 11th, 2013
10:58 am

From below:

TBS

January 11th, 2013
10:52 am

td

Cool. You must be a bad shot. I don’t know many people who hunt deer with a 20 rd magazine.

Usually do not use the 20 round while hunting just for target shooting. Picked it up a few years ago at a gun show.

Adam

January 11th, 2013
11:00 am

godless heathen: You don’t have to have a drivers license to own a car.

Yes, let’s treat guns in EXACTLY the way you just described. You can buy the gun, but you can’t get it home if you haven’t gotten your license yet so you’ll have to give it to a responsible gun owner to hold on to and lock up for you, until you get your license. Or they have to be with you at all times you are carrying it. Just like you can’t drive your new car home if you don’t have a license nor can you operate it without an experienced driver in the car with you until you have a full license.

Great idea godless, wish I had thought of it ;)

Adam

January 11th, 2013
11:00 am

Erwin: If you are gonna resort to making shyte up…go big

Seems by asserting the opposite you haven’t followed your own rule.

RB from Gwinnett

January 11th, 2013
11:01 am

Keep, “Now where do I order my $28 Obamacare pizza?”

It was $25 and here’s your answer.

http://mypizza.com/restaurant/menu/849

Even the veggie pie is over $25. You asked for it and now you have the proof, so STFU!!

godless heathen

January 11th, 2013
11:02 am

What would be “doesn’t work” and how many days would you give before declaring it a failure? 10?

It will be the gun grabbers that declare it didn’t work 15 minutes after the next school shooting.

Adam

January 11th, 2013
11:02 am

RB: Vegan and gluten free pizzas being more expensive proves…. what, exactly? And what does that have to do with Obamacare?

td

January 11th, 2013
11:02 am

“The biggest danger of such an approach is the false sense of security it might create. In the infamous 1999 shooting at Columbine High School, an armed police officer was on duty at the school but found himself outgunned by the two student perpetrators. Of the 13 innocent people killed that day, 11 died after the killers’ initial engagement with armed law enforcement.”

Now tell the whole story here Jay. Tell us how after a few rounds were exchanged the Columbine killers ran back into the school and the resource officers were not allowed to follow them. Thank God those rules have been changed.

Adam

January 11th, 2013
11:03 am

godless: It will be the gun grabbers that declare it didn’t work 15 minutes after the next school shooting.

Exactly my point.

moonbat betty

January 11th, 2013
11:03 am

Well said, Jay.

They also need to have VERY stiff penalties for those who carry a concealed weapon and are not licensed.

Unfortunately, this will do nothing to stop a crazy from getting a gun illegally and shooting up a public place.

USinUK’s suggestion made me giggle that laws be passed on:

“WHERE and HOW those guns are stored – so that any yahoo (or child) can’t stumble on them and steal / use them”

I don’t know how you could enforce this (random house searches?), but gun safety is common sense. You can’t outlaw stupidity.

Adam

January 11th, 2013
11:03 am

td: and the resource officers were not allowed to follow them.

That is so much bullsh*t.

the cat

January 11th, 2013
11:04 am

RB-do you know that the same bottle of water that costs $1 here will cost around $5 in Walt Disney World? Something about the location……and what the public will bear

godless heathen

January 11th, 2013
11:05 am

Adam: I have to have a license to carry a concealed weapon. It’s a condition of operating it in public.

So you agree that if I want to own a Bushmaster with a 30 round clip, as long as I don’t break any laws with it, it’s noone’s damn business?

barking frog

January 11th, 2013
11:05 am

JoeHusseinMama
My experience is that most Judges issue orders to a detainee
regarding the disabilities imposed by sentence or finding but
the actual enforcement is only if the offender is in violation
henceforth and nothing is done at the time. I have helped
many people get the disabilities removed which does not
require an attorney.

Joe Hussein Mama

January 11th, 2013
11:08 am

RB picks a boutique pizza joint in Manhattan and that’s supposed to prove something, I guess.

Anyone got an idea what it was he was trying to prove? That food’s expensive in Manhattan, maybe? I can attest to that.

godless heathen

January 11th, 2013
11:09 am

Exactly my point.

And then will come another useless law to limit the freedom of law abiding citizens.

Piers for Prez

January 11th, 2013
11:09 am

Fun Facts:
Obesity kills exponentially more people each year than all violent crime, accidental deaths, and DUI per year combined. Smoking kills more than that.

No one is limited in the amount of booze they can by, food they can buy, or how many packs of cigarettes they can buy.

I’ve owned over 60 guns in my lifetime and all of them, so-called ‘assault-rifles’ included have killed less people than Ted Kennedy’s car.

What is an ‘assualt-rifle’ anyway? Any gun can be used for evil, so can any blunt object. Why aren’t there ‘assault-bats’ or ‘assault-hammers’ or ‘assualt-chainsaws’…all of which have various models that are bigger and scarier looking and can inflict more damage if used for sinister actions than other ones? News flash idiots…AR stands for Armalite not ‘assualt-rifle’.

Lastly, if you are too ‘blinded by caring for the kids rainbow’ to see what is really afoot here, God help you. Every Liberal in Congress behind closed doors are rubbing their hands together like Smithers from the Simpsons cackling, “We can begin to disarm the public now…piece by piece we will take all of their guns and then we have the ultimate power. Muah haha!”

Adam

January 11th, 2013
11:09 am

godless: So you agree that if I want to own a Bushmaster with a 30 round clip, as long as I don’t break any laws with it, it’s noone’s damn business?

No. That is separate. The Second Amendment is not unlimited.

Likewise, you would not want ME owning vials of plutonium (or, if you really don’t mind, you’re nuts), and me declaring it’s no one’s damned business.

And for the record, if that gun were against the law to purchase, then purchasing it would mean you are a criminal. And if you buy it ahead of time because you’re worried confiscation will be part of the law, then don’t give me that “law abiding citizen” crap, since you are intent on breaking a perceived future law.

Aquagirl

January 11th, 2013
11:09 am

So you agree that if I want to own a Bushmaster with a 30 round clip, as long as I don’t break any laws with it, it’s noone’s damn business?

Not really—I don’t think Nancy Lanza broke any laws and her guns sure turned out to be other people’s damn business.

skipper

January 11th, 2013
11:10 am

Adam

January 11th, 2013
11:10 am

godless: And then will come another useless law to limit the freedom of law abiding citizens.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope

USinUK - not very ladylike (and former Girl Scout)

January 11th, 2013
11:10 am

“This “administration” wishes to use Executive Order to limit the rightful free flow of weaponry”

… and your proof is … ???

Joe Hussein Mama

January 11th, 2013
11:10 am

b. frog — “My experience is that most Judges issue orders to a detainee
regarding the disabilities imposed by sentence or finding but
the actual enforcement is only if the offender is in violation
henceforth and nothing is done at the time. I have helped
many people get the disabilities removed which does not
require an attorney.”

If I’m reading you right, you’re saying that law enforcement won’t get involved unless Andy Average tries to buy another weapon or unless he commits a crime or causes a ruckus involving one of his firearms. Is that correct?

So long as he’s institutionalized or behaves himself at home, he can keep his weapons, that’s what I think I’m hearing.

Fred ™

January 11th, 2013
11:11 am

RB from Gwinnett

January 11th, 2013
11:01 am

Keep, “Now where do I order my $28 Obamacare pizza?”

It was $25 and here’s your answer.

http://mypizza.com/restaurant/menu/849

Even the veggie pie is over $25. You asked for it and now you have the proof, so STFU!!
++++++++++++++++++

What the hell are you talking about? I didn’t see an Obamacare pizza anywhere on that menu. Or arwe you saying that the prices of those pizza’s is what they are because of ROMNEYcare? If so man are you silly. Those pizza’s are no more expensive than Mellow Mushroom, or Shorties. Or Any GOOD pizza place. Maybe brain dead folks with no taste buds think Papa John’s rules but they also thought Romney ruled and probably eat steak well done.

Regnad Kcin

January 11th, 2013
11:13 am

“So you agree that if I want to own a Bushmaster with a 30 round clip, as long as I don’t break any laws with it, it’s noone’s damn business?”

Mr. heathen, what is its purpose, except to kill many people very quickly? I ask as a serious question.

Piers for Prez

January 11th, 2013
11:13 am

And yes, I can’t spell assault, apparently.

Adam

January 11th, 2013
11:14 am

Obesity kills exponentially more people each year than all violent crime, accidental deaths, and DUI per year combined. Smoking kills more than that.

No one is limited in the amount of booze they can by, food they can buy, or how many packs of cigarettes they can buy.

