Home | Real Estate Search | Classifieds | Place an Ad | Public Notices | Galleries | Obituaries | Subscriber Services | Kingman Digital | Contact Us
Kingman Daily Miner | Kingman, Arizona

home : opinion : letters April 29, 2016


1/11/2013 6:00:00 AM
Kingman Letters: No reason to own assault weapon

My heart and prayers go out to the families of the school shooting in Connecticut. This was such a tragedy.

With that being said, let's talk guns. As everyone in my family has at least one gun, none of us owns an assault weapon. I do not understand what the need is to have one of these. None of us wants to ban all guns, just these deadly assault weapons. I don't care who you are, you have no defense against a assault weapon of any kind.

I am a corrections officer watching over 3,500 inmates and we have no need for those types of weapons. We do carry a shotgun and a 9mm handgun. We do not need to carry assault weapons of any kind.

If law enforcement does not feel the need to carry them, then what need would a civilian have to carry or own one? As I stated, my whole family owns guns and no one wants them banned. We all believe in defending our homes and families, but does a person really need an assault weapon to do this? I do not think so.

I am concerned for my children and grandkids going to school or just walking down the street with assault weapons out there. You never know if someone is having a bad day and doesn't like the way they look or talk or anything. Assault weapons do not just kill, they tear a person to shreds when they are shot with one. To me, that is total overkill.

A person has a chance of surviving a shot by a handgun (depending on where they are shot) but no chance with an assault weapon. Assault weapons should be banned, not handguns or rifles or shotguns, but true assault weapons.

Penny Gabriel

Kingman


    Most Viewed     Recently Commented
•   20-year sentence possible for murder in Yucca (2026 views)

•   ATV rider the focus of a complicated rescue effort (1579 views)

•   McCain fundraiser arrested following drug raid (1231 views)

•   Missing Kingman woman connected to man arrested for identity theft (1042 views)

•   Arsenic is not the threat we've been told it is (Guest Opinion) (615 views)



Reader Comments

Posted: Wednesday, January 23, 2013
Article comment by: np ...

When I was stationed in Germany over 40 years ago in the U.S. Army, a GI stole a tank, drove it to the home of a young gal whom he had been seeing but whose (German) parents had forbidden the GI to visit any longer. It only took a couple turret blasts to level the house. He drove off with the willing girl. NOW do you oppose personal ownership of tanks?

Posted: Friday, January 18, 2013
Article comment by: Frank Lee Speaking

@Ansons Nephew

Yeah, the war on drugs has been such a success.........What makes you think if someone owned an old tank they could not, with some work, get ammo on the underground market. All it takes is money.

I am reminded of videos I have seen of the damage done by someone who stole a tank. Then there was a really angry guy who turned a dozer into a "tank" with sheet steel and pretty much trashed his small town.

Machine guns? You could have stuck with the short answer.......Yes, you can own them. And considering there are ranges where you can rent and fire them, there must be more than enough of them.

Fortunatly, if it is as easy to convert weapons from semi to full auto as gun-grabbers often screech, we will always have them available to us. So there is a bright side.

LOL


Posted: Thursday, January 17, 2013
Article comment by: Anson's Nephew

“You can't own a tank - Yes you can, with the proper permit.”

But not an armed tank.

”You can't own a fighter jet. - Yes you can, with the proper permit.”

But not an armed fighter jet.

”You can't own a machine gun - Yes you can, with the proper permit.”

Not exactly correct. Since the Firearms Owners' Protection Act of 1986, ownership of newly manufactured machine guns has been prohibited to civilians, period.

Machine guns manufactured prior to the Act's passage are regulated under the National Firearms Act and can be purchased only with special permission of the Treasury Department and subject to a complete FBI background check that includes any criminal history or tendency towards violence, along with an application that includes two sets of fingerprints, a photograph, and a sworn statement that the transfer of the weapon is of “reasonable necessity” and that the possession of the weapon “would be consistent with public safety,” and lastly the application must also contain the signature of a law enforcement. So yes – it is possible to own a machine gun.


Posted: Thursday, January 17, 2013
Article comment by: Frank Lee Speaking

@Think Tank

"When our Constitution was written they didn't have weapons that you could just keep pulling on a trigger and shooting. You had to reload. That is the way it should be and honestly,...."

I have also heard people just like you say that we should be restricted to muzzle loading weapons because that was all that was available at the time. Please, oh please, respond and tell me you believe that as well.

