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 : opinion April 30, 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 (2227 views)

•   ATV rider the focus of a complicated rescue effort (1987 views)

•   Missing Kingman woman connected to man arrested for identity theft (1931 views)

•   MCSO: Man linked to missing woman is arrested (1603 views)

•   McCain fundraiser arrested following drug raid (1429 views)



Reader Comments

Posted: Tuesday, January 15, 2013
Article comment by: Nice Chuckle

"then chuckles, what is your argument? what is your stand point? your are always on here disagreeing and telling people they are wrong with people but offer no solution of your own. instead of chukling or giggling or whatever it is you do, why dont you offer anything???? i guess its easy to comment on a football game from the bench though."

You see, Teej, this is an opinion page. People offer their opinions, right or wrong. This is not a "let's offer solutions to the world's problems" page.

Of course, I should ask you the same question.


Posted: Tuesday, January 15, 2013
Article comment by: How long

I wonder. I have a really nice Wheatherby bolt action rifle. I can fire say 6-8 rounds with 100% accuracy up to 100 yds per minute.

Because of the one hit one kill ability of such a rifle and shooter. "assault" may be used to define the action by those hating all weapons.

How long until Im considered a terrorist with assault capibilities. The word Assault alone cannot dictate gun legislation.

If it does hunters like myself could lose more then our deer rifles.


Posted: Monday, January 14, 2013
Article comment by: tj denton

then chuckles, what is your argument? what is your stand point? your are always on here disagreeing and telling people they are wrong with people but offer no solution of your own. instead of chukling or giggling or whatever it is you do, why dont you offer anything???? i guess its easy to comment on a football game from the bench though.

Posted: Monday, January 14, 2013
Article comment by: anonymous anonymous

I think the gun issue is like a flu epidemic, it comes around on a regular basis, a new vaccine is proscribed each season and its a never ending cycle! Prohibition during the 1920's proved banning a popular wanted thing is futile, wasted energy, wasted law enforcement energy, creates a black market for the very thing one bans, in fact one would see small machine shops crop up all over the country, folks would hide and do their fire arm thing, enforcement would be feeble at best since one cannot lock up a entire 50% plus of the nation who tend to be gun addicts! No doubt there are those who would try it, but then its like the prohibition era the moralists who felf banning the demons rum would turn us into a better society, only created the Al Capones and other numerous criminal kingpins!

Posted: Monday, January 14, 2013
Article comment by: anonymous anonymous

Amusing how some think laws prevent the criminal from being a criminal, guess one has not been outside very much if one believes this! Moonshiners still make their own alcohol, guns will be sold legally or illegally no matter what laws one passes, there is a old thing called supply and demand, and does anyone truly believe banning drug usage has slowed it down at all? Making burglary, robbery, murder stops it from happening? Some people live in Peyton Place fantasy and some of us just live in the real world! I think this upcoming generation has played to many video games and thinks life is like a video game!

Posted: Monday, January 14, 2013
Article comment by: Frank Lee Speaking

@Edward Tomchin

"3. Strictly regulate ammunition sales so they may be limited and traceable in amount and type
4. Require comprehensive background checks for all gun purchases and transfers
5. Require an ATF-approved safety certification for all gun owners and
6. Establish a national database of all gun ownership."

Not going to happen. Especially #5. and #6. The govt. has no reason to know what guns I have.

#4? If I am not selling a gun to someone outside of AZ, any "transfer" in state could be the states business, but not the feds

And #3? Good luck with that.

Why don't you just admit you're a gun grabber? But I will share your ideas with others.......They all need a good laugh now and then.

@Jo Jack

"Guns are cool if used properly BUT but need stricter rules enforced to own one....like a "cool" car does. Just implement stricter rules for use and ownership in regards to guns."

The last time I checked, i did not need any federal license for my "cool" car. But if you are saying you wish the rules for guns to be left up to the individual states.......we can certainly discuss that

@Lori Hyphenated

"What part of "A well-regulated militia," doesn't anyone understand?"

What part of SCOTUS has ruled on that do you not understand?

LOL


Posted: Monday, January 14, 2013
Article comment by: Nice Chuckle

"If assault weapons were banned...from law abiding citizens...ONLY CRIMINALS WOULD HAVE THEM!"

I love this tired old argument. Let's follow this logic....if we ban cell phones, only criminals will have them. Like the tshirt logo says....if we ban inlaws only outlaws will have them. LoLoL


Posted: Monday, January 14, 2013
Article comment by: Anson's Nephew

@ Woe Is Us

”Only the possibility of a tyrannical government turning on its citizens, or, an attack by an invading army, can be the reason for the 2nd.”

And the Founders did not address “tyrannical government” because ….?

@ az mac

”Yes the founders wrote the second amendment so the people could stop a tyrannical government.”

And you can support that in what part of the Second Amendment?

@ Patrick W

”Maybe Anson can show us where it says the Second Amendment is about duck hunting ? LOL”

Gosh, I can’t do that! Now maybe you can show us where the Second Amendment says anything about over throwing a tyrannical government? LOL!


Posted: Monday, January 14, 2013
Article comment by: Vack Wash

According to the leadership of the NRA,"Currently, a person is banned from buying a gun from a licensed dealer if the person is a fugitive, a felon, convicted of substance abuse, convicted of domestic violence, living in the U.S. illegally or someone who "has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution.""
And, according to the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence "some 40 percent of gun sales happen with no background checks, often at gun shows or through private sellers over the Internet or in classified ads." Is there a compromise here? Is there a solution? Yes there is if legislators will pass laws making private sells of guns illegal. Mush the same way as some states allow the sell of alcohol or Marijuana. There doesn't need to be a ban on guns, there needs to be a ban on gun sells at gun shows, and private sellers on the Internet or classifieds. Only licensed gun sellers at gun shop should sell guns only after a thorough back ground check of the purchaser has been completed. If I own a gun or guns legally and I want to sell my weapons to another individual legally then I should be required to complete the transaction only though a licensed gun shop. The gun shop would do all the necessary background checks , handle the paperwork, making sure that the gun is no longer registered to me is now registered to the new owner and the gun shop sell be paid a commission for doing so. I do however support any recommendations that will ban assault type weapons and magazines/clips holding more than six rounds of ammunition. No one needs this much fire power at their local gun range or to hunt their favorite game animals.


Posted: Monday, January 14, 2013
Article comment by: anonymous anonymous

I think the gun manufacturers, NRA's main inocme source has been going to the bank laughing at all the panic worry about gun confiscation, national gun registry, since even Senator Reid admits no bans could pass congress let alone senate, folks worry to much, as a moderate democrat, pro-2nd amendment voter, this panic is silly, one cannot worry about tomorrow it has not come yet, yesterday is gone, all one has is today! Folks who want all guns banned, national registry will do what they do every crisis, tragedy try and pander it into gaining membership its just not happening for them and guess they remind me of folks who beat their heads against the wall they accomplish nothing but a sore head!

Posted: Sunday, January 13, 2013
Article comment by: gun owner 000

Some of you "dim-bulbs" out there are missing the point.
If assault weapons were banned...from law abiding citizens...ONLY CRIMINALS WOULD HAVE THEM! Remember, stupid, criminals could care less about gun control laws....Anything that's legally banned means they will be the only ones who have them...Wht part of that didn't you understand?


Posted: Sunday, January 13, 2013
Article comment by: nnp .....

Can't we clear this up by pointing out the context in which Jefferson wrote those words? The context was this - that the twin enemies of freedom and safety were the British Government, and Native tribes. The enemies of freedom and safety now are drug addicts/gangs and a Government which has devoured the last couple generations (and arguably, others before) in wars based upon lies and terrorist attacks in which they at least had a prominent hand, using these incidents afterwards to snatch away our historic rights under the most psychopathically-derived misnomers, such as the "Patriot Act". If we can agree that Jefferson and the other Founding Fathers would see things this way - and surely they would - there could be no serious doubt about possessing whatever personal firearms each citizen deemed necessary for defence of hearth and home. Oh, and one more point - something tells me that a citizen of the 1700's would not have faced a lifetime in prison if he had shot one of those Natives outside his front door, particularly if, in the distance, you could see the neighbour's cabin burning and hear their women & children screaming as they're murdered and scalped.

Posted: Sunday, January 13, 2013
Article comment by: Eric Duran

the purpose of the 2nd amendment is that it wasn’t for target shooting or hunting or anything else in that realm. Whether you like it or not or whether you agree with it or not, the reason why 2nd amendment exists is to arm the population in order to overthrow a Tyrannical Government.


Posted: Sunday, January 13, 2013
Article comment by: Edward Tomchin

NOTE: Nothing in this petition entails taking anyone's guns away from them.

I posted the following Petition on We The People in favor of gun regulation.

I would ask that all those who favor such a petition, please go to https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/regulate-sale-and-possession-firearms-follows/8Lppqnzc and sign this petition.

Please post this on Facebook, Twitter and other social sites, email it to your friends and acquaintances, and anyone else you think may be interested. Thank you.

THE PETITION

In order to promote a safe environment for ourselves and our children, the undersigned hereby petition the government of the United States of America to:
1. Reinstate the Federal assault weapons ban
2. Establish a comprehensive buy-back program for all firearms
3. Strictly regulate ammunition sales so they may be limited and traceable in amount and type
4. Require comprehensive background checks for all gun purchases and transfers
5. Require an ATF-approved safety certification for all gun owners and
6. Establish a national database of all gun ownership.

Created: Jan 12, 2013
Issues: Firearms



Posted: Sunday, January 13, 2013
Article comment by: Anson's Nephew

“Curious that everything being pushed and rammed by the Obama administration, the Founders were in fact scared of, and that's in context of the health and prosperity of our nation.”

Actual evidence please. Thank you.

“Therefore we will use you as a teaching tool, and as a teaching moment.”

And still you were unable to show any evidence of a “tyrannical government” portion of the Second Amendment. Teaching moment? Not even close.


Posted: Sunday, January 13, 2013
Article comment by: Lori Gabriel-Dane

To Ombudsman the Gun Lover:

You wrote, "BTW Ms. Gabrial, nothing in your piece addresses anything with the 2nd Amendment. Not one sentence, not one word."

Okay, here's my stance on the Constitution's 2nd Ammendment. Gun-owners (the fanatical ones) and the NRA have misconstrued what it says. What part of "A well-regulated militia," doesn't anyone understand? What "well-regulated militia" do you belong to? And if you're talking about the week-end warriors that play war games out in the desert, they are not "regulated" in any way, shape, or form. They are just as "scary" as any fanatical religious cult that stockpiles weapons. They are just a bunch of paranoid fanatics who are scared of their own shadows (and those black helicopters) and every weekend get to "prove" how tough they are when behind an assault weapon. They are nothing more than doomsday, government-hating, paranoid fools who responsible gunowners and the general public should be more afraid of than any "tyrannical" government taking over America.

(165)


Posted: Sunday, January 13, 2013
Article comment by: Woe Is Us

To "Nephew": What factors could have necessitated the 2nd? The need to hunt? Attacks by Indians? Target shooting? All of these would have been presumed to be reasons for being armed without an amendment. Only the possibility of a tyrannical government turning on its citizens, or, an attack by an invading army, can be the reason for the 2nd. Be rational. Your comments have been shot full of holes!

Posted: Sunday, January 13, 2013
Article comment by: az mac

Anson's Nephew
Looks like you only picked what you want to hear about what I wrote. Yes the founders wrote the second amendment so the people could stop a tyrannical government . Much in the constitution that it protects is not written down in the constitution. You must read all the founding documents to know what the founders were thinking.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government" -- Thomas Jefferson, 1 Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334


Posted: Sunday, January 13, 2013
Article comment by: Patrick W

Maybe Anson can show us where it says the Second Amendment is about duck hunting ? LOL

Posted: Sunday, January 13, 2013
Article comment by: Concerned Citizen

Let address some of the issues brought up in these comments. The 2nd Amendment had nothing to do with over throwing a tyranical government. The 2nd had everything to do with protecting the country with a militia (National Guard). For those of you who need a history lesson, we have not had a continuously standing Army or Navy since Independence. Both Army and Navy were disbanded shortly after the Revolution because of money, and the Coast Guard IS the oldest continuous service in the U.S. Next, assault weapons such as the AR-15 which is the civilian version of the M-16 can not be automatic and one hallmark of an assault weapon is the fact the ammo is actually designed to tear the flesh and cause damage, the same reason you don't hunt with them. Most people can not use a handgun when they are scared with any accurracy, racking a pump shotgun has been proven to scare thieves since pointing in the direction of the target you have a good chance of doing damage. By the way mom, the reason law enforcement have AR-15's in the units is because they are assault weapons.

Posted: Saturday, January 12, 2013
Article comment by: Anson's Nephew

“… in a few years they say oh well you know the hand gun violence is just to bad we need to ban them.”

It’s always fascinating to see this same tired old argument dragged up. We had an assault weapon ban that remained in place for ten years until the only convicted criminal to ever occupy the White House allowed it to expire. In those ten years no one came forward with a handgun ban – as was predicted prior to the institution of the assault weapon ban.

But then the only way to marshal the forces of the intellectually challenged is through fear.


Posted: Saturday, January 12, 2013
Article comment by: Anson's Nephew

“I agree that a shotgun is a good choice for the average person WITH some qualifiers.”

Thank you for agreeing with me. And BTW, any weapon – including a stick of dynamite – would have “some qualifiers.”


Posted: Saturday, January 12, 2013
Article comment by: our own worst enemy Mr. C,

A shorten version of what all of us want, Guns out the hands of "criminals", Guns out of the hands of "anyone" deemed to be a danger to Him/Her self or to someone else.

The laws are on the books in every state in the union. There are statues enforceable by ATF, I take issue with 100 round clips and the like, As a "sportsman". But, and this is a big BUT I don't live high up in the mountains or way outside yonder and varmint shoot anymore or I would probably want a 1000 round clip..... The ammunition makers would just love me!!!

So let us do the sensible things that needs to be done "NOW" Protect our schools. Make it "impossible" for any killer to get to their intended target and just as importantly enforce the laws we now have. My god how many more have to die or be injured by stupidity??????

P.S. For a short while my 2nd amendment rights were violated, I didn't get all bent out of shape over it, End of story.......


Posted: Saturday, January 12, 2013
Article comment by: Jo Jack

cars may be considered "cool" but you have to take a written and driving (ability) test to operate one and you have to pay for registration and insurance to cover for bodily harm etc... Just FYI, commercial drivers license holders have to take a physical every two years in order to renew their cdl license. So why shouldn't there be an exam for a gun owner? Guns are cool if used properly BUT but need stricter rules enforced to own one....like a "cool" car does. Just implement stricter rules for use and ownership in regards to guns.

Posted: Saturday, January 12, 2013
Article comment by: Patrick W

@ Why is the rage only one sided

I'm not a Republican or a conservative , so we would probable agree about GW .



Page 1  - Page 2 -  Page 3



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