I am writing out of frustration. After 19 years in public service at the Cobb County Commission and the Cobb Chamber of Commerce, I have never opined on community issues. I have been asked a number of times about different issues, but have always stated that when I leave something I don’t look back or attempt to have influence that is better left to those currently in those same positions of leadership. But when innocent 6- and 7-year-old babies are the victims, it is time to speak.
I cannot remain silent on this recent tragedy. Some folks are regurgitating the same mantra that “People kill people, guns don’t kill people.” And that there is no reason to address our current gun laws. To me this is absurd.
Being politically conservative I certainly agree with the citizens’ right to bear arms. However, to take the hard line position that this should include all guns, including automatic rifles such as the AK-47, is ludicrous.
I have heard and read two opinions on this particular aspect of the debate. One expert on Fox News stated the obvious when he said such weapons were originally developed for “military purposes.” Enough said! That fact speaks volumes.
The second statement came from an interview in a USA Today article on 12/18 with rocker, avid hunter and NRA Board member, Ted Nugent. Mr. Nugent is paraphrased as having said that “… he hunted before he began playing the guitar.” My immediate thought was to ask him if he ever hunted with an AK-47. I am reasonably certain that I know the answer. No sportsman would ever use such a weapon.
There is absolutely no defensible rationale for allowing these automatic killing machines to be sold to the general public. This is not a constitutional issue of the “right of our citizens to bear arms.” That right is inviolate. We can have a discussion of better standards for checking applicants vis-à-vis mental health issues, etc.
However, a very positive first step would be to remove the high-powered automatic weapons from the potential arsenal of anyone, no matter their mental state.
Thank you for listening. There comes a time one is obligated to speak up.
Bill Cooper
west Cobb
Editor’s note: Mr. Cooper represented west Cobb on the Board of Commissioners and later was president of the Cobb Chamber of Commerce. He is a retired airline and military pilot.
Follow us on Twitter!
The cows have left the barn!!! Shutting the barn door will not help! As Larry Savage wrote in last week's column, Ak-47s are produced in over 80 countries around the world. There is NO WAY that these weapons will ever NOT be available to criminals or citizens wishing to defend themselves!!!
The citizen without a criminal record or mental health deficiency who buys "rapid-fire, larg-magazine" rifles is probably NOT confident in their training -- so they want something that continually fires at an intrudent to ensure their own safety. Good luck trying to dispel this concept from gun-buyers' minds!!!! Just as people take two tablets per dose instead of the prescribed one tablet per dose -- because two are twice as effective as one -- people will still crave more "effective" weapons!!!
I also said if it takes you that many rounds to hit a deer, perhaps you are a bad hunter.
I believe in the right to bear arms for protection and hunting, but agree with Mr. Cooper in that guns such as AR15's should be for armed forces and that's it.
However, sorry Bill, but I believe that People Kill People....not guns purchased or stolen, airplanes that crash into buildings or rental vans that have bombs in them (Oklahoma).
Behind these devices are people who have somehow been affected by culture that have changed their reason for being. Until the culture changes, we will have to deal with these people.
See, the problem is that you put all of your faith in the reliability of government to always protect us from evil deeds. The fact is, no police with arms got there in time to stop the mad man. Had someone on the property been armed, many of those who lost their lives would be alive today.
Key to your argument is the notion that the only legitimate use of guns by citizens is hunting. That's pure ignorance! Apart from having the right to protect ourselves from those who wish to harm us, we also have the right to stop a government which becomes too intrusive on our rights! You have just revealed that you have been a part of building such a government! I will need all the firepower I can muster to go up against your tanks (remember Waco?!). You, however, probably won't be happy until law-abiding citizens are left only with bows and arrows, or at the most, muskets!
Stop making excuses for lunatics with too much fire power. And, by the way, if that apocalypse you imagine in your fever swamp dreams ever happens, I want to see you step into thee street to confront an Abrams tank with your ArmaLite.
I just wonder, would you characterize the American Revolution as "apocalyptic?" I believe you are what Karl Marx referred to as a "useful idiot!"
BTW, I have no opinion on Ted Nugent. He's welcome to express his opinion on gun rights as long as the 1st amendment remains intact... Or do you want to try to take that, too?
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
What's that first phrase again? A WELL REGULATED MILITIA. Power trippers who want to get off on guns should be able to within the parameters of the well regulated militia with which they are members.
1. Prior to WWI, most American owned firearms that were better than what the military had
2. American veterans traditionally prefer firearms they are the most familiar with...which is typically those that they served with.
3. The firearms being discussed here are NOT full-auto/select fire military-issue firearms, but rather their civilian semi-auto lookalikes.
But of course we can't confuse the issue with mere facts when we have political axes to grind and bandwagons to jump on.
A well "regulated" militia... Regulated at that time only meant trained.
The comma after Militia was a typo made during the transcription before ratification. It can not be taken out without writing another amendment. This comma makes the 2nd Amendment difficult to understand, although it doesn't change the meaning.
And last of all, study the definition of militia.
"The reserve militia or unorganized militia, also created by the Militia Act of 1903 which presently consist of every able-bodied man of at least 17 and under 45 years of age who are not members of the National Guard or Naval Militia.(that is, anyone who would be eligible for a draft). Former members of the armed forces up to age 65 are also considered part of the "unorganized militia" per Sec 313 Title 32 of the US Code." (Wikipedia)
This type of militia commonly use their own weapons. So I ask, should they be armed with a .22 single shot?
I'll remind you - US Code is Federal Law!
Stop making excuses for Animal Lanza, and the rest of the maniac killers.
Hard to do with bullets flying at your face.