Uhhhh, actually….

The amount of alcohol you can buy at a bar is limited to whether the bartender thinks you are too drunk.

The amount of food you can buy is not the issue, and measures are already in place that limit both that and certain ingredients

How many packs of cigarettes is also not the issue, but you are limited as to where you can smoke and who you can smoke around.

All of these are about public safety dude. We DO take legal action to limit activities that harm others all the time.

stands for decibels

January 11th, 2013
11:14 am

Maybe brain dead folks with no taste buds think Papa John’s rules but they also thought Romney ruled and probably eat steak well done.

Fred, I hereby take back about 93% of all the less than complimentary things I might’ve posted about you in the past.

USinUK - not very ladylike (and former Girl Scout)

January 11th, 2013
11:14 am

“Mr. heathen, what is its purpose, except to kill many people very quickly? I ask as a serious question.”

I’m sure it has nothing to do with (ahem) COMPENSATING for other shortcomings …

barking frog

January 11th, 2013
11:15 am

JoeHusseinMama
All correct. If the offender has a gun permit it would be rescinded
but no confiscation unless the weapon is used in the commission
of the crime.

Fred ™

January 11th, 2013
11:15 am

<i.Likewise, you would not want ME owning vials of plutonium (or, if you really don’t mind, you’re nuts), and me declaring it’s no one’s damned business.

Wow. really? Comparing a highly radioactive material, plutonium, with a rifle? Will that Bushmaster cause ratiation to accumulate in your bones just by mere contact with it and cause you to DIE just by standing by it?

That HAS to be one of the most insane “arguments” I’ve read here and there have been some really insipidly insane ones here.

Maybe you are right. To have posted something THAT stupid you have to be a Republican………..

td

January 11th, 2013
11:15 am

In fact, if I could pass just one gun law, it would be a law barring the sale of ammunition to anyone who cannot demonstrate that had taken and passed a gun-safety course within the last five years. I don’t know why that’s so hard”.

If I could pass just one law then it would to require every car in this country to have a breathalyzer attached to the ignition system. That would save more lives per year then taking every gun in America.

Adam

January 11th, 2013
11:15 am

Fred: I choose Medium Rare on steaks and burgers (when given the option). What’s your fave?

Fred ™

January 11th, 2013
11:17 am

<i.Fred, I hereby take back about 93% of all the less than complimentary things I might’ve posted about you in the past.

Fatboy DO know his food lol.

USinUK - not very ladylike (and former Girl Scout)

January 11th, 2013
11:17 am

“Obesity kills exponentially more people each year than all violent crime, accidental deaths, and DUI per year combined. Smoking kills more than that.”

hrm. when have you ever seen anyone french fry someone to death? or drive-by taco innocent bystanders???

the things you mention are what people do to THEMSELVES, not others. And, where other people ARE affected (such as second-hand smoke), there ARE regulations in place.

Adam

January 11th, 2013
11:17 am

td: If I could pass just one law then it would to require every car in this country to have a breathalyzer attached to the ignition system. That would save more lives per year then taking every gun in America.

OK, let’s do it. While ALSO addressing gun issues.

What, didn’t think I’d agree? Think it’s nuts? You’re the one who said it would save lives!

Personally I think we should just have a car that can scan your blood as part of the ignition system.

USinUK - not very ladylike (and former Girl Scout)

January 11th, 2013
11:18 am

“Fred: I choose Medium Rare on steaks and burgers ”

mmmmmmmmmmmm … hungry …

TaxPayer

January 11th, 2013
11:18 am

Talking about fatter rabbits and Florida Power and Light and such,

Number of deaths for leading causes of death

•Heart disease: 599,413
•Cancer: 567,628
•Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 137,353
•Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 128,842
•Accidents (unintentional injuries): 118,021
•Alzheimer’s disease: 79,003
•Diabetes: 68,705
•Influenza and Pneumonia: 53,692
•Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 48,935
•Intentional self-harm (suicide): 36,909

Yet cons don’t think we should be imposing on folks to implement any sort of national healthcare system that is available to all and affordable. I mean, after all, there are just all sorts of excuses and rationalizing not to do anything that might impose on one’s personal constitutionally gauranteed liberties.

