Online subscriber? Please Log In

Need Help? | Forgot Your Password?

It won't be enough to control weapons

Dec 21, 2012 | 3 Comments

By Jeb Bladine
Of the News-Register

Only online subscribers may access this article. Subscribe online by clicking here. Already a subscriber, please .

Would you like to comment on this article?

Only online subscribers may comment on articles. Click here to see how you can subscribe.
Already a subscriber, please

Note: Some articles do not accept comments at all.


02:50 pm - Tue, January 8 2013
Muddyvalley said:
Well said! Our culture of violence begins in the home, where young children are given violent and bloody video games to keep them occupied. The news media is also to blame, for it is no surprise that another incidence of murder, or attempted mass murder followed often by suicide happens following the media circus of the first. We also glorify war, calling all of our soldiers "heros". While some undoubtedly are, I'm sure that the majority would deny that label.
We already have enough laws on the books. Another law passed from a knee jerk reaction will not solve anything. In fact, just the possibility of another being passed has caused a flood of the very fire arms and high capacity magazines in question to be purchased. The suppliers can't keep up with the demand.
The problem won't be an easy one to solve, but passing more laws won't be the answer. The only consistent winners in court are the lawyers.
08:45 pm - Wed, January 9 2013
Dances with Redwoods said:
Seems like Hollywood film producers are allowed to own (or possess) weaponry not availiable to the rest of American citizens. Is employing the use of such weaponry a 1st Amendment issue not to be infringed upon?

Why do the 1st Amendment rights of Hollywood filmmakers/producers carry more water than that of all other non-politicized Americans?

Where is the sanity in that exercise of power?
08:25 am - Thu, January 10 2013
Dances with Redwoods said:
I mean think about that, who else in America is allowed to rent A-10 Warthog's, Gatling Cannons or just about any other belt/chain-fed fully automatic' Heavy Weapon's that they desire, soley for the purpose of entertainment?

Gotta wonder if actors that have been convicted of a felony ..or.. had/have serious mental health issues are allowed to 'act' with firearms capable of firing real ammunition, and if so, why?

© 1999- News-Register Publishing | © The Associated Press
The News-Register and are owned and operated by News-Register Publishing Co., P.O. Box 727, McMinnville, OR 97128.
All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Web design & powered by LVSYS