Locals react to gun control debate
»Play Video
BOISE, Idaho (KBOI) -- As the nation debates gun control, they're getting ready for a weekend gun show at Expo Idaho.
Organizer Paul Snider of Lewiston has promoted more than 650 guns shows in the Northwest over the past three decades.
He passionately believes President Obama is using the Sandy Hook massacre as an excuse to outlaw all guns in the United States.
"It's what I'm fearful will be the beginning of the end," Snider said. "And our Second Amendment will be destroyed by the president who hates the Second Amendment. And I pull no punches."
Nobody seems to be pulling any punches as the long hot debate over gun control in America has now become super-charged after the Sandy Hook tragedy.
Despite fresh opposition from the National Rifle Association, the White House is looking at a ban on assault weapons sales, limits on high capacity ammunition magazines and universal background checks for gun buyers.
While many see that as trampling on their right to bear arms, other gun owners we talked to say the president's proposals make sense.
"Everyone who buys a gun should have a background check," said Charles Nicholas of Boise. "It's ridiculous we don't do that already. I own guns, and have bought guns without anybody scrutinizing my background. I think that's completely wrong."
President Obama plans to push new measures on gun violence during his State of the Union speech Feb. 12.
Organizer Paul Snider of Lewiston has promoted more than 650 guns shows in the Northwest over the past three decades.
He passionately believes President Obama is using the Sandy Hook massacre as an excuse to outlaw all guns in the United States.
"It's what I'm fearful will be the beginning of the end," Snider said. "And our Second Amendment will be destroyed by the president who hates the Second Amendment. And I pull no punches."
Nobody seems to be pulling any punches as the long hot debate over gun control in America has now become super-charged after the Sandy Hook tragedy.
Despite fresh opposition from the National Rifle Association, the White House is looking at a ban on assault weapons sales, limits on high capacity ammunition magazines and universal background checks for gun buyers.
While many see that as trampling on their right to bear arms, other gun owners we talked to say the president's proposals make sense.
"Everyone who buys a gun should have a background check," said Charles Nicholas of Boise. "It's ridiculous we don't do that already. I own guns, and have bought guns without anybody scrutinizing my background. I think that's completely wrong."
President Obama plans to push new measures on gun violence during his State of the Union speech Feb. 12.
The primary function of a firearm is to kill people. Killing people is what most guns are specifically designed to do. This fact begs the following questions:
Since the 30,000 gun deaths per year in the United States are nearly all murders, suicides and accidents, and few deaths are prevented by armed self-defense, why are guns valued for self-defense?Since many children are killed by guns, why would a parent want to possess one?
Do gun-owning parents think much about how they would feel if one their guns killed one of their children? Do they ever consider that if they got rid of their gun, the gun would never kill their kid?
Remember the guy a year or two back who brought his 8 year-old to the gun range and handed him an Uzi, which the kid fumbled and shot himself with? Ever wonder how Newtown hit that guy, or what he feels like every Christmas?
Why isnât the Second Amendment fulfilled by the existence of the National Guard? If not, should the amendment be repealed?
Since a driverâs license to operate a car is not a universal âright,â but a privilege granted by the state, why should there be anywhere a ârightâ to operate a firearm?
If the second amendment gives individuals the âright to bear armsâ, shouldnât it also confer the right to bear bazookas, machine guns, cruise missiles, armed drones and atomic bombs?
If the NRA supports the ârightâ of citizens to bear arms for the purpose of âdefenseâ against a central government deemed autocratic by gun-owners, should it be regarded as a terrorist organization under the Homeland Security Act?
What are the financial links between NRA leaders and gun manufacturers, and to what extent are rank and file members pawns in a giant scam turning America into a gun-toting dystopia profiting the firearms industry?
Since the widespread deployment of private firearms in the United States is the primary cause of 30,000 yearly deaths, is not gun-ownership a public health issue? Shouldnât guns and gun ownership therefore be eradicated like cancer or polio? As a social pathology shouldnât guns and gun ownership be abolished as was slavery?
Â
all the legal changes currently being proposed by biden would have done NOTHING to prevent what happened at sandy hook. Â as we live in a country of freedom, we have forgotten why weapons are so very important. Â without the second amendment there is no bill of rights. Â or does nobody realize that only because of guns were our rights made manifest? Â if assault rifles are so bad, why is it that every government agency seeks to arm themselves with them? Â if high capacity magazines are so bad, why are they the product of choice for the military, cia, fbi, homeland security, border defense as well as local police? Â because the bad guys already have them! Â As we have all seen, the bad guys now carry high capacity magazines, shotguns, pistols, crossbows and assault rifles. Â equality of force is the only deterrent. Â or why do you think they only go to places where the victims are unarmed, weak, undefended, easy prey? Â the good, hard working, patriotic citizens our our fine country are able and willing to defend what matters most, our children. Â ENABLE THEM! Â to take weapons away from these honest and caring defenders of our children is to sentence them to being unable to defend that which we all love. Â should we leave our money undefended? Â should we leave our government buildings and politicians undefended? Â should we leave our military bases and borders undefended? Â the idea is unthinkable. Â undefended money would be stolen, undefended borders would be overrun, and undefended children are no different. Â many of the proposals coming from bidens office may be sensible, but they will never stop a crazy person from accomplishing their goals. Â only when the good citizens of our country have the same right to defend their life that the crazy people have to take it will the equality of force protect lives. Â or does nobody realize the crazy kid at sandy hook also had a shotgun, or the crazy theatre man also had made thermite and napalm or the other crazy kid with a crossbow, not to mention knives and club injuries and deaths? Â what law can you create to prevent a crazy person from being crazy? Â there is none. Â the solution is simply to enable law abiding citizens to defend their own life. Â you can only call the police after the crime has happened. Â but if you are armed, you have a chance to prevent the crime at the moment it may be happening. Â for this reason, i support arming and training of teachers over limiting weapons for law abiding citizens. Â the policy of defense the government enjoys should be equally the policy for the good and patriotic citizens of America!
Unfortunately the left doesn't know the difference betweeen an "assault rifle" and a "semi automatic rifle". This whole debate is about control not minimizing violence. If we were searching for laws that would save one life we'd ban automobiles, alcohol, all drugs, aircraft, watercraft, playground equipment, baseball bats, hammers, screw drivers, axes, knives and this list goes on.
 @Karl Spencer With all respect, the search is for laws that would save 30,000 lives a year.  Unlike cars and screwdrivers, most guns are specifically designed to kill people.  Their widespread deployment in private hands will only continue the carnage.  The more gun ownership is understood as a public health issue, the less it will  be seen in terms of "left" or "right".  Awareness of the mayhem caused by the very existence of millions of guns could reach the point that the term "responsible gun ownership" may someday be seen as an oxymoron.