Gun Confiscation Reference October 2017

October 11, 2017
[Reverse chronological order]

October 11, 2017
Dan Pfeiffer: What to Bring to the Gun Fight [national gun registry, Tracking and limiting purchases of ammunition and a national gun buyback program]

October 9, 2017
Eugene Robinson: Gun control should include buyback program like Australia’s

October 6, 2017
The Week: Ban guns

October 6, 2017
New York Times: The Cancer in the Constitution [2nd amendment]

October 6, 2017
“President Trump, end this ‘American carnage.'”

WaPo Editorial Board Demands US Enact Australian-Style Gun Ban…

October 5, 2017
New Boston Post-Connecticut Professor: Repeal the Second Amendment

October 5, 2017
The New York Times: Repeal the Second Amendment

October 4, 2017
Plan A Magazine: Ban Guns. Amend the Constitution.

October 4, 2017
(CNN)Sachs: Ban semiautomatic assault weapons and save lives

October 3, 2017
Forget about ‘gun control,’ let’s repeal the Second Amendment

October 2, 2017
Prospect magazine: Dear America: it’s time to grow up and ban guns

What to Bring to the Gun Fight
Written By:Dan Pfeiffer
The Democratic gun control strategy fails because it is defined by this poverty of ambition—the determination never to look beyond fear of political repercussions. Universal background checks and a ban on high-capacity magazines are good ideas and we should seize the opportunity to enact them if it presents itself. But they won’t come anywhere close to making gun violence in America a tolerable problem. We are nibbling around the edges instead of proposing bold, meaningful solutions such as:

A national gun registry, so law-enforcement officials can know when someone is compiling an arsenal. The government can track purchases of allergy medicines that can be used to make methamphetamine, and fertilizers that can be used to make bombs, like the one used in Oklahoma City in 1994, but not deadly assault weapons. That’s absurd.
Tracking and limiting purchases of ammunition.
Requiring that guns use smart-gun technology, which would dramatically reduce accidental deaths, particularly among children, who, according to a 2016 study, are dying accidental deaths at the hands of guns at the rate of one every other day.
A national gun buyback program similar to the one Australia instituted after a mass shooting that killed 35 people. That incident was in 1996. There hasn’t been another one since,

I understand why defeatism is so rampant. If the slaughter of 20 innocent children in Newtown didn’t change enough minds to change any laws, the thinking goes, then it will never happen. But it doesn’t have to be this way. We have failed to date because we have failed to make robust, courageous, and honest arguments to the country. We may not succeed in time to prevent the next mass shooting or the one after that, but we can win this argument over time. And the truth is, we have yet to try.


Eugene Robinson: Gun control should include buyback program like Australia’s
By Joe Concha – 10/09/17
Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson said the U.S. gun control debate should include a discussion on whether the government should buy back some guns, as has been done in Australia.

Robinson’s remarks on NBC’s “Meet the Press” came on a Sunday morning when political talk shows across the dial were dominated by the mass shooting in Las Vegas on Oct. 1, which left 58 people dead and more than 500 wounded.

“It’s not going to stop. And, you know, these things happen, they’re awful, they’re tragic. And then we start the gun debate nondebate,” Robinson told Chuck Todd. “Because one reason it’s a nondebate is that we debate, ‘Well, what specific piece of legislation could have stopped this incident?’”

Robinson, who is also an MSNBC analyst, cited gun control measures in Australia as a possible remedy.

“Meanwhile, there are 300 million guns in this country,” he noted. “And so a real gun debate has to look at that fact: 300 million guns. And we need, you know, to look at what was done in a place like Australia, where they had a gun buyback,” he said.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), who has introduced legislation to ban bump stocks, said there is “Republican interest” in the bill but that she only has Democratic sponsors so far.

“I have nobody lined up, we have 38 cosponsors, they’re all Democratic. We’ve had individuals that have indicated an interest and particularly for a hearing,” she added.


Ban guns
Paul Waldman
October 6, 2017

Whenever America has one of its periodic mass shootings, you can count on seeing this particular exchange played out on cable news and in conversations across the country. The advocate for guns will say to the promoter of restrictions, “You just want to ban all guns!” to which it is replied, “No, I don’t! I just want some common-sense regulation!” In anticipation of this criticism, Democratic politicians will regularly begin their remarks on gun control by saying, “I support the Second Amendment, and I’m not trying to ban guns. I just believe…”

So since no one else wants to say it, I will: Yes, I’d like to ban guns. Almost all of them, at least the ones in private hands.

Now before you begin penning your angry, threatening email to me (and so you know, you won’t be the first or even the hundredth to communicate your friendly sentiments), let me be completely clear about what I’m not saying. First and most important, I know that guns are not going to be banned. And I know that with around 300 million of them already in circulation, collecting them would be an impossible task even if we tried (which we won’t). I am fully aware of the Second Amendment, and of how the Supreme Court decided for the first time in 2008 that it confers an individual right to own a gun. This isn’t a realistic proposal for legislation.

