world

House Democrats examine ways to reduce gun violence

27 Comments
By MATTHEW DALY

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2019 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

27 Comments
Login to comment

The Democrats are trying to find a cure for the wrong problem.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

The Democrats are trying to find a cure for the wrong problem.

Yeah why can’t they focus more on real problems like crime by immigrants, and terrorism? Those combined must kill way more Americans than gun violence, right?

Right?

.....right?

1 ( +5 / -4 )

National Emergency.

Done.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

And it's an actual real national emergency, not one made up by the Republicans.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

They are not gun safety laws, they are gun control laws.

Address gun violence by swiftly putting those that commit violent crimes behind bars with no parole.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Hopefully, they will follow the numbers and work to address the areas with the most impact and in the most cost-effective manner?

https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2016/crime-in-the-u.s.-2016/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-4.xls Data is for the USA.

1 Handguns are by-far the most likely weapon used to harm others. About 7100 murders in 2016. 4 Knives and other sharp objects, about 1600 killed. 6 Rifles, about 375 murders, so 18x less than handguns.

Not all firearms bring the same risks, but 11K out of 15K murders did use a firearm of one type or another.

Data for firearm injuries is said to be "unstable and potentially unreliable" by the CDC. That's the only reason I used murders above and not injuries.

Every life matters.

Mandatory locks/safes. Like a seat belt law.

Mandatory training and re-training. Like a drivers license.

Background checks for all firearms, no loopholes. There are existing ownership transfer methods already using a licensed 3rd party.

Mental health reporting (no idea how to do this in a way that respects patients privacy). Like an eye test to get a DL.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

If Trump declares a national emergency to get his wall, the next Democratic president -- likely in 2020, can Simply declare gun violence a national emergency and change the second amendment. people like bass4funk will have no choice but to hand over his 24 guns by law, or go to prison. Problem solved. And guns are ACTUALLY a national crisis.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Who needs a gun? Only law enforcement and national security.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

If Trump declares a national emergency to get his wall, the next Democratic president -- likely in 2020, can Simply declare gun violence a national emergency and change the second amendment.

Then we will have a civil war for sure, I have NO doubt about it.

people like bass4funk will have no choice but to hand over his 24 guns by law, or go to prison. Problem solved. And guns are ACTUALLY a national crisis.

I won’t ever have to worry about.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Then we will have a civil war for sure, I have NO doubt about it.

Repubs seem all up for that. It's a form of fanatacism, or mental illness - the fetish of gun ownership. I've seen the damage gun-madness has done in my own country and it takes bravery, non-partisanship and often outside help to reduce the disease.

I won’t ever have to worry about.

True that. The elite has little worries to pause over. They'd rather see it all as a game and tend to sneer at those brave souls who put their lives on the line to tackle this huge problem.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

people ... will have no choice but to hand over his 24 guns by law, or go to prison.

Hopefully. There's been one or two "residents" who've claimed in the past that they carry whilst on public transport. Which, if true, is illegal.

Don't let the disease spread to Japan.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Repubs seem all up for that. It's a form of fanatacism, or mental illness - the fetish of gun ownership. I've seen the damage gun-madness has done in my own country and it takes bravery, non-partisanship and often outside help to reduce the disease.

I have the opposite of not being able to have a gun on multiple occasions. I could care less about any gun hater that doesn’t understand our 2nd amendment. Liberals want to tell, the millions of gun owners that are law abiding citizens what they can or cannot have or telling them they have NO right to defend themselves, enjoy hunting, collecting or just outright owning a firearm, I know story of people that wouldn’t be here today had they not owned a firearm. This sickly obsession of the left to try and disarm us will ultimately fail and miserably.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Who needs a gun? Only law enforcement and national security.

And Americans that love and cherish the 2nd amendment, very proud.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

I know story of people that wouldn’t be here today had they not owned a firearm

And how many people do you not know because some nutter had a gun?

You don't know, because they're dead.

 Americans that love and cherish the 2nd amendment, very proud.

Very crazy

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

And how many people do you not know because some nutter had a gun? 

You don't know, because they're dead.

I can only speak for the people I know and the hundreds of people I have met as an NRA member and supporter.

Very crazy

I respect your opinion, but I disagree.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Weird. Republicans get all freely about a dude kneeling in a soccer game, yet threaten to take to the streets with guns, while breaking the law.