Will you be scrapping your computer and going with parchment and quill pen to exercise your 1st Amendment right in the future? That or a hand operated printing press are what the founding fathers intended, using your logic.

"You can't own nuclear weapons even though they are an "arm". It is because they are too dangerous for the safety of the general public."

No one thinks you should be able to own those. But please, feel free to offer proof that anyone ever has said we should be allowed to.

I have seen your brain dead gun grabber logic used elsewhere for other things considered "arms".

You can't own a tank - Yes you can, with the proper permit.

You can't own a fighter jet. - Yes you can, with the proper permit.

You can't own a machine gun - Yes you can, with the proper permit.

Come back when you are ready to leave the kiddy end of the debating pool.

LOL


Posted: Thursday, January 17, 2013
Article comment by: Almost Correct

@ I read that a few days ago

"Yea...The AR rifle was in the trunk of the car during the shootings at the school."

I have to correct you. The gun AR was found in a car and it wasn't the killers.

http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/340113


Posted: Thursday, January 17, 2013
Article comment by: Frank Lee Speaking

@So Tired

"I am sure your assault rifle will protect you against the armored tanks and predator drones. Get real!"

Yeah because we have done such a great job with all of our advanced weaponry in defeating a bunch of goat herding terrorists in Afghanistan........Oh, wait a minute. LoL

I can't wait for you to respond and explain why after years and years, countless lives lost, and billions of dollars spent they are still winning and will take over ten minutes after we leave. So much for our superior weapons.

And besides that, how willing do you think much of our military will be to turn their weapons on fellow citizens? It may be a lot less than you think.

LOL


Posted: Thursday, January 17, 2013
Article comment by: Patrick W

I kind of wonder if you anti Second Amendment people aren't really in cahoots with the guns& ammo industry , since it was your hysteria over this latest incident that sparked the buying frenzy . LOL

2011 FBI Murders stats by means :

1694 Knives
726 Hands & feet
496 Clubs & Hammers
323 Rifles of any type

Is this what you're hysterical about ? It looks like you'll have to ban a few other things before you get to so called "assault weapons "


Posted: Thursday, January 17, 2013
Article comment by: I read that a few days ago

Yea...The AR rifle was in the trunk of the car during the shootings at the school.

You can bet your life no Media is going to come on and say...."Sorry folks we demonized this rifle for a month without proof it was involved".

One of our biggest problems in America is our Media. I believe in free speech....However, I wish it had to be proven CORRECT before its printed as FACT.

So now that the rifle is innocent.....what do we do?


Posted: Thursday, January 17, 2013
Article comment by: anonymous anonymous

All this controversy, anger, fear is being ginned up by both sides of this issue by the right wing media and the left wing media which sees a ratings benefit! Guns and gun control has been debated for decades, much like alcohol we have those who if given the power would ban it, make it illegal, same with tobacco, immorality, etc., etc., we have always had folks who felt they had the right to impose their view of the world on others its just human nature I guess! Good thing our forefathers knew this and wrote our constitution and designed our government with so many safe guards into it those who wanna-be tyrants of any kind will fal!

Posted: Thursday, January 17, 2013
Article comment by: No One No Where

@AN

You and most everybody else know perfectly well that the 2nd Amendment doesn't explicitly say that the right to keep and bear arms is so that the people will have the arms necessary to overthrow a tyrannical government and reinstate it with one of the people. It has to be taken with the context of the time period it was written and with the other written words of the founders surrounding the Constitution, such as the Federalist papers etc.

Here is a question for you, where in the 4th Amendment does it say explicitly that it protects a women's right to have an abortion and kill an unborn child? Where in the 1st Amendment does it explicitly say that it protects the right of media outlets to produce and distribute pornography? Neither of them do. But the SCOTUS has interpreted them as doing exactly that. Just as they have ruled that the 2nd Amendment protects the individual right to keep and bear arms.


Posted: Wednesday, January 16, 2013
Article comment by: tj denton

is anyone else here keeping in mind that assault rifles werent even used in the school shootings, they were hand guns. you liberals just use any excuse you can find to try and limit personal liberties out of your fears! and this is just what you need to exploit it.

