Again, This organization has my interest, but in citing statistics, 97percent failed again to provide full statistics. In fact, just omitting them. For instance, what about including stats about states where people defended themselves from would be attackers with firearms! The NRA has a monthly column each month for these incidents. They do happen you know? You must include how a firearm in trained hands prevented a criminal and/or violent act! Why is it, on your path to find common sense rules/laws you fail to do this research. It only paints 97percent as a gun grabbing organization! Also, with regard to New Mexico, to confiscate firearms based upon "see something/say something" from an anonymous source or a neighbor or whoever? This is promoting fear and suspicion. Many of the mass shootings that have taken place were perpetrated by individuals who had some type of mental issue: Transitioning? Gender dysphoria? (mismatch xx/xy?) Being prescribed drugs for such issues like that, and depression. This was not happening 40 years ago. In fact, in recent times, it seems that most of the mass shooters were already on law enforcement radar, even being visited by police or brought to the attention of police by students, by family, etc. YET, they were allowed to keep their weapons, or even buy weapons, or allowed to have weapons in their home / living condition! We've all seen/noticed this time after time. And yet, 97percent is supposed to be common sense? Please focus on fixing all the other loop holes (as mentioned above) in the system before you start advocating for wholesale changes in the 2nd amendment laws across America. Support the police, support firearms training, support veterans, yes, even support NRA certified firearms trainers. Again, also focus on how criminals have been stopped in their tracks during acts of violence by gun owners. Most responsible gun owners I am aware of advocate for the 4 basic firearms safety rules. Furthermore, most gun owners in America are fine, responsible people. The last 3 years have seen more firearms legislation targeting gun owners than in ANY Time in our nations History! What's changed? From your perspective; mass shootings. From many gun owners perspectives, it has been the downfall of strict law enforcement (defund the police anybody?), Lawfare?, School Districts telling parents that can't know about their own kids getting prescriptions at school?, or if there is some strange aspect of gender going on?, Really, when you look back over the past decades, the belligerence has sometimes become intolerable. There are all kinds of social issues happening, and yet, instead of focusing on the causes, you've decided to focus on the easy road: just make laws against gun owners. Hey, problem solved, right? Except that criminals will not be affected and you'll remove a potential good person with a gun who can make a difference. But you don't know that because you don't do those kinds of statistics! I applaud trying to keep the community safe, who does not? But if you really wanted to legitimately do your work, then invite a number of pro gun individuals into the mix for your discussions. There are two sides to consider in this debate. You have set your two sides to be: 1) Taking guns makes us good people and/or the adults in the room, and 2) Make laws that can go after people with guns, as they are the problem. I say there is a third option: 3) Enforce the existing laws and work within those existing laws. But to do that, people really have to do their jobs properly. If you need an example of people doing their job in law enforcement, I suggest looking up Grady Judd. Grady Judd is an American law enforcement officer who is best known for being the sheriff of Polk County, Florida. He has served in this position since 2005. You've probably already seen him, and if not, you can see him and his law enforcement philosophy via the internet. He has a good reputation as a lawman. Thank you.
Again, This organization has my interest, but in citing statistics, 97percent failed again to provide full statistics. In fact, just omitting them. For instance, what about including stats about states where people defended themselves from would be attackers with firearms! The NRA has a monthly column each month for these incidents. They do happen you know? You must include how a firearm in trained hands prevented a criminal and/or violent act! Why is it, on your path to find common sense rules/laws you fail to do this research. It only paints 97percent as a gun grabbing organization! Also, with regard to New Mexico, to confiscate firearms based upon "see something/say something" from an anonymous source or a neighbor or whoever? This is promoting fear and suspicion. Many of the mass shootings that have taken place were perpetrated by individuals who had some type of mental issue: Transitioning? Gender dysphoria? (mismatch xx/xy?) Being prescribed drugs for such issues like that, and depression. This was not happening 40 years ago. In fact, in recent times, it seems that most of the mass shooters were already on law enforcement radar, even being visited by police or brought to the attention of police by students, by family, etc. YET, they were allowed to keep their weapons, or even buy weapons, or allowed to have weapons in their home / living condition! We've all seen/noticed this time after time. And yet, 97percent is supposed to be common sense? Please focus on fixing all the other loop holes (as mentioned above) in the system before you start advocating for wholesale changes in the 2nd amendment laws across America. Support the police, support firearms training, support veterans, yes, even support NRA certified firearms trainers. Again, also focus on how criminals have been stopped in their tracks during acts of violence by gun owners. Most responsible gun owners I am aware of advocate for the 4 basic firearms safety rules. Furthermore, most gun owners in America are fine, responsible people. The last 3 years have seen more firearms legislation targeting gun owners than in ANY Time in our nations History! What's changed? From your perspective; mass shootings. From many gun owners perspectives, it has been the downfall of strict law enforcement (defund the police anybody?), Lawfare?, School Districts telling parents that can't know about their own kids getting prescriptions at school?, or if there is some strange aspect of gender going on?, Really, when you look back over the past decades, the belligerence has sometimes become intolerable. There are all kinds of social issues happening, and yet, instead of focusing on the causes, you've decided to focus on the easy road: just make laws against gun owners. Hey, problem solved, right? Except that criminals will not be affected and you'll remove a potential good person with a gun who can make a difference. But you don't know that because you don't do those kinds of statistics! I applaud trying to keep the community safe, who does not? But if you really wanted to legitimately do your work, then invite a number of pro gun individuals into the mix for your discussions. There are two sides to consider in this debate. You have set your two sides to be: 1) Taking guns makes us good people and/or the adults in the room, and 2) Make laws that can go after people with guns, as they are the problem. I say there is a third option: 3) Enforce the existing laws and work within those existing laws. But to do that, people really have to do their jobs properly. If you need an example of people doing their job in law enforcement, I suggest looking up Grady Judd. Grady Judd is an American law enforcement officer who is best known for being the sheriff of Polk County, Florida. He has served in this position since 2005. You've probably already seen him, and if not, you can see him and his law enforcement philosophy via the internet. He has a good reputation as a lawman. Thank you.
Hot off the press, heal with prayer book reading and commentary:
https://spotifyanchor-web.app.link/e/PsbBIre3iMb