◀Previous Post
Next Post▶

 

“In the case of guns, we don’t do enough. Baby steps, consistent with the Second Amendment, would include requiring universal background checks, boosting research to understand gun violence and investing in smarter guns. A debit card requires a code to work, a car requires a key — and a gun, nothing at all.” – Nicholas Kristof in How Could We Blow This One? [at nytimes.com]    (h/t Jan P.)

◀Previous Post
Next Post▶

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

62 COMMENTS

  1. I love how they keep trying to claim that infringing on your right to keep and bear arms is “consistent with the Second Amendment”. Sorry, but the Second Amendment is probably THE most well known Amendment to the Constitution – it’s pretty hard to lie to people about what it says.

    • I use my debit card to pay for a cup of coffee.

      I use my car to go to Bed Bath and Beyond.

      I use my .300 BLK LMT MRP/Glock 19 to repel meth heads invading my home to steal valuables, pilfer medications, murder me, and rape my wife.

      I like my guns key and PIN free for that reason. Then again that might be too subtle a distinction for someone who works and lives behind a wall of hired security. Thanks but no thanks. Don’t forget to FOAD and be sure to take the rest of the NYT with you.

    • I use my debit card to pay for a cup of coffee.

      I use my car to go to Bed Bath and Beyond.

      I use my .300 BLK LMT MRP/Glock 19 to repel meth heads invading my home to steal valuables, pilfer medications, murder me, and r@pe my wife.

      I like my guns key and PIN free for that reason. Then again that might be too subtle a distinction for someone who works and lives behind a wall of hired security. Thanks but no thanks. Don’t forget to FOAD and be sure to take the rest of the NYT with you.

  2. *Sigh* it just NEVER seems to end….all this claptrap about ‘universal’ background checks. Ever notice that they NEVER, EVER, specify what this “universal” stuff really means?

    Tom

    • Most people pushing for it have no idea what it means, and haven’t even read the most popular proposed bills.

      I’ve gone through this with friends who think UBC is the answer.. Some of them have changed their tune when I explained that many UBC bills would ban the act of giving a firearm to a family member or friend, even to borrow or try out at the firing range, or that some of the UBC bills (like here in WA state) even mandated warrantless searches and inspection of your home to check for any unregistered firearms – oh yeah, that’s the little-admitted fact about many of the UBC bills as-proposed, that they are unenforceable without requiring registration, and it’s almost a universal fact that every registration scheme has eventually led to confiscation – either in full, or specific types of firearms that were deemed “too dangerous” after the fact. That puts teeth into the argument that certain people actually ARE “trying to take your guns away.”

      So yeah, most of them just automatically see UBCs as “a good thing” sort of like endless welfare benefits or amnesty for immigrants.

      • Well UBC’s will lead to a harmonious country where all the criminals will be denied guns and they won’t ever transfer or steal them again… also UBC’s will lead to unicorns sh1tting rainbows and farting perfume; and Kim Kardshian’s ass will shrink and she’ll grow a brain if only we had UBC’s! Why don’t you gun owners just understand that everything will be sunshine and rose petals once we are done registering everyone’s guns so we can confiscate them have UBC’s?

        • I liked your utopia until you suggested Kim Kardasian’s a$$ would shrink. That a$$ is the only thing I really like about that girl.

        • Once people shoot all their high capacity pmags then there won’t be any bullets left because magazines are ammunition.

  3. All points that, if directed toward any other Amendment Right would have people protesting in the streets. But introduce this progressive banter in regard to guns and the anti-2nd intellects are reading bobbing their heads in affirmation.

    It surprises me not that all this stuff is coming from New York and their Treasonous mindsets.

    LOOK! From the signing of the Declaration of Independence New York, as a State, has acted inhospitably to the purpose and means by which this Country was founded.

    • Remember that they never believed it was a right anyway. Read the NYT’s post Heller rant their editorial board went on after the SCOTUS refused to declare the 2A extinct like all the other courts wanted to AND STILL WANT TO.

