Does America Need More Gun Control? [Poll]

In the wake of the movie theater massacre in Colorado which left 12 people dead, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has called on President Barack Obama and presumptive Republican nominee Mitt Romney to push for stricter gun laws.

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg is calling on President Obama and presumptive Republican nominee Mitt Romney to propose stricter gun control laws following last week's which left 12 people dead and 59 wounded in Colorado, The Huffington Post reports

“This really is an enormous problem for the country, and it's up to these two presidential candidates," Bloomberg said, according to the Huffington Post. "They want to lead this country,and they've said things before that they're in favor of banning things like assault weapons. Where are they now and why don't they stand up? And if they want our votes, they better.”

According to The Huffington Post, the alleged Colorado shooter, James Holmes, acquired his arsenal of weapons, ammunition and body armor over several months from the Internet and brick-and-mortar stores alike. His purchases did not raise any red flags. 

Proponents of gun rights, however, argue that a vast majority of gun owners are law-abiding citizens and that criminals who commit these kinds of massacres aren't obeying laws already in place, so wouldn't obey stricter ones either. 

Dudley Brown, executive director of Rocky Mountain Gun Owners, commented on Holmes' 6,000 rounds of ammunition for an assault rifle.

"If I only had 6,000 rounds for my AR-15s, I'd literally feel naked," Brown said, according to The Huffington Post. Holmes' arsenal included "two handguns, a shotgun and a rifle. That's the average male in Colorado."

John M. Joy July 23, 2012 at 10:04 PM
Um, actually the problem is that NOBODY in the theater other than the shooter had a weapon. Had it been otherwise, he might have been stopped after having only gotten a few shots off. So, no, if anything, we need FEWER restrictions.
Ed Rowland July 23, 2012 at 11:00 PM
We have all been witness to what more rules and regulations do for Americans.The middle class will be regulated out of existance within the next decade.The strong majority of gun owners are ordinary people that are law abiding.More regulations will not help.
Paul Singley July 24, 2012 at 09:37 AM
These comments were posted to the same article, which was accidentally published twice on Oxford Patch. Apologies. Dave 10:04 pm on Monday, July 23, 2012 No. Reply Delete Abe 5 hours ago "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 Reply Delete Watts 2 hours ago Abe, not clear if you quoted that believing their was some relevance still left to that quote or to show just how out out of date that thinking is.
Realist July 24, 2012 at 01:43 PM
Millions of sane adults own and use firearms responsibly. Taking that right away from them solves nothing. The one area I have to agree with is the suggestion that there be ban on the sale of assault weapons. I can find no reason for owning what is essentially a machine gun.
John M. Joy July 24, 2012 at 02:04 PM
To possess an automatic weapon leagally, one must jump through a barrage of licensing hoops. That has been the law since the National Firearms Act of 1934.
Ed July 24, 2012 at 09:06 PM
The reason for owning machine guns is to be on at least somewhat more even footing if the people must ever violently put down tyranny. Ditto tactical explosives. But what we're really missing is the culture of the Militia in the proper sense - all the able-bodied people training together as a community, electing our own officers and putting the power of the sword back in our own hands, not in those of corrupt, usually criminal, politicians.
Joe Blow July 25, 2012 at 04:15 AM
Where is the poll?????!!!!!
Paul Singley July 25, 2012 at 09:56 AM
Added it. Apologies
Rick Fain July 25, 2012 at 12:24 PM
DOWN with all GUNS. WE and the people DO NOT NEED GUNS AROUND. Most people that have gun are NOT ordinary people that are law abiding they are no good and "DO NOT CARE ABOUT THE LAW. You read about the guns people have every day and if you don't read about it you heard about it.
Bruce Kraemer July 25, 2012 at 01:22 PM
As in Milford on Saturday I would much rather have a gun than a phone in my hands. When you need help how long do you think it will be before they get there?
JNG July 25, 2012 at 01:33 PM
More likely...Deregulated out of existence. How did removing banking regulations work out for the economy?
John M. Joy July 25, 2012 at 01:53 PM
It probably would have worked out just fine, had the institutions which made bad investments been allowed to fail and be liquidated, rather than being bailed out.
JNG July 25, 2012 at 02:16 PM
Seems to me when Shearsen was allowed to collapsed half the economy went with it. Some regulations are needed in life. We regulate ourselves or get into a mess. Is it good to allow the mess? Not always. Car safety is regulated, would we be better off and safer if people were allowed to drive whatever they wished? How about if anyone could drive without a license? Practice medicine without regulation? Trust me, I am in the Land Use field and find this area to have valid regulations as well as ridiculous regulations which are abused by people with little knowledge of the issues, but authority to make decisions. God gave ten commandments, which Jesus narrowed down to two. Man has added thousands of new rules. If two wouldn't be followed, howso the added ones?
John M. Joy July 25, 2012 at 02:32 PM
The economy went with it and NEVER CAME BACK. Had the rest of the trash been taken out as well, and the books cleared, we wouldn't be contending with a zombie economy. Re: thousands - How so, indeed. I'm sure you're familiar with what's become known as the "helmet paradox" - sometimes, actions taken to promote safety can actually induce risk. Likewise (and speaking of car safety): as someone in land use, I'm sure you're also familiar with the work of the late Hans Monderman. In economics, a related principle is typically called "moral hazard."
Chief Waldo July 26, 2012 at 01:04 AM
If it wasn't for deregulation, the economy wouldn't have collapsed. There wouldn't be any "trash to take out" or a "zombie economy". On the other hand, the last time government allowed banks to fail without bail outs, we ended up in the Great Depression. Those who don't learn from the past are doomed to repeat it.
John M. Joy July 26, 2012 at 01:10 AM
The Great Depression was the direct result of the most heinous act of regulation the economy has ever seen: the establishment of the Federal Reserve, December 23, 1913. The actions of the Fed caused, to the benefit of the politically well-connected, the boom of the 1920s, as well as the subsequent bust.
Chris Sakelarakis July 26, 2012 at 03:02 AM
Down with all guns? Are you really that stupid? The last check the people have against criminals and government is our 2nd amendment rights to defend ourselves. We have soooooo many laws on the books regulating guns it's ridiculous. Fact check before you spout off about guns or any other subject . And do u think if all guns are banned you will be safe? Only the criminals and govt will have guns. Like Peter Jennings reminded us a few years ago , the folks with the guns get the food. And whatever else they want I'm sure. Picture just a few licensed patrons in that theater in colorodo , the second he started firing at concealed carry permitees he's shot down. Sad but THINK ABOUT IT.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something