RB from Gwinnett

January 11th, 2013
11:19 am

All, for weeks, Keep has been whining about proof of a $25 pizza from a comment I made about costs rising as a result of healthcare cost. It doesn’t seem to matter to the idiot that I can’t provide proof for a year when those rules actually take effect, he just keeps asking for proof. I guess he thinks he’s clever or cute to demand I show him menu pricing from 2014 or something. I can’t speak for the head case.

So, for all on this board, I have provided Keep the evidence of a $25 pizza he demanded I provide. We’ll just consider any further requests on the matter to be the blatherings of an idiot.

Lord Help Us

January 11th, 2013
11:19 am

‘probably eat steak well done’

with marks from where the jockey was hitting it…

Joe Hussein Mama

January 11th, 2013
11:19 am

Fred — ” Maybe brain dead folks with no taste buds think Papa John’s rules”

Word. If I’m dropping $25 on a pizza, it damn sure won’t be one from Papa John’s.

Mellow Mushroom, maybe. Or Savage Pizza. Or DaVinci’s. Not PJ’s.

barking frog

January 11th, 2013
11:19 am

JoeHusseinMama
Also, disposal is as easy as saying “Mom, these guns are yours now”
and if the offender is on probation Mom’s guns are o.k. in the house
but not in the probationer’s room.

Adam

January 11th, 2013
11:19 am

As for DUI analogies, to wit:

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-january-8-2013/scapegoat-hunter—gun-control

“[Do we ban cars] because people get drunk and kill people in cars?”
Jon Stewart: “No, but we do enact stricter blood alcohol limits, raise the drinking age, ramp up enforcement and penalties, and charge bartenders who server drunks and launch huge public awareness campaigns to stigmatize the dangerous behavior in question and we do all those things because it MIGHT just help bring drunk driving rates down, I don’t know, by two thirds in a few decades!”

“There’s all sorts of stuff you can’t have already: …. F-16 fighter jets, Surface-to-air ANYTHING!”

“Now I see what’s happening. So this is what it is: Their paranoid fear of a possible dystopic future prevents us from addressing our ACTUAL dystopic present. We can’t even begin to address 30,000 gun deaths that are actually, in reality, happening in this country every year because a few of us must remain vigilant against the rise of Imaginary Hitler.”

alex

January 11th, 2013
11:19 am

simple answers for simple folks..”sanity”?? by DSM 5??, Jay you’re final statement seems rational to me, but methinks that it does not go far enough for many folks…..

Aqua…brutal…

Aquagirl

January 11th, 2013
11:20 am

Skipper, I’m glad I could brighten your gloomy Friday with visions of convicted felon organ donors dancing in your head.

Adam

January 11th, 2013
11:20 am

RB: All, for weeks, Keep has been whining about proof of a $25 pizza from a comment I made about costs rising as a result of healthcare cost

And your proof of such a pizza existing does exactly nothing to prove it’s because of Obamacare.

Joe Hussein Mama

January 11th, 2013
11:20 am

RB — “We’ll just consider any further requests on the matter to be the blatherings of an idiot.”

Who’s “we?” I don’t think you speak for many people other than yourself here, Champ.

USinUK - not very ladylike (and former Girl Scout)

January 11th, 2013
11:20 am

“Mellow Mushroom, maybe. Or Savage Pizza. Or DaVinci’s. Not PJ’s.”

ohmygod … Savage Pizza!!! there’s a blast from the past …

stands for decibels

January 11th, 2013
11:21 am

I would love to eat medium rare burgers, but for quite a few years…just can’t justify the perceived risk.

(It would be a different story if I were personally responsible for grinding the meat to be consumed.)

TaxPayer

January 11th, 2013
11:21 am

Regnad Kcin

January 11th, 2013
11:21 am

” That would save more lives per year then.”

td – it’s hard to take anything you post seriously as long as you keep posting stuff like ” taking every gun in America”

If you want to convince people of your position, it helps to stay real.

Of course, if your’e just here to rant, please carry on – sorry to have interrupted.

Stevie Ray..Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right..here I am...

January 11th, 2013
11:23 am

JAY,

Every plan has holes. In this instance I see two. First, how is responsible and sane defined and evaluated? The guy who did the Sandy Creek shooting was deranged but he was also highly intelligent. What would a system look like to screen an individual who is clever enough to appear responsible and sane?

Second, what about individual resales? If I sold a gun to another licensed individual, how do I know they won’t sell same gun to private individual who may not have good intentions?

