When I watched President Obama answer questions from audience members a couple weeks ago during the town hall meeting he held in Belgrade to discuss health care, there was one man whose first words to him were that he’s a “proud NRA member” “ utterly ridiculous.
Then there was the following day in Grand Junction, Colo., where NRA members proudly but quietly demonstrated, showing off their guns. Nothing screams red neck more than waving weapons to show the president how much they deserve their right to bear them. Funny how gun control has nothing to do with health care “ oh wait, except, when someone gets shot. Then I guess it has a lot to do with it.
 Shootin’ the breeze Louisa Barber |
Now, I realize there will always be murders and accidental injuries even without taking all guns away, but perhaps instituting heavy gun control would mean one less weapon to use in killing or injuring someone. I also wonder about that Second Amendment’s right to bear arms. While I believe the argument’s outdated, there’s always the possibility of “what if?” What if this country is invaded? There are always people crazy enough to try it. And what about the responsible hunters? There’s got to be a way to allow people to hunt without getting guns into the wrong hands.
But as it currently stands, gun shops require background checks before a customer can purchase a firearm. However, that isn’t stopping gang members or offenders from getting their hands on them. It’s estimated that 80 percent of those with criminal history get guns from family, friends, a street buy or an illegal source (again from the department of justice).
Perhaps most eye-opening in the debate is Michael Moore’s movie “Bowling for Columbine,” which explores gun violence in the United States. As much as I dislike him, Moore makes some compelling statements. At one point, he compares the United States, which is by far the highest, to several major countries in the number of deaths by firearms. There are those who believe that Obama, in all his liberal glory, is out to take all guns away. However, clearly something must be done, and if it was up to me there would definitely be heavy restrictions.
Louisa Barber is a reporter for the Sidney Herald. She can be reached at 406-433-2403 | reporter@sidneyherald.com
Comments
john wrote on Feb 3, 2010 6:57 AM:
Bill wrote on Dec 23, 2009 11:59 AM:
"thenewamerican.com/world-mainmenu-26/europe-mainmenu-35/717" "
Hey wrote on Dec 17, 2009 3:06 AM:
amazed wrote on Sep 9, 2009 6:44 PM:
Blue in a Sea of Red wrote on Sep 1, 2009 3:35 AM:
Unfortunately, those type of persons will obtain a weapon if they really want one by stealing it or buying one from the street.
I agree we have the right to bear arms, to protect ourselves and our property. Remeber the saying, if guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns. "
hello wrote on Aug 31, 2009 7:37 PM:
Yep wrote on Aug 31, 2009 5:18 AM:
thnx for the article wrote on Aug 30, 2009 12:17 PM:
With that being said, it would be nice if you had a follow-up colummn on the other side of the issue, as gun control has been a debateable problem for a very long time. When John Hinckley shot President Ronald Reagan, gun control was again thrust into the limelight as an ever increasing problem in this country.
More recently, there have been numerous school shootings where firearms have been obtained both legally and illegally, and I believe that is what is concerning our elected officials.
I too have taken hunter safety, and am proud member of the N.R.A., but I think we all need to be realistic, and understand that it is crazy for firearms to be in possession of mentally unstable, or drug-induced fanatics.
Louisa again thanks for your great columns, and keep up the good work. "
Keepin It Real wrote on Aug 30, 2009 12:05 PM:
opinion wrote on Aug 28, 2009 2:35 PM:
No more Herald wrote on Aug 28, 2009 9:46 AM:
1shot wrote on Aug 28, 2009 9:20 AM:
This is the USA and we all have the right to express our opinion as well as own a firearm, but like I said earlier….
If anyone with the capability and means to contribute to society but doesn’t would not have been eligible to vote, (maybe that should be a law) we would not be fighting now to remain a free Country "
crazy redneck wrote on Aug 28, 2009 8:43 AM:
Have you ever had a violent encounter with a drug influenced individual? I have, my home was broken into at 3 am. The suspect kicked in my front door which awoke me. The suspect made about 25 feet inside my home where I confronted him with a firearm, he was armed with a belt.I had every legal justification to end his life. I did not, I ordered him to the ground at gunpoint from behind concealment and called the police. I was very, very lucky he complied. What were his intentions? according to the responding officers had I not stopped him I would not be here today.