So yes, if I had my way, there would be little private ownership of guns, and what there was would be highly regulated, with strict requirements on licensing, training, and record-keeping. You might be able to get an instrument whose very purpose is to kill, but you’d have to jump through some pretty serious hoops, and there would be lots of things that could disqualify you from that privilege. You could keep a small number of bolt-action hunting rifles, but anything else you’d have to go to a range to use, unless there were some extraordinary circumstance that absolutely demanded you keep a different kind of gun in your home. I realize that to some people that sounds like a nightmare.


New York Times: The Cancer in the Constitution
By Timothy Egan Oct. 6, 2017
One of the great disconnects of our history is how a nation birthed on the premise that all men are created equal could enshrine an entire race of people as three-fifths of a human being. We tried to fix that, through our bloodiest war and a series of amendments that followed.

At the time, the typical firearms were single-loading muskets and flintlock pistols. At most, a shooter could fire off three rounds per minute, at a maximum accuracy range of about 50 yards.

No, the Second Amendment became a cancer because lawmakers stopped making laws to match the technological advances of weaponry. They did it to appease a lobby of gunmakers. And that cowering to a single special interest shows how the cancer has spread to the democracy itself, making it nearly impossible for majority will to be exercised.

As I said, it’s only in the last 30 years or so that this amendment has metastasized. President Roosevelt signed the National Firearms Act of 1934, restricting sales of machine guns and sawed-off shotguns — the weapons of choice for violent gangsters.

It’s a no-brainer to pass a law designed to keep people from turning their AKs into machine guns with the so-called bump stocks. But it was also a no-brainer to restrict people on terrorism watch lists from buying guns, as was proposed after the Orlando slaughter of 49 people last year. It failed. A healthy democracy, reflecting the outrage of its citizens and the common-sense will of the majority, would have done right by the Orlando victims in a heartbeat.

But we’re no longer a healthy democracy, thanks to the cancer that has grown out of the Constitution.


Published on Oct 6, 2017
WaPo Editorial Board Demands US Enact Australian-Style Gun Ban…

“President Trump, end this ‘American carnage.'”

President Trump promised to end “American carnage.” Members of The Washington Post Editorial Board demand he start by backing gun-control legislation to prevent mass shootings.
let’s take a page from Australia after a massacre in1996 it passed a raft of measures including a ban on semi-automatic assault rifles.


The New York Times: Repeal the Second Amendment
Bret Stephens
OCT. 5, 2017
I have never understood the conservative fetish for the Second Amendment.

Given all of this, why do liberals keep losing the gun control debate?

Maybe it’s because they argue their case badly and — let’s face it — in bad faith. Democratic politicians routinely profess their fidelity to the Second Amendment — or rather, “a nuanced reading” of it — with all the conviction of Barack Obama’s support for traditional marriage, circa 2008. People recognize lip service for what it is.

There is only one way to do this: Repeal the Second Amendment.

Repealing the Amendment may seem like political Mission Impossible today, but in the era of same-sex marriage it’s worth recalling that most great causes begin as improbable ones. Gun ownership should never be outlawed, just as it isn’t outlawed in Britain or Australia. But it doesn’t need a blanket Constitutional protection, either. The 46,445 murder victims killed by gunfire in the United States between 2012 and 2016 didn’t need to perish so that gun enthusiasts can go on fantasizing that “Red Dawn” is the fate that soon awaits us.

Donald Trump will likely get one more Supreme Court nomination, or two or three, before he leaves office, guaranteeing a pro-gun court for another generation. Expansive interpretations of the right to bear arms will be the law of the land — until the “right” itself ceases to be.

Plan A Magazine: Ban Guns. Amend the Constitution.
Oct 4, 2017
What we really need could not be more obvious: a Constitutional Amendment that repeals or revises the 2nd Amendment so that either Congress or the states can regulate or eliminate private gun ownership. We know this works because other countries like Australia and Scotland have had similar problems with mass shootings, and solved them through comprehensive gun bans.

Let’s not get into the Incremental Liberalist agenda of eliminating bumper stocks, high capacity magazines, and silencers. Let’s not even pretend like banning the AR-15 is sufficient — a bunch of handguns and shotguns is more than enough for a newsworthy ‘Murican suicide slaughter.

We need to amend the Constitution.

Oh but it can’t be done! say our sober leaders. Impossible! say the Democrats. What is possible of course is for the Democrats to solidify their moral authority in crying tears of pain and frustration while avoiding the obvious solution.

Warren Burger has been on the record that the GOP-NRA committed a massive fraud — fraud — against the American people in twisting the Second Amendment into the enshrinement of personal firearms as a cultural right. It is no such thing.

Ban guns. Amend the Constitution.


(CNN)Sachs: Ban semiautomatic assault weapons and save lives
By Jeffrey Sachs
October 4, 2017
Editor’s note: “Jeffrey Sachs is a professor and director of the Center for Sustainable Development at Columbia University. The opinions expressed in this commentary are his.”
(CNN)Semiautomatic assault weapons are not protected by the Second Amendment. The federal government and the states can outlaw them, a point underscored by none other than the late Justice Antonin Scalia, who emphasized that the Second Amendment protects gun ownership of the types of arms that were “in common use” in 1791, when the Second Amendment was adopted.