Posted: Wednesday, January 16, 2013
Article comment by: bobby J

@penny gaberial I work at the prison and you are claiming that there are no assault rifles utilized at the facility. either you havent worked at the prison very long or just wander aimlessly throughout your job because located in the weapons room is an arsenal of assault rifles. You dont supervise 3500 inmates either, 1500 are on the hualapai yard and 2000 are on the cerbat. you dont work both yards! just speaking some truth into this.

Posted: Wednesday, January 16, 2013
Article comment by: Anson's Nephew

“I'm sure if you look hard enough you'll probably find it next to the right to an abortion . LOL”

Actually the “right” to an abortion is not guaranteed in the Constitution – but anyone actually studying the Constitution would know that.

However, the Supreme Court in Roe V Wade (410 U.S. 113) in 1973, in a 7-2 decision, recognized the right to privacy under the due process clause of the 14th Amendment extended to a woman’s right to have an abortion.

So you’re “LOL” demonstrates nothing more than a lack of understanding of the Constitution and how it applies to the rights of Americans.


Posted: Wednesday, January 16, 2013
Article comment by: So Tired

What is wrong with this country? It is all about My Guns, My Constitution, My Beliefs, My Family. When did we stop using common sense? When are the people so worried about their rights worry about everyone else's rights? I should not have to think that someone with an assault weapon is going to mow myself and thirty other people down in a movie theatre before 30 seconds is over. Please--wake up and smell the dollars!! The NRA would have you thinking it would be a cinch to fire a bullit into someone who would have you dead before you could blink, let alone pull out your own gun. It helps them to scare you and think all of your neighbors are ready to roll over for the "imagined" government that is going to take your guns away. I am sure your assault rifle will protect you against the armored tanks and predator drones. Get real! The NRA is working for the gun manufacturing industry and they are helping them put guns into the hands of people that don't have a clue to what damage they can do until the damage is done. And if you think all the guns that are being sold now after the latest shootings are being bought by private citizens to protect their families, you are truly naive. If they are outlawed--these buyer will be out selling them to anyone with the big money to pay. Just like the bank lobby, the health care lobby, the defense lobby--It is about good old fashioned greed. Let's use some common sense. (And for all you second amendment people-look up the Heller decision by the Supreme Court).

Posted: Wednesday, January 16, 2013
Article comment by: Anson's Nephew

“You need to educate yourself on the Second Amendment. Again, it is to have enough fire power to go against a tyrannical government. You know, obama's government right now.”

And still you have failed to offer any evidence that the second Amendment says anything about tyrannical government. When are you going to share that information with us?


Posted: Wednesday, January 16, 2013
Article comment by: vock canyhon

So what you are saying if I where black cloths and look scary I too will be considered an assult weapon?

The very weapon that you carry the 9mm, is an assult weopon. Shotguns (blunderbust) have been used in almost all wars since their invention.

Our conntry, it's stability, beliefs and fredoms are based on our constitution. Why would you want to change it so that only you can own firearms? Are you willing to protect our rights? I think not......

Our forefathers saw that our freedoms can't be trusted to any government, even our own government. Strange, again as in our forefathers time, our government is trying to take away our freedoms.

We have fire extingushers in each school room, simply arm some of the teachers that wish to carry and pay them extra for getting the training to use them.


Posted: Wednesday, January 16, 2013
Article comment by: larry townsend

For evryone to know NBC admitted last night that there was no AR pattern rifle used @ the Newtown school massacre.The weapons were 2 9mm pistols with Conn legal magazines.Again inaccurate reporting leads to hysteria.and the second ammendant comes under attack

Posted: Wednesday, January 16, 2013
Article comment by: anonymous anonymous

Limiting a magazine clip capacity does what? As a old jar head vietnam era, some of use to tape two clips end to end doubled the capacity depending on ones dexterity in flipping the clips in reloading, now unless one has arthritus, crippled hands 7 round clips taped end to end gives a quick reload of 14 rounds, do this with 6 clips one has 42 rounds guess how fast one can drop the clip and flip it is how fast one can fire and reload! Revolvers have speed loaders, sorry I just do not think knee jerk reactions accomplish much other than gives someone a feel good moment!

Posted: Wednesday, January 16, 2013
Article comment by: Nice Chuckle

@Linda

"You need to educate yourself on the Second Amendment.

Again, it is to have enough fire power to go against a tyrannical government."

You are still making this claim. I, among others, have asked you for proof of where in the Second Amendment those words are mentioned. You still can't do it. And yet, you make the claim again.


Posted: Wednesday, January 16, 2013
Article comment by: Patrick W

@ Anson's Nephew

"Gosh , I can't do that ..."

I'm sure if you look hard enough you'll probably find it next to the right to an abortion . LOL


Posted: Wednesday, January 16, 2013
Article comment by: Linda Athens

Lori:

You need to educate yourself on the Second Amendment.

Again, it is to have enough fire power to go against a tyrannical government. You know, obama's government right now.

I am so sick of the liberals throwing around the term assault weapon. You can beat someone in the head with a brick and kill them and that brick would be an assault weapon.

And just because one gun looks scarier than another, doesn't mean it automatically should be banned Dianne Feinstein. You who actually have a carry license yourself for your own protection. But that's different. You're a liberal politician. There are apparently different laws for you libs.


Posted: Wednesday, January 16, 2013
Article comment by: Check Your Facts

@ Think Tank - You would be enlightened if you were to research the term "regulated" as it was used in the time the 2nd Amendment was written. It does not mean what you seem to think it does for a "well-regulated militia".

Posted: Wednesday, January 16, 2013
Article comment by: Capt. Nice

I have 22 caliber rifles that I have had since I was 11 years old that hold 15 rounds, I guess these would be considered assault rifles. I also have a rifle with a thumb hole and a tripod that weighs 17 lbs and I guess from the looks of it, you gun haters would consider this an assault rife.
What gets me, you hear nothing from the left about protecting our kids, all you hear is trying to get rid of guns which is their agenda....what a joke they are to think that is going to happen in this country. Government can't do anything about 20 million illegals so how are they going to collect 300 million legal guns.
To the guard at a prison, I will bet that if there was a big break out the assault rifles would come out in truck loads.....who you trying to fool?


Posted: Wednesday, January 16, 2013
Article comment by: Frank Harris

You forget one Ed. Fingerprint sensor triggers.

Posted: Tuesday, January 15, 2013
Article comment by: Think Tank

Everyone on here is suddenly a fan of semantics huh? Seriously though I don't see any good explanation as to why anyone should have a weapon with more than six shots in a magazine. If you can't hit the guy coming at you with six shots you are more of a danger to the people around you than the other guy anyway. I don't care if you call it "assault" or "enhanced capacity" it should be banned.
You can't own nuclear weapons even though they are an "arm". It is because they are too dangerous for the safety of the general public. We need to define as a country where the line is. I don't agree that the Second Amendment gives everyone the right to bear arms (not so sure why everyone skips that "well regulated militia" part) but it was decided long ago that it does mean that so it should continued to be enforced as such, that we each have an individual right to bear arms. That doesn't mean I should be allowed to deal in uranium because it is "cool" and "the Constitution protects my right to". When our Constitution was written they didn't have weapons that you could just keep pulling on a trigger and shooting. You had to reload. That is the way it should be and honestly, that is the way our Founding Fathers intended it to be.
WC 234



  - Page 1 -  Page 2



Article Comment Submission Form
Comments are not posted immediately. Submissions must adhere to our Use of Service Terms of Use agreement. Rambling or nonsensical comments may not be posted. Comments are limited to Facebook character limits. In order for us to reasonably manage this feature we may limit excessive comment entries.
Submit an Article Comment
First Name:
Required
Last Name:
Required
Telephone:
Required
Email:
Required
Comment:
Required
Passcode:
Required
Anti-SPAM Passcode Click here to see a new mix of characters.
This is an anti-SPAM device. It is not case sensitive.
   


Advanced Search

Find more about Weather in Kingman, AZ
Click for weather forecast



Find it Features Blogs Milestones Extras Submit Other Publications Local Listings
Real Estate Search | Classifieds | Place an Ad | Find Kingman Jobs | Kingman Chamber | e-News | Contact Us | RSS | Site Map
© Copyright 2016 Western News&Info, Inc.® The Kingman Daily Miner is the information source for Kingman and surrounding area communities in Northern Arizona. Original content may not be reprinted or distributed without the written permission of Western News&Info, Inc.® Kingman Daily Miner Online is a service of WNI. By using the Site, kdminer.com ®, you agree to abide and be bound by the Site's terms of use and Privacy Policy, which prohibit commercial use of any information on the Site. Click here to email your questions, comments or suggestions. Kingman Daily Miner Online is a proud publication of Western News&Info, Inc.® All Rights Reserved.


Software © 1998-2016 1up! Software, All Rights Reserved