Mizz Barber, until you experience an encounter like that don't PREACH gun control. Maybe you would like to defend yourself with a butter knife but i will keep my guns.
At the time of that encounter I had 160 hours of advanced firearms training (4 times more than most police officers)I believe that is why I reacted the way I did. I believe every person that owns a gun should WANT to get more advanced training its worth every penny.
The suspect was charged with aggravated burglary which he plead down to burglary and was sentenced to 36 months probation. Pretty good 36 months probation for breaking into someones home with the intention of killing them. That Mizz Barber is why we need to reform our justice system not our gun laws. "
editor wrote on Aug 28, 2009 7:56 AM:
Suprised wrote on Aug 28, 2009 6:22 AM:
Basically, I wanted to say that I am going to stop buying any Sidney Herald papers until they make right by showing they are more then just the everyday liberal media and I would ask you do you same if you feel strongly like I do. The least the Herald could do is run a pro-gun rights article to show both sides of the debate.
Ms. Barber, I highly suggest you somehow watch the gun control episode of Penn and Teller's TV show on Showmax or Cineamax. Due to profanity in the title of the show I can't say it, but if your any type of decent reporter you should be able to find it yourself. "
awesome wrote on Aug 28, 2009 5:43 AM:
Im an 18 yr old girl and I know my rights wrote on Aug 27, 2009 11:46 PM:
-Second Amendent 1791
This quote is out of my government text book I just thought that you might want to know the correct Amendment of which our Consitution gives us the right to bare arms, being as it is the topic of your article.
I have been going hunting with my dad for as long as i can remember. When i turned 12 i took hunters safety and got my hunting license and i have been hunting ever since, i am now 18.
There is always articles or stories on the news about someone being mugged in an alley or a girl that was raped and then beaten to death. Did you ever think of how things would have ended up if the person being mugged or raped had a gun. Possibilites are that the person that attacked them would more than likely never be able to hurt someone else again. Not every shot you make with a gun has to be a fatal shot unless you want it to be.
If they take guns away from us it doesnt mean that a person who wants a gun badly enough cant get one. It's not possible to fully control a person, people can be and are dangerous with our without guns. "
Ethel Brost wrote on Aug 27, 2009 9:56 PM:
Ms. Barber, I don't know where you hail from and I haven't been impressed with your literary ability, but you have exceeded the limits of civilized society with this pompous, misdirected tirade. Vilifying loyal patriots of America who have the strength of character to defend our nation against all enemies while providing for their families is despicable.
Your statistics are erroneous. And, it is the 2nd Amendment that guarantees our right to carry, not the 4th Amendment. The 4th Amendment protects Americans from illegal search and seizure.
Yes, Obama, the UN and our enemies do want to take our weapons. Bills are pouring into congress now that the Democrats are in total control.
Please note that the rent-a-mobs at the town halls this month across the country are bused-in, paid rabble threatening and injuring peaceable citizens carrying out their right to speak to their representatives. Anyone with a weapon is quietly reminding our elected leaders that we plan to remain free, as our Constitution provides.
"When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns." It's more than a catchy little jingle. "
Cant believe wrote on Aug 27, 2009 9:53 PM:
Montana Raised wrote on Aug 27, 2009 6:04 PM:
Montanan wrote on Aug 27, 2009 2:37 PM:
Jordan Hall wrote on Aug 27, 2009 2:07 PM:
GSpot wrote on Aug 27, 2009 10:17 AM:
Please read this story, maybe then you may undrstand.
"
SD wrote on Aug 26, 2009 9:19 PM:
To get a license for a shotgun or rifle , takes far less time than a hunter`s safety course does in Montana.
You are allowed to take the test and pass or fail without taking the course.
It is not the law , but I have kind of been told , the rule is , don`t take the test without the course if you are going to fail.
Let`s see how Canada`s crime and murder rate stays when the meth moves in harder.
I am not being racist , but one reason I did not move to florida , was because all the violent cuban criminals were being let in.