Seems they’ve lost their moral path.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

I can only speak for the people I know and the hundreds of people I have met as an NRA member and supporter.

You mean you base your opinion solely on what you hear inside the gun-nutter bubble.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

You mean you base your opinion solely on what you hear inside the gun-nutter bubble.

No, but Cleo, you don’t need to get upset. You don’t like guns, I get it, I do. You don’t like or understand our 2nd amendment, I do and I cherish it. You don’t like hunters, I live for the hunt and very proud to be a hunter. You would gladly see our 2nd amendment go away, or be abolished. I would fight to keep it with everything I have. We just have a difference of opinions and values, that’s all.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Who cares what you cherish? National emergency. People are dying, Bypass Congress. Done,

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Who cares what you cherish?

Back at the 2nd amendment haters.

National emergency. People are dying, Bypass Congress. Done.

Civil War breaks out, all the Blue States have the ocean and seafood and we have the main food, guns amo and “breadbasket” of America, people going get tired of eating fish only and the Vegans will starve, National Emergency ceasefire. 24 hours later, done. Lol

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Great. Civil war breaks out. And you'll be on the front lines, I suppose.

You don't really get the overall point here. You keep arguing for the 2nd Amendment. If you cherish it, then don't give the executive branch the power to take it away when he or she wants without going through Congress.

Trump fans don't understand that they aren't doing anything for Trump personally or putting some kind of one-time law on the books. It's about increasing the power of the presidency for the next president and beyond. Trump is temporary, the powers of the President are permanent.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

You don't really get the overall point here. You keep arguing for the 2nd Amendment. If you cherish it, then don't give the executive branch the power to take it away when he or she wants without going through Congress.

Has nothing to do with the executive branch, but if the Democrats (if they ever get back into power again) were to initiate such a move, to confiscate 150 million firearms by executive order, Washington would come under serious fire (no pun intended) like nothing every seen before.

Trump fans don't understand that they aren't doing anything for Trump personally or putting some kind of one-time law on the books.

I disagree with that. Trump could do the Democrat way by bending over and throwing in the towel, but that’s not his style.

It's about increasing the power of the presidency for the next president and beyond. Trump is temporary, the powers of the President are permanent

And the way the Democrats are going at this rate, the Presidency will elude them for a very long time, but hey, they’ll always have Nancy. ROFL!

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Who needs a gun? Only law enforcement and national security.

Since the Bill of Rights became law, owning a firearm is more protected than owning a motor vehicle or a horse. If the US gets 2/3rds of the voters to agree, then the 2nd amendment will be modified.

Who "needs" a firearm? Anyone who lives on the edge of wilderness with dangerous animals that harm/kill children and adults. This guy: https://japantoday.com/category/world/update-1-colorado-jogger-strangles-mountain-lion-after-attack-on-trail for example. Dogs and insects/bees cause many more injuries/deaths than larger animals. We need to pay attention to the numbers, right?

Humans are the most deadly animal to other humans. The data being gathered today is poor as it relates to weapons used by humans to harm other humans. Start with a law to mandate detailed data recording. We need the facts to build responsible arguments. Having zero firearms isn't possible, but restrictions on ownership, transportation and sales/transfers are possible. We need to start there, using data.

In Tokyo and many large cities, it is easy to say that nobody needs a firearm. But when you live 45 minutes from any law enforcement, enjoy hunting, then your view might change.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

I do and I cherish it

From Japan? Because Japan has no NRA2A

0 ( +2 / -2 )

1) Repeal the 2nd Amendment (there are no more "militias" in the US)

2) Forcibly take away everyone's guns and destroy them

0 ( +2 / -2 )

1) Repeal the 2nd Amendment (there are no more "militias" in the US)

2) Forcibly take away everyone's guns and destroy them

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

1) Repeal the 2nd Amendment (there are no more "militias" in the US)

But there are millions of hunters, goooood luck with that. I give it a 99.9% chance it’ll fail.

2) Forcibly take away everyone's guns and destroy them.

I give that a 110% chance of that not only failing, but even happening, the Democrats party would cease o exist because remember this, there are millions of liberals that own guns, so if the Democrats really want to screw themselves on this on this one, I hope they try. I want them to, that’ll make their stay in Washington a very short one.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites