More People Dead as Gun-Control Fails in New York State

While its true they are machines, its dishonest not to recognize that firearms are force multipliers. It does seem the legal system in NY failed this time though as there were multiple red flags that should have prevented him from buying a weapon in the first place.

I believe the word you are looking for in "inanimate". Wouldn't that apply to drugs as well? But people on the right don't seem to have a problem outlawing drugs.

What law on the books do you feel is not being enforced?

MSgt Steve Sweeney - Respectfully, drugs are not in any sense, a Constitutionally protected right; least of all, illegal drugs. On the other hand, firearms ARE, according to the Constitution's Bill of Rights, an INDIVIDUAL "right," protected from government intrusion just like the 1st, (2nd), 3rd, 4th and 5th Amendments all deal with INDIVIDUAL as well as collective RIGHTS.
As for gun law enforcement? There are some 50,000 THOUSAND or so gun laws on the books. Many increase the penalty for use during the commission of a crime, and are plea bargained away, OR dismissed by judges. The DOJ has long ignored apply8ing federal gun laws when a state prosecutes when they could well enhance the penalties to criminals but are simply deemed unimportant. If the laws on the books were ENFORCED across the board, there would likely be a decrease in crimes with guns - and yes, I said, "likely." Meanwhile, the choice to use a gun during a crime, is not a risky to the criminal as it should be.

SSG Bill McCoy - You don't consider life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness a right? What you choose to put into your own body is not a right? Are you saying you do not have rights over your own personage? The government can tell you what you can and cannot do... with your own body? Maybe this is where the left and right disagree... I do not believe they do, but given the laws on drugs, and what they are working on for abortion, not to mention trying to pass laws about whom someone can love and marry, apparently people on the right think the government should be empowered to mandate and control a person but not inanimate objects made of wood and metal. Does that make a lot of sense? If only because one was mentioned in a document written 250 years ago? Still, when the Constitution was adopted, slavery was still legal, so.... Guess it speaks to the mindset.

Regardless, the argument was not from a Constitutionally legal perspective and the picking and choosing men living over two centuries years ago did. The argument was the nature of a drug or drugs as an inanimate substance with no independent will, just like a gun or a spoon or a lamp post.

As for the gun laws, you are talking about adjudication, not enforcement. If the individual was arrested or even merely charged with the crime when arrested, then the law was enforced. If it was later dropped through judicial proceedings, then it was adjudicated. Perhaps we should have some mandatory minimum sentences attached to gun laws like they have for drug laws.... because that worked so well with the "war on drugs". Do we need a "war on guns"? But do you think that would go over with the NRA? One of the reasons the gun laws are difficult to make stick is because right-wing lobbying organizations like the NRA work hard to make it that way. They spend a ton of money to undermine and water down these laws as much as possible. So if the laws are not working, maybe it is tie to look at the people the are purposely undermining the laws.

SPC David Willis - It all reflects the truth of the MSM prime directive, "If it bleeds --- it leads." More blood = more attention.

CW3 Harvey K. exactly but I don’t blame them. They are in a for profit business and answer to share holders. Some lean right and some lean right but they all cover different angles of the same story because it’s what sells.

CW3 Harvey K. - I have no doubt! If the government gets its way, we will have access to nothing but weapons like those used in the Revolutionary War era--if any weapons at all.

MAJ Dale E. Wilson, Ph.D. - We still see the claim that "Only the guns available at the time are protected by the 2nd Amendment". The ironic absurdity of exercising a 1st Amendment right on the internet to advocate limiting a 2nd Amendment right on the basis of a temporal restriction, when the communication technology of the time of the Bill of Rights was the megaphone and the hand-operated printing press, has been something the gungrabbers cannot comprehend.