The federal government banned military-style semiautomatic assault weapons for 10 years between 1994 and 2004, and deaths from mass shootings fell. It’s a no-brainer to do so again, and fast.

According to data assembled by Mother Jones in its open-source database, there were 15 mass shootings with 96 deaths during the 10-year ban. The ban expired in 2004 and was not renewed, and mass shooting deaths soared. During the next 10 years, there were an astounding 35 mass shootings and 195 deaths. Since then, the rate of mass shootings has continued to rise. Even before the latest massacre, America was awash in semiautomatic assault weapons and bloodshed.

Congress members themselves are vulnerable, as we saw when a gunman opened fire on a Republican baseball practice in June, injuring, among others, Louisiana Rep. Steve Scalise. It must be a miserable job to worry (along with the rest of us) about being shot by people armed with semiautomatic assault weapons — but at the same time to be targeted for retribution by the National Rifle Association for a vote in favor of something as obvious as a ban on such weapons. We need to boost the security of the Congress so that they can more safely vote to save themselves and us.
Other countries are not paralyzed. Australia, which is a lot like the United States in its politics and its libertarian streak, strictly bans such weapons. It suffered a number of mass shootings involving semiautomatic weapons in the 1980s and 1990s, including a horrendous mass shooting in 1996. The government of the time took decisive action, banning such weapons. Since then, there has not been a single mass shooting with semiautomatic assault weapons and very few cases of multiple homicides.

It’s a good bet that the families of the Las Vegas victims will eventually file a class-action suit suing the gun industry for its reckless disregard. The families can never recover their awful loss, but they could yet save the lives of countless others by bringing these awful companies to justice. Nothing should exonerate gun manufacturers from their responsibility in making and marketing such instruments of needless death.
America is heading for a societal nervous breakdown. The President is a crude narcissist whose antics provoke division, hatred and violence, and our society is in the grips of an epidemic of gun violence. The Republican Party is utterly complicit in this, focused only on achieving a tax cut for the super rich to the neglect of every real responsibility to the society.
It is often said that it is darkest before the dawn. Let us certainly hope so. It is dark indeed today in Las Vegas and across the land.
Correction: An earlier version of this commentary incorrectly referred to semiautomatic weapons as banned under the now-expired 1994 federal assault weapons ban. The reference should have been to military-style semiautomatic assault weapons, which, under the ban, were illegal to manufacture for use by private citizens.


Forget about ‘gun control,’ let’s repeal the Second Amendment
Dr. Warren J. Blumenfeld ·
Tuesday, October 3, 2017
So after suffering the effects of yet another mass shooting in our country, this time in Las Vegas, Nevada where currently over 50 people have died and approximately 500 others were wounded, let’s look at the firearms laws in the state of Nevada.

I propose that we reevaluate the political right’s obsession with the so-called “freedom” to bear arms because it is not only “criminals who kill people” as Second Amendment advocates claim. Therefore,

We must ban and criminalize the possession of automatic and semi-automatic weapons.
We must close loopholes such as buying a weapon at a gun show.
We must ban the purchase of firearms and ammunition on the internet because some people are still doing this legally.
We must increase the waiting period and make background checks more rigorous and effective.
We must limit the number of firearms any individual can own.
We must limit the number of bullets any firearm clip can hold.
We must ban and criminalize the purchase and possession of armor piercing bullets, and also hollow-tip bullets.
We must rethink the “logic” of permitting concealed weapons, especially in places like houses of worship, colleges, bars, restaurants, and political rallies.
We must interface all databases monitoring firearm ownership to assess the firearm-owning population more accurately and effectively.

To be perfectly honest, though, I want the Second Amendment repealed!


Dear America: it’s time to grow up and ban guns
An adult, civilised society does not consider it necessary for a private citizen to own an assault rifle
by Stephanie Boland / October 2, 2017 /
And so we have news of another mass act of violence. In Las Vegas, we hear, a man has opened fire from a hotel window into a vast crowd of concert-goers, killing over 50 and injuring more than 400. “We heard what sounded like firecrackers going off,” one woman told MSNBC, adding that as she ran off, there were “probably a couple hundred [people] on the ground.” The police have named their suspect as Stephen Paddock, a “local man” aged 64. He is believed to have checked into the Mandalay Bay Resort and Casino in late September. We don’t yet know what might have gone through the head of our suspect, but we do know what was in his hands: Paddock, the police say, had an “excess of ten rifles” in his hotel room.



Author: Torcer

Differential equations teaches us that one can use the initial conditions of the present to extrapolate events in the near term balanced with the knowledge of the past. The interaction of technological advances and the march of history is fascinating. History can inform those willing to listen as to what will happen in the future because the laws of human natural are as immutable as the elegant equations of Newtonian physics.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s