What People are Reading
Recent
Popular Alltime
Recent Comments
- Salary "cut?"
Let's use plain
8 hours 9 min ago - Wow ! Have you been to Sunday
11 hours 11 min ago - This is classic.
Augur, a
1 day 18 hours ago - This is known that cash makes
2 days 11 hours ago - One could question the wisdom
2 days 19 hours ago - A lot of smoke and mirrors
2 days 19 hours ago - Hot damn! This is great
2 weeks 15 hours ago - Look for Levesque to go to
2 weeks 16 hours ago - History has a nasty way of
2 weeks 2 days ago - I can't help but think of one
2 weeks 3 days ago
More in Opinion
Letter: The imaginary gun show loophole
May 05, 2009 8:00 am
Edgar Allen Beem wrote "Maine Citizens against Handgun Violence brought Tom Mauser to Maine to testify on behalf of LD 814. Mauser's son Daniel was killed in the 1999 Columbine school massacre by a student wielding a gun purchased legally at a gun show, so if he couldn't persuade the Maine legislators, I'm sure I can't. But there is hope."
Beem failed to note that the specific weapons used were purchased by a straw purchaser in an illegal transaction. The entire gun purchase was already illegal under federal law. No "gun show loophole" legal sale occurred. It was not as though the shooters went to the seller who sold those arms under some pretend loophole. Instead they used a third party who illegally bought the weapons.
Does everyone follow that? The sale was illegal under existing law. No imagined "gun show loophole" was used or had any effect on the acquisition of the guns. If existing gun laws had been followed, no sale would have happened.
This was simply another example of hysterics trying to use a tragedy to push an agenda, disarming America and gutting the Constitution without cause or real reason. Perhaps Augusta was thinking for once.
Jim Verdolini
Boise, Idaho
(formerly of Portland)
Comments
Gaffer says:
eabeem says:
Edgar Allen Beem
Let me see if I can make this clear. I am not opposed to gun ownership. I do not regard gun control laws as attacks on the 2Nd Amendment. I confess I do not follow the logic that says let's not have laws because criminals will break them. I also don't follow the logic of the argument that guns are like cars or matches -- neutral tools misused by people. Guns are designed specifically to cause bodily harm or death. Cars only do so accidentally. And I'm afraid I also have trouble understanding people who seem to worship the Bill of Rights and the Founding Fathers but not the government they created. That said, it's clear we won't be able to agree on the merits of closing the gun show loophole. I do hope, however, that we agree the freedom to disagree is one of the great things about the United States of America.
Gaffer says:
I would also like to ask Mr. Beem what is going to protect his precious 1st Amendment if the 2nd is neutered? I can just see him trying to protect his right to free speech with only his pen.
Few have stopped to evaluate the thinking that went on by our founding fathers as the labored to create their new government. It is my humble opinion that mere men could not have done so without a large dose God's assistance in ideas and the gentle pushing to get so many men to agree to a common issue. The 2nd Amendment is not about hunting, it is not about collecting or competitive shooting; it is about the God given right of self preservation and protection of family.
If Mr. Beem is so sure we do not need guns than perhaps he will take me up on a free offer of window decals for his home that say, "Gun Free Home!" I am sure he would relish the thought of the the criminally minded knowing that his home is one they could clean out without the danger of being shot. I have said decals and they are free. All he has to do is ask for them, if he dares.
My guess is he is one to bask under the protection of those of us who do know that better than half of Maine homes have guns in them and owners who would use them to protect lives and property. I have no respect for those types of hypocrites who are holier than thou but use my beliefs to protect their precious butts.
eabeem says:
Edgar Allen Beem
I guess I just don't know anyone who has found it necessary to take up arms to protect his/her family or property. I am always perplexed when opponents of gun control sound as though they're going to have to shoot it out at any moment. So, Gaffer, I will pray that you never have occasion to use your guns. Not sure why you think I don't own a gun. Not everyone who owns a gun against reasonable gun laws.
Gaffer says:
A typical liberal answer by Mr. Beem. Ignore the fact that there are over 20,000 gun laws on the books now and still we have people breaking them. It is obvious to those who have some common sense that more gun laws will not eradicate the problems we now have with criminals obtaining guns and doing bad things.
It is also common sense to believe that arson is caused by an arsonist rather than the matches that were used to start the fire. The same could be said about gun crimes, that it is the individuals rather than the guns. It is rather frustrating to see the public blame OUI's on the driver not the MV yet in the matter of guns they blame the guns and not the operator. Go figure!
eabeem says:
Edgar Allen Beem
It is my understanding that the guns used in the Columbine massacre were legally purchased at a gun show and then illegally transferred to the under-aged shooters. I hope some reasonable folks find it troubling, however, that the basic argument of anti-gun control activists comes down to "The laws don't work, so let's not have laws."
JIMV says:
Sir, I believe you have that 100% backwards. In the late 1990's under the Clinton/Reno administration, the Feds, along with several left of center think tanks, hired the National Academy of Science to study each and every significant gun control law used in the United states. The National Academy of Science is a well know anti gun organization and no one in the gun rights crowd expected anything good from the study. Well, 4 or 5 years later the Academy released its report. The end result....Aside from a very small measurable difference in suicide rates attributed to the Brady waiting period, not a single gun control measure has had a measurable (as in statistically valid) positive effect on violent crime, homicide, accidents or suicide....not a one. Think about that for a moment. Not a single Gun Control measure studied has had a positive effect (in fact, some had minor negative effects but we will skip that awkward reality).
Your understanding of the Columbine facts is simply wrong. Under federal law, a straw man purchase of a weapon is illegal. The guns purchased at that gun show were straw man purchases. If the crime had been detected at the time, the buyer would have gone to jail there and then.
The issue is not "The laws don't work, so let's not have laws " , but instead...'If gun laws do not do what they are intended to do yet impact on the Constitutional right for law abiding citizens to keep arms, why maintain such laws?'.....Remember, these laws do not work. You propose the legislative equivalent of 'throwing good money after bad'...there comes a time when the failure of an idea becomes clear. We passed that point in gun control years ago.
Well Mr. Beem is alive and well with his holier than thou comments. To be frank, Mr. Beem, I have used a gun to protect myself and for you to diss it only shows your arrogance and reliance on the police who usually arrive much later than the piazza delivery.
I would recommend you read Clayton Cramer's' Civilian Gun Self-Defense blog at http://www.claytoncramer.com/gundefenseblog/blogger.html to see how often a gun is needed to defend oneself and family.
I am not a newbie to guns, I am nearly 77 years of age and until retirement was a Master Maine Hunter Safety Instructor and still hold several NRA Instructor ratings for guns of all types.
What really bothers me is that you spout so many lies about gun shows and then have the audacity to ignore an admission of error and an apology. You also conveniently ignore that fact that your precious 1st Amendment will be toast without the protection of the 2nd Amendment.