I was not afraid of the firearms , but it is very hard to see a knife and even harder to hear a knife. "
Blondie wrote on Aug 26, 2009 7:18 PM:
Being armed to defend your home/self/family would be a much better option! "
Seriously wrote on Aug 26, 2009 4:49 PM:
Barber, you said, "that isn’t stopping gang members or offenders from getting their hands on them. It’s estimated that 80 percent of those with criminal history get guns from family, friends, a street buy or an illegal source (again from the department of justice)."
Doesn't this mean that these guys are already breaking gun control laws? So you want more laws to punish the law abiding citizens? Gun control advocates always say that law abiding citizens will be able to have their guns, but obviously CRIMINALS are still getting guns (most liking stealing guns, which is already a crime that isn't stopping them). The only solution then for control advocates is to have pretty much all guns destroyed, which would make America like England. Didn't we decide back in the 1700's that we didn't want to be controlled like the English?
Maybe we should just start punishing the severe criminals like severe criminals to solve the problem of severe crime. What you didn't mention was that America is pretty much has the highest rates of ALL crimes. I think your wanting to fix a problem with society by control instead of fixing the problem with the society. "
LMAO wrote on Aug 26, 2009 4:39 PM:
The whole reason for the 2nd Amendment is not just hunting. It's about self defense and even defending ourselves from the ones in power if it should come down to that.
You can't compare the US to other nations in the world. You can't do that. I'm sure other nations have leading cuases of death that you would never have thought possible and rarely see here. It's not a perfect world and I'll keep my guns and freedom in spite of what others may want or do. I would much rather have a gun and not need it then not have a gun and need it. No what I mean? The places in the US with the strictest gun control also have the greatest crime rates. Gun control does not work. You should also look up the Montana Firearms Freedom Act and look at article 12 of the Montana Constitution. "
Robert Bethune wrote on Aug 26, 2009 4:23 PM:
The track record of the vast majority of people who own firearms is exemplary. There is no justification for making it more difficult for ordinary gun owners unless we can show that doing so will in fact have a strong positive advantage for controlling criminals, psychotics and such. The results we observe when gun control measures such as those widely advocated under the general heading of “gun control” are implemented clearly do not establish that any of them, singly or in combination, do in fact have a strong positive result in keeping firearms out of the hands of those who should not have them. What we need is policy that puts the focus and the burden where it belongs—on the few who will misuse firearms, not on the many who will not. "
Bondsman wrote on Aug 26, 2009 3:24 PM:
ND Reader wrote on Aug 26, 2009 3:13 PM:
Shane wrote on Aug 26, 2009 2:47 PM:
If you look at the picture globally and control for all other variables, gun control has no effect on violent crimes. Violence and crime have their own root causes that bear no relation to the tool used to commit them.
Perhaps the tool can effect crime in some ways; guns may be more deadly than knives but the chances of being injured in a robbery tends to decrease with the distance you are from your attacker. You may die slightly less often from knives, but you may get injured more. If someone is planning murder and cannot find a gun, there are virtually infinite numbers of substitutes. Banning guns as a type of harm reduction ignores the core issues of why crime and violence are happening to begin with.
Prohibition simply reduces the supply which makes it profitable for more guns to be smuggled in or illegally manufactured (which is fairly straightforward for simple firearms).
CCW has never been shown to increase violent incidences, and may even decrease them. Gun control is fueled by ignorance and emotionally charged, irrational arguments (i.e. "Bowling for Columbine"). "
just a guy wrote on Aug 26, 2009 1:58 PM:
Since Australia adopted stricter gun control in 1996, the annual homicide rate has gone done from 354 in 1996 to 282 in 2007. Fewer homicides are a good thing. "
My Opinion wrote on Aug 26, 2009 12:35 PM:
Randy wrote on Aug 26, 2009 12:01 PM:
The fact is that if someone wants a gun, there isn't a law or regulation anywhere, that will keep that person from getting it. Gun control laws just create more hoops for law abiding citizens to jump through to be able to exercise their 2nd Amendment Rights.
Perhaps Barber should research what happened to the crime rate in Australia after the 1996 gun ban. "
Common sense wrote on Aug 26, 2009 11:05 AM: