Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

Don’t I know it…

Posted in:

Illinois

* From the Kankakee Daily Journal…

The gun issue by far produces the angriest, nastiest, meanest comments on this blog.

* So, let’s try something different today.

If you’re for gun control, say something positive about gun rights advocates.

If you’re a gun rights advocate, say something positive about gun control advocates.

If you’re in the middle, say something positive about both sides.

And no snark, please. Violators will be deleted and banned. I’m serious.

posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 10:13 am

Comments

The majority of those who are for gun control have good intentions–they truly believe it will make our state safer.

Comment by Fan of the Game Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 10:24 am
^ Fan of the Game took the one I was going to use.

Instead…

Most gun control advocates understand and attempt to accomodate hunters and even those interested in self defense via handgun.

Comment by Notacop Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 10:29 am
Todd V. engages on a civil basis. I think he reaches his conclusions honestly.

I understand the frustrations and suspicions that stemmed from the Chicago/Oak Park et. al. bans on handguns in the home.

I think of hunting like fishing, a traditional outdoor recreational activity that many enjoy and is very important to the economies of many rural communities.

Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 10:29 am
Gun rights advacates:

–care about individual rights

–care about the U.S. Constitution

–are engaged in our political processes

As such they are exceptionally good citizens.

(I just think they can be too narrowly focused in all three areas.)

Comment by walkinfool Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 10:31 am
Both sides have a point when it comes to the mentally ill that commit such heinous crimes such as shooting kids and adults in a school. Finding, treating, and, if necessary, putting them in an institution before they become unhinged should be a priority. We, as a society, aren’t doing a very good job at that.

Comment by Mouthy Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 10:32 am
Gun control advocates want the world to be a better place; gun rights advocates want to ensure the world is a better place.

Comment by walter sobchak Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 10:32 am
Gun rights advocates aren’t pushing for some personal gain, but have a genuine desire to make our society safe.

Comment by pipersls Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 10:33 am
“advocates” sorry

Comment by walkinfool Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 10:33 am
Most gun rights advocates are well informed and know the data that supports their arguments pretty well.

Comment by Siriusly Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 10:35 am
I meant gun control advocates, sorry about that…….

Comment by pipersls Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 10:35 am
Gun rights advocates are generally responsible gun owners and practice gun safety at all times.

Comment by Wensicia Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 10:37 am
Gun owners fully engage in politics and clearly believe in the First Amendment right to petition their government for a redress of grievances as much as their Second Amendment right to keep bear and arms (pursuant to a well-regulated militia). That’s admirable and an example for the rest of our citizenry.

Comment by Dan Johnson Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 10:37 am
I believe gun control advocates are correct when they ask for more thorough testing for a FOID card. They are also correct in the proposal to title ownership of firearms. I had to take a test to get my first drivers license and later a CDL. This did not imply I would be a lawbreaking driver and it did not diminish my right to drive. The licenses and registration were to make sure I understood driving safety/laws and that I was responsible on how my vehicle was used. Seems sane to apply those concepts to firearms.

Comment by bongofurry Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 10:40 am
My viewpoint as a gun rights advocate is formed from growing up and living in rural Illinois, where gun ownership is part of our heritage. Our families own guns for sport and protection. If I was raised and lived in an urban area, my viewpoint may be different.

I applaud the passion of control advocates. They are concerned about gun violence that occurs in society and they believe that limiting access to guns will help reduce the violence. The reduction of violence is a noble goal; but I have a different view on the medication needed for this societal illness.

Comment by Endangered Moderate Species Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 10:40 am
The vast majority of gun rights advocates have never hurt anyone.

And the vast majority never will.

– MrJM

Comment by MrJM Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 10:44 am
I served in the US military, have a FOID card, and have been trained in various weapons systems and guns. However, I support strict civilian gun control and believe less guns in our population at this point in our history make our nation freer, safer, and more prosperous.

Although I generally disagree with those who are passionate, and and some cases even rational, in their support liberalized gun laws, I also think they make a couple excellent points. First I believe they are genuinely concerned about strict enforcement of existing laws. Secondly I think they have genuine concern for lack of resources for mental health treatment for disturbed citizens with guns. Ultimately I sympathize with their arguments that we should be doing much more to utilize existing laws and constructs to counter gun costs.

Comment by Crime Fighter Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 10:46 am
I believe gun safety is an issue that rights advocates can support. I appreciate the passion of gun control advocates even as I vigorously oppose them. I appreciate the concern and intensity of gun control supporters.

Comment by dupage dan Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 10:55 am
They are passionate in their views and believe if their views are followed the world will be a better place.

Comment by Kevin Highland Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 11:03 am
Gun Control advocates want a safer world/society. Even if we disagree in the results of their laws they do want people to be safer.

Gun control folks also have not shown up to my door yet (good for them and good for me). We disagree on lots and I wish we could pass what we DO AGREE ON with out attaching a bunch of stuff we don’t agree just console the extremes on either side.

Comment by USMCJanitor Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 11:03 am
The gun rights advocates are responsible for many, if not most, of the gun safety training programs available to the general public. They are very generous with their time and equipment.

The gun rights advocates also have a depth of knowledge with respect to the capabilities of various fire arms that seems to be seriously lacking on the gun control side. If we are to ever have gun laws that reduce the ability of potential mass killers to obtain high capacity firearms, those laws will need to be written with the assistance of the gun rights advocates.

Comment by Pot calling kettle Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 11:05 am
I’m somewhere in the middle on the whole issue–so here goes.

My dad, a lifetime NRA member, taught me growing up respect for guns. I grew up in a small town north of the border and hunting was part of the family. He refused to buy my brother or I a beebee gue or a pellet rifle until we were old enough to have real guns and respect them for what they could do. He didn’t have good feelings for those who bought their kids beebee guns. Those kids would then went on to play ‘war’ with them and shoot each other. In dad’s eyes because they wouldn’t have respect for real guns since they considered guns a toy from their experiences with beebee guns.
Fast forward now to my suburban non-hunting self.
I can understand where the pro-gun advocates are coming from. No matter how many laws were on the books, the tragedy in Connecticut would have happenned anyways. The mother who owned the guns had the RESPONSIBILITY to secure them. She did not, and a tragedy resulted. No matter how any legislator feels, nor how many tragedies happen, it is impossible TO LEGISLATE PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. It can not be done and all we get is a bunch of knee-jerk mishmash laws that are for the most part meaningless.

Now from the other side. There are a whole lot of people out there who should not have guns, but are able to get them quite easily. Background checks are not followed through with. That is not good. Also, why do we need AK-47 and other assault rifles to do target practice and ‘play guns’ as the enthusiasts like to do? Why do they need to have armor-piercing ammo? There has to be some give on their side too, but like the gun control crowd, the pro-gun people have their loud mouth loonies too.
I read an interesting statistic yesterday. 60% of all guns used in crimes come from 1% of the gun dealers. That’s pretty crazy. Looks like there are a few bad apples out there who need to be weeded out.

train111

Comment by train111 Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 11:07 am
Those that would see more restrictions on guns and gun ownership are usually presenting an argument informed by sincere life experiences. When the majority of your interaction with firearms is associated with murder, violence, and crime, what other conclusion could a person come to other than to implement restrictions on them. I get that, and respect them for trying to make their communities safer.

Comment by John A Logan Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 11:07 am
The zealous gun rights activists that I know genuinely believe they are defending the nation against the encroachment of a tyrannical government.

Comment by South of Sherman Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 11:11 am
walkinfool said what i wanted to say, and probably more eloquently…

Comment by bored now Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 11:14 am
Being in the middle, I would say that gun contol advocates do have the most sincere belief that fewer guns will mean fewer deaths. On the other side of the fence, gun rights activists, specifically the NRA, have some of the best gun training programs available today which teaches respect of the weapon.

Comment by Chevy owner/Ford County Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 11:18 am
Although I disagree with him on a lot of issues, I have a great deal of respect for Todd V as a person. He’s one of the nicer and more helpful lobbyists I’ve met. He’s willing to spend time discussing and explaining his position. On a topic that leads to some heated emotions, he keeps his cool.

I also admire his work trying to build a compromise before the 7th Circuit ruled on conceal carry. When things were in doubt, he gave the other side an opportunity for a reasonable compromise.

On the other side, I admire the people who want very strict gun control for being pretty open about the fact that the studies on the issue are inconclusive. Most are very open about the fact that whether or not gun control works in practice has yet to be decided. That sort of intellectual honesty is refreshing.

Comment by Skeeter Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 11:19 am
I grew up in New York City and Los Angeles and guns were very alien to me and I am still in favor of regulating the use of guns at least as much as the use of automobiles. At the same time, I now live in Urbana and know people who live in the country. I recognize the importance of hunting and of some degree of self-protection when law enforcement might be a half-hour away. I understand the concerns of guns rights advocates from those points of view.

Comment by the old professor Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 11:21 am
Everyone has the right to protect their person, their property and any other person whose life is threatened. Even if it means being armed with the weapons and ammunition equal to those whose intend harm.

Comment by RMD Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 11:24 am
Mark Walsh is a funny guy and a lot of fun to have abeer with

Comment by Todd Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 11:26 am
What I intended to post would only repeat what Fan Of the Game ststed, so I will only expand on that: Individuals who support gun control honestly believe their efforts will lead to a safer society.
I respect anyone who will strongly and honestly support what they believe in.

Comment by SO IL M Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 11:33 am
I credit both sides with great sincerity, and a genuine desire to have a safer world.

Of course, they diametrically differ in what route would achieve that.

Comment by titan Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 11:33 am
Both supporters have merit but we have a big state with vastly different living conditions. Owning an “assault” rifle, owning a gun in Tolono and carrying said gun around in a car is much different than the same person doing the same things and owning the same weapons in the Loop or in Hinsdale.

I don’t think there’s middle ground.

Comment by DuPage Moderate Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 11:34 am
Kudos to Rich for encouraging this conversation. The comments on this page are a breath of fresh air on what can otherwise be an overwhelming issue.

Comment by Anon Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 11:38 am
I live in a very rural area and many people enjoy hunting as a past time. I really respect responsible gun owners and in no way want to limit their right to pursue happiness. These are the folks who in no way believe they need to defend my freedom. Hats off to them.

Comment by Deep South Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 11:40 am
Gun owners know the intricate details of their tools, how they work, how to safely use them and the important distinctions like calibers, gauge, ammunition and modifications. This knowledge is largely absent or overlooked by my friends on the gun control side of this debate.

Ask someone the difference between a .38, a 9 millimeter, a .45 or between a .22 and a 30-06. If they can’t explain it quickly and simply, they shouldn’t be part of the debate.

Gun rights advocates, for the most part, fully understand what they are talking about.

Comment by 47th Ward Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 11:56 am
Gun control advocates have a great faith in the power of government and the wisdom of elected officials to better people’s lives that I have lost over the years.

Comment by Cincinnatus Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 12:03 pm
Gun control people make some valid points. I may not agree with all of them, but they are welcome in the policy making process.

Comment by SirLankselot Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 12:06 pm
I don’t know enough about guns to know which ones should be banned. The pro-gun rights people do and they should most definitely be at the table designing laws we can all live with.

Comment by Cheryl44 Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 12:09 pm
–Gun control advocates have a great faith in the power of government and the wisdom of elected officials to better people’s lives that I have lost over the years.–

More backhanded snark, unless you truly believe all laws related to public safety are pointless.

Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 12:14 pm
- Gun control advocates have a great faith in the power of government and the wisdom of elected officials to better people’s lives that I have lost over the years. -

You’re so slick, Cinci.

I think the vast majority of gun rights advocates will very likely never shoot anyone, intentionally or unintentionally, and I’m happy they take care to use their firearms in a safe manner.

Comment by Small Town Liberal Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 12:23 pm
Almost all gun control or gun rights activists that I have met or conversed with come to their positions by life experience…those who had a family member with a bad experience where a weapon was used, those who used to go deer hunting with their grandpa, etc. The ironic thing is how some on either side of the fence have very similar life experiences but come to opposite conclusions, but that’s part of the mystery of life and what makes us who we are. Most are someone who’d you would want as your neighbor.

OT regarding Cincinnatus’ post - It’s probably an opportune time to ask any state employee or pensioner about the great faith they have in government or the wisdom of their elected representatives, LOL.

Comment by Six Degrees of Separation Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 12:33 pm
This really hurts but:
Both sides are sincere.
Both sides are interested in protecting what they see as important needs for everyone in our society.
Oh, just ban me.

Comment by Excessively Rabid Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 12:48 pm
Gun pro control and pro rights are people who have the state and nations fundamental values close to their hearts. Both sides have passion and fire that is a force to be reckoned with in congress. A good leader would recognize this, and asses the paths both parties can take. Set some of the most passionate people on a path to effecting truly positive change in America. Quinn has that opportunity. Obama has that opportunity. Can either man rise to the challenge.
That’s where my positivity runs out. Leadership, compromise, respect…. Approach the other side hat in hand for change.

Comment by civil Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 1:17 pm
Gun control advocates are right in their belief that government, by the people and for the people, gets it right more often than not.

Gun rights advocates are generally safety conscious, and respectful of the rights and privacy of others.

Those of us in the middle would do well to learn from both sides. Can someone spell c-o-m-p-r-o-m-i-s-e?

Comment by mongo Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 1:26 pm
Both sides want a safer world and those engaged in the political process should be commended for their participation and efforts. I think the irony is that both sides share a fundamental belief which neither acknowledge in the other. Both sides share a commitment to moral absolutism. Because evil is real and concrete and not going anywhere, we should either minimize or maximize the availability of guns.

The better longview question is whether efforts can be made to minimize the risk that someone develops the malicious intentions which metastisize into full-blown acts of violence. Some of the answers may be found through the political process but most answers are probably best found through personal commitments to improving yourself, your family and your community. Minimize violence through micro-acts of kindness and selflessness spread across a lifetime.

The democratic political process has its limits. People are thirsting for solutions beyond the same tired partisan rhetoric.

Comment by Geneva Guy Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 1:27 pm
Pro-gun guys are single-minded, organized and tenacious. Pro-public safety advocates have good intentions, but lack the passion found on the other side.
What they have in common is that neither proposes anything that will significantly reduce firearms deaths and massacres in the US.

Comment by reformer Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 1:29 pm
Both sides are passionate and sincere in their beliefs.

Comment by Logic not emotion Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 2:08 pm
As a gun control person, I don’t have a gun. But when my rural house was being over-run by skunks, my pro-gun neighbor was nice enough to come over and shoot the skunks.

He was also nice enough to shoot a stray dog that had killed some of my chickens. However, he had to shoot the dog from his kitchen window, as the dog would never let him get close enough for a good shot otherwise.

Comment by Joe M Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 3:50 pm
–As a gun control person, I don’t have a gun. But when my rural house was being over-run by skunks, my pro-gun neighbor was nice enough to come over and shoot the skunks.–

Oh, that’s brilliant. So clever.

Pro-gun safety means vermin infestation. I get it. You’ve got them on the run now.

Some of us are talking gun safety and reducing the risk of more massacres like the last one at (fil in the blank). If you’ve forgotten a name, no worries. There will be another one soon.

But, to play at your level, why are you attracting so many varmints, anyway? I was in FFA, and they teach you ways to reduce that risk.

Start with getting rid of the garbage and BS around the house.

Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 4:29 pm
I don’t live in a rural area, yet we have skunks (raccoons, oppossum, woodchucks and smaller vermin).

If you keep your yard clean and your roof repaired, you don’t have to worry about the wildlife, they mind their own business. We certainly don’t need to shoot them, which would be illegal since they’re protected around here.

Comment by Wensicia Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 4:48 pm
We seem to have some great experts on skunks in wordslinger and Wensicia. Where were you when I needed you?

However, eventually the great horned owls in the area got rid of all of the skunks without the use of guns. Unfortunately they also got rid of all of my outdoor cats too.

Comment by Joe M Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 5:41 pm
@Joe M,

Around here, most outdoor cats end up as roadkill, though a few become raccoon bait.

So goes the law of whatever jungle you live in.

Comment by Wensicia Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 6:08 pm
The guy on the Piers Morgan show seemed pretty nice for a complete wacko, clearly off his meds and in dire need of hospitalization

Comment by steve schnorf Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 7:00 pm
Being in the middle on this issue, I support the gun control advocates who want to regulate or ban assault rifles with large ammo clips. I also support banning sales of firearms without background checks.

On the other hand, I have a FOID and praise the folks fighting for concealed carry, though I am still not totally comfortable with the idea. I have been in situations where I felt I or my loved ones might have benefited from a concealed handgun.

Comment by Grandson of Man Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 7:17 pm
Sorry, I didn’t mean to double-post. I thought I checked carefully for my previous post so I wouldn’t do that.

Happy New Year to all.

Comment by Grandson of Man Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 7:20 pm
GC advocates are utopians, they sincerely envision a better place without guns.

Comment by CarrollCounty Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 7:40 pm
sorry so late hope some can see this in 2011 there where 721 murders in the State of Illinois 433 in the city of Chicago..in 2011 Chicago had an est.2.7 million residence while Illinois had 12.9 million..Chicago had a murder rate of 15.99/100,000 people.the rest of the state 2.83/100,000 people..that said Chicago is at a 5.5x merder rate over the rest of the state..!!Gun deaths arent the “states” fault they expose the city of Chicago and its lack of control, the most stringent city in the country with gun control laws is NOT the states burden !!! tick tock tick tock 166 days?

Comment by railrat Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 8:31 pm
I’m a proponent of reasonable and effective gun control (yes, there IS such a thing). Having said that, I’ll take Rich’s challenge. I’m happy to acknowledge that gun owners who are hunters are usually down-to-earth people who are in touch with nature and have real respect for the natural world. They’re also more likely than the rest of us carnivores to be aware of where their food comes from and the sacrifice (the animal’s loss of life) that is involved in that food showing up on the table. For all those reasons, I can respect hunters and their desire to pass on this tradition from generation to generation.

Comment by Steve Downstate Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 10:18 pm
The GC volunteers are fairly sincere.

Comment by John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 10:50 pm