      • I would like to read them, I love hearing them cry. Do you happen to have a link to any of the articles? I am not sure what to search for “NYT cries after Heller”?

    • I want to see smart knives, so they can’t be used to kill humans or pets… except when they’re evil.

      • Smart Circular Saws, Smart Matches, Smart Pressure Cookers, Smart Bottles of Bleach… Is it too much to ask for Smart Voters?

        • TO: Lauderdale Vet
          RE: Smart Voters, Anyone?

          Is it too much to ask for Smart Voters? — Lauderdale Vet

          If you’re asking the vaunted American public education system for such….

          ….that’s a big ‘YES!’.

          Used to be that education replaced an empty mind with an open one. NOT ANY MORE!

          Regards,

          Chuck(le)
          [Education makes a people easy to lead, but difficult to drive; Easy to govern, but impossible to enslave. – Lord Henry Brougham]

          P.S. This generation is ready to be enslaved…..

    • If they want to save lives, smart doctors should be next. They kill many times more people each year than guns, knives and cars

  6. How could you blow this one? Could it be that a majority of the people support the Second Amendment as written?

  7. Last I heard, no one requires me to have a key for my car. The government doesn’t require me to keep my debit account secure.

    • there are so many cars now where you can start the car from 20ft away with the push of a button. my friends dodge challenger starts with the button.

  8. TO: Nicholas Kristof
    RE: Would You Please…..

    …..show me in the Constitution of the United States where the right to own a debit card or operate a car is written?

    I seem to have missed those passages in my Civics class.

    However, I point out that the Second Amendment is not about self-defense. It’s about defense against tyranny.

    Hope that helps….but I have SERIOUS doubts.

    Regards,

    Chuck(le)
    [The Truth will out….people like Nicholas are either stupid or evil. And in YOUR case, I suspect the latter…..]

  9. This guy looks like the “Family Guy” version of a Brittish chap.

    Also, I think the big guns that Drake and Vasquaze carried in “Aliens” were called smart guns… if so then yes we do need some.

  10. TO: All
    RE: Smarter Guns

    I want weapons that will shot around corners!

    And I want personal Fiber-Opticallly Guided Munitions (FOGM) of at least .50 cal.

    And I want a laser rifle. Or better still, Star Trek Phasers.

    Regards,

    Chuck(le)
    [Good individual defenses make for good governance.]

    P.S. If the police are militarizing…..shouldn’t we as well? After all…..what are they militarizing for? MS13?

        • FASTER PLEASE!

          P.S> In the meantime…..I’m quite capable with AR-15s and .45 cal ACPs. Especially with these more advanced targeting systmes…..than what I learned with the old iron-sigths in the Army.

  12. Focusing on the object not the cause, again. So predictable. It would be too politically divisive to focus on the causes of violence and might cause the “Anointed One” and his lackeys to have to suggest some minorities predominate the statistics for gun-involved violence.

  13. I find it funny we’ve had a handfull of terrorist attacks and the gun grabbers tend to run around like a bunch of chickens with their heads cut off giving up rights because they fear it might happen to them. But we have home invasions, assaults and murders nearly every day but we’re the paranoid ones.

    • TO: chuck
      RE: ‘Chickens’??!?!?

      Not merely ‘chickens with their heads cut off’.

      More like rabid dogs.

      Regards,

      Chuck(le)
      [Only mad dogs and traitors attack the Bill of Rights…..]

      • Specifically rabid miniature poodles with shaved asses. The way they prance around like show dogs, thinking they are better and know better than everyone else. Except for Feinstein, she’s more like a old wrinkly Shar pei mixed with a bulldogs ass.

  14. What I thought was telling, was that for all the attempts at “consistent with the Second Amendment” talk (suggesting that they’re not really coming for our guns), the Australian system is always held out as the holy grail of gun legislation. Such a system and the Constitution are simply incompatible. I find this type of rhetorical slight of hand most reprehensible when it comes from those who should, or do, know better.