I see defining “responsible and sane” as a nightmarish, ACLU bonanza…
I can imagine penalties on original or subsequent sellers but that’s likely to be impossible to enforce with efficacy..

USinUK - not very ladylike (and former Girl Scout)

January 11th, 2013
11:23 am

no burgers and steak for us tonight … Chinese … omnomnomnom …

Adam

January 11th, 2013
11:23 am

stands: You should TOTALLY make medium rare burgers at home. I do and they are MMMMMMMM

Other than that, I would say go to a place you can trust. I have been food poisoned before, but not by burgers. It’s not fun, and I don’t think the risk is really that high unless your immune system has issues handling it.

alittlecommonsense

January 11th, 2013
11:23 am

Six shots, empty gun and the intruder was still standing. She ran him off by bluffing that she had more shots ready to fire.

What if there were two intruders? Maybe a high capacity clip would have been nice in that situation. I’m not saying we shouldn’t have a discussion about reasonable limits. We already do have a lot of limits on gun ownership. I just want to point this out to the people who say there should never be any need for high capacity clips. If you have two or three intruders in your house, you would be pretty happy to have a 20 round magazine.

Joe Hussein Mama

January 11th, 2013
11:23 am

b. frog — “Also, disposal is as easy as saying “Mom, these guns are yours now”
and if the offender is on probation Mom’s guns are o.k. in the house
but not in the probationer’s room.”

FWIW, I’d like to see any transfer of ownership tracked at both a state and a Federal level. Too many guns are legally bought, then disappear into a black hole — only to turn up later, involved in crimes and no way to trace the weapon’s ownership.

Fred ™

January 11th, 2013
11:23 am

Dang I keep screwing up the italics lol.

Adam: What’s my fav what? Steak place? Steak cut? Hamburger joint?

Given how much hamburger are handled (ground beef) I like them a little more done for safety, but I STILL want them juicy. As for steaks? It depends on the cut. A Ribeye needs to get to a bare medium for the connective tissue (fat) to “melt” they say, but I still like it medium rare.

A filet or New York Strip I will take rare+ to medium rare since there is no fat to break down. Back when I was younger and stuff was more local, thus imho cleaner, I would eat raw slices of steak with salt on them. I won’t do that now though. Especially not a steak tartare since it also has raw egg, although IO USED to like it.

And yet I’ll still eat sushi. Go figure……….

Peadawg

January 11th, 2013
11:23 am

“Here in Georgia, for example, state Rep. Paul Battles of Cartersville has announced legislation that would allow an administrator in each school — at the discretion of school district leadership — to undergo annual state peace-officer firearm training and be certified to carry a weapon at school” – I’m completely fine with this.

“and WHERE and HOW those guns are stored” – Who’s going to go house-to-house to check this?

Welcome to the Occupation

January 11th, 2013
11:24 am

“In other words, let’s keep this reasonable and rational, on all sides of the issue.”

There’s the typical liberal gesture. Always at pains to demonstrate that they’re ‘rational’ or not ‘extreme’, etc.

Well, that’s too bad, because in order to put anything ’sensible’ or ‘rational’ into effect, you’re going to have to go through a determined gun industry lobby that is one of countless tentacles of the Oligarchy that rules us. And that, unfortunately, will require measures that are anything but calm and sensible and reasonable.

Against an extremist and insane and ruthless opposition, reason simply does not prevail.

Erwin's cat

January 11th, 2013
11:25 am

Adam – Seems by asserting the opposite you haven’t followed your own rule.

how so?…Did I predict the motivation and emotions and actions of others like you did?

stands for decibels

January 11th, 2013
11:25 am

You should TOTALLY make medium rare burgers at home. I do and they are MMMMMMMM

Probably ought to get one of those meat grinder attachments for the KitchenAid. I’ll take it up with the committee (i.e., mrs. sfd.)

Stevie Ray..Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right..here I am...

January 11th, 2013
11:25 am

stands for decibels

January 11th, 2013
11:21 am

Rare meat comes out harder than it goes down….

MANGLER

January 11th, 2013
11:26 am

USinUK, I’m sending that idea to Betty White’s show – drive-by taco’ing innocent bystanders.

Simple Truths

January 11th, 2013
11:26 am

Who gets to decide what qualifies as “sane” and “responsible”?

Let’s limit voting to sane, responsible voters.