    • He wants to be consistent with the Second Amendment? Fine, let’s start by repealing EVERY local, state, and federal law starting with NFA ’34 and everything since then.

  15. Smart guns again? If laws are to be made based off of “I saw it in a Bond movie” logic, then they should mandate those huge avalanche proof balloon jackets not only for the skiers, but everybody within 100 feet of any snow. Oh, and issue those tiny rebreathers to everyone near the ocean or aquariums in case they end up trapped around swimming sharks. Also, slide whistle sound effects for all vintage AMC muscle cars.

      • Crap, in one Bond movie(Does Roger Moore really count as a Bond) they had an AMC Pacer that converted to an airplane. How’s that for a new federal law? All new cars have to be ugly and fly.

        • If they have rocket launchers and machine guns attached like most Bond cars, I’m game.

    • All cars are required to be driveable under water. All watches must have grappling hooks and lasers. Give government agents unlimited licenses to kill!

      Yeah, the “it’s in a James Bond movie so let’s do it in real life” logic doesn’t hold water.

  16. A debit card requires a code to work, a car requires a key — and a gun, nothing at all.” – Nicholas Kristof

    Let’s entertain the court jester.

    A credit card doesn’t require a code(ask the eastern European card scammers) .
    A car can be hotwired or remote started.
    A gun in fact should not have any authentication features because a normal person drawing a gun means there is a imminent threat which needs to be stopped. Opening a car/swiping a card doesn’t fall into that category in most cases. So, Mr. Kristof, FOAD

  17. I just bought a smart hammer that requires a 38 digit Pin code, 4 finger prints to be read, an Iris scan, a copy of my birth certificate and SSN before I’m able to take it out of the case and use it. It was a bargin too only cost me $16,000.00
    WTF is this world coming to………Everything is getting “smarter” but the people that are supposed to be “in charge”

  18. For an ignorant person who knows nothing about the practical realities of owning and using firearms, universal background checks and “smart guns” seem like no-brainers that ought to be obviously good for everyone with no downsides, and anyone who opposes them (ie, all knowledgeable gun-owners) look like paranoid hicks at best and aiders and abettors of violent criminals, at worst. They get their knowledge of guns from the movies, where they virtually always go bang when the good guys need them to, and their knowledge of violent crime from their days at a peaceful university, where they were dilligently taught by ivory tower professors about the absolute equality of everyone and the sanctity of certain minority groups.

  19. It gets tiresome to keep pointing this out, but I will. Neither a debit card nor a car are rights protected and enshrined in the U.S. Constitution.

    • I believe they are Matt. I’m not as well educated as some of our commentors. But it would seem that the right to do business and conduct commerce is protected by the constitution even if it’s not exactly worded to that effect. In modern times I would think this protects the plastic in our wallets as much as the plastic in our guns. As for cars. Does the constitution restrict us or put constraints on our travels? We are not limited to just muskets, so why be limited to feet or horses?

      • TO: Matt in FL and jmy
        RE: Oh….for Cry’n Out Loud

        Debit cards are one thing.

        However, one can hot-wire a car to get it going.

        The principal point here is that neither of such objects are DECLARED A RIGHT as part of the Bill of Rights in the Constitution of the United States.

        But the ownership of firearms on a par with those used by the federal government ARE part of the Bill of Rights of the Constitution of the United States…..a document I swore to ‘uphold and defend’.

        Did either of you characters make such an oath?

        If so….

        Welcome to the ‘party’, pal. — Bruce Willis, in Die Hard

        Get it?

        You REALLY have to be a REAL Christian to appreciate that sort of ‘attitude’.

        Regards,

        Chuck(le)
        [Please don’t throw me into that briar patch! — Bere Rabbit, Disney Song of the South]

        • P.S. Went to an estate sale this morning.

          There, I picked up an old device. As I made my way to the ‘check-out’, someone accosted me and asked….

          Are you planning to have fun or make trouble with that thing.

          I replied….aren’t those the same thing?

  20. beep, beep, beeep… “damn…” beep, beep “Hold on a second Mr. Robber, I can’t get my gun to take my pin number”

  21. Most of our guns are far more secure than any of our cars or debit accounts. My car isn’t bolted to the frame of my house with double locks behind a 1 1/2″ thick steel door. If a threat is perceived it can be unlocked and opened to get to the guns, how’s that for smart.
    I do agree we should have more research on crime, not just gun violence, but not through the CDC (conflicting data center). We need unbiased research on crime, not just “the epidemic of gun violence”, guns can’t be treated as a disease as the CDC did. The funny thing is such research could be done all along, but once the anti-gun funds dried up and they were mandated to halt clearly biased research and reports (that weren’t even backed by the data given) the CDC, and all other research outlets, decided it wasn’t worth their time. So what they’re asking for is to be paid to lie again.

  22. Nicholas Kristof in How Could We Blow This One?

    Ah, ’cause your argument kinda’ SUCKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  23. From the article…

    “We appear willing to bear any burden, pay any price, to confound the kind of terrorists who shout “Allahu akbar” (“God is great”) and plant bombs, while unwilling to take the slightest step to curb a different kind of terrorism — mundane gun violence…”

    So you think that the price we pay to protect ourselves from terrorism is a good thing? That we should do more of that? That we need more TSA and Patriot Act and Drones and all the other crap we do in the ‘name of safety?’

    Man, this guys really needs to quit using up oxygen that could put to better use elsewhere on the planet.

  24. speaking of The Amendments, can’t find your article on the (D) trying to limit corporation free speech, but it reminded me of the DOJ a month ago banning sex jokes by college students with “campus speech codes”:

    http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/05/the-fire-the-government-has-mandated-speech-codes-on-all-campuses/

    The FIRE: “The government has mandated speech codes on all campuses”

    http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/05/the-ignored-doj-scandal-anti-free-speech-codes-on-campuses/

    The ignored DOJ scandal — anti-free speech codes on campuses

  25. “A debit card requires a code to work, a car requires a key — and a gun, nothing at all.” What’s it take to get a politician to protect the constitution?

  26. “boosting research to understand gun violence”

    AKA federal funding for anti gun people.

    That research was defunded for a reason. the ‘researchers” all refused to ever parse out criminals.

    Hence false claims that gun owning homes are more dangerous to their occupants. They include active criminals and criminal gun owners. Those criminals and their family members are virtually all the gun deaths from household members in “households with guns.”

    The researchers also reuse to take into account the number of crimes prevented by legal gun owners, If you look at Wikipedia “defensive gun use” the numbers range from hundreds of thousands to millions per year. In other words CDC and NIH researchers were, with a straight face, using the technique of anti vaccine whackos who refuse to count benefits because they can only be estimated.

    Lastly how about applying health consequence research to all of the bill of rights?
    We know First Amendment protected circumcisions kill about !25 children per year. That is more than assault rifles kill.

    How much damage to health do the fourth Fifth, Sixth and Eight Amendments cause? Shall we have taxes on defendants to fund research into whether bail causes health issues? (w know it does because persons on bail are massively more likely to commit violent crime than the general population. How about the health lost for murder, assault and rape by persons acquitted due to due process? Or Miranda. Or prevention of warrantless searches?

    • The CDC did dozens, maybe hundreds of studies, trying to prove that there was a connection between availability of guns and crime and death rates. Study after study failed to make a connection so they kept starting new studies in hopes of finding the one that would prove their point. They never did and all this was done on the taxpayers dime. Congress finally shut down the funding for the studies as they were clearly a waste of funds and the powers that be at the CDC weren’t interested in the truth.

  27. Well actually my firearms need ammunition, and until recently your government panic and the DHS made that a little difficult. So again FOAD!

Comments are closed.