Saturday, October 25, 2014
FAIRFIELD-SUISUN, CALIFORNIA
99 CENTS

Faulty reasoning in assault weapon letter

Web_OurView_YourView

By
From page A11 | January 23, 2013 |

In a Jan. 17 letter to the editor, Edward Doolin finally expressed the argument supporters of private ownership of assault weapons make for owning those weapons as opposed to other weapons. He did so in the last paragraph of his letter when he said we need them “in case we are called to help stop an internal tyrannical government or some other tyrannical government from invading our country.”

First, the odds of a foreign tyrannical government invading our country are zero. That is because we have, by far, the strongest military in the world. Does Mr. Doolin seriously think that a country from Asia or Europe would be able to cross an ocean and defeat our Navy, Air Force, Army and Marines (which forces would be supplemented by the National Guard) and get to our shores to try to take over our country? That is not going to happen.

Second, the odds of an internal tyrannical government being established in this country are also zero. We have a balance of power established by the Constitution between the president, Congress and the Supreme Court to prevent such an event. A president would need the military to cooperate if he tried to establish a tyranny. The United States military would not support such a move.

Mr. Doolin stated, “in case we are called to help stop an internal tyrannical government.” Who is going to call him? Rush Limbaugh? We have a democratically elected government and will continue to do so into the forseeable future so I see no need for Mr. Doolin and his fellow assault weapon supporters to attack that government.

Charles McLaughlin

Fairfield

Letter to the Editor

LEAVE A COMMENT

Discussion | 70 comments

The Daily Republic does not necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy

  • rlw895January 17, 2013 - 9:07 pm

    Well said. That's the argument that fires me up too. As long as people really believe that, there can be a thousand Sandy Hooks, and it won't matter to them. Set that argument aside, where it belongs, and we can have a reasonable discussion.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • G-ManJanuary 17, 2013 - 10:46 pm

    Rubbish...This country has only been around for a bit over 200yrs...how can you make such absolute predictions?..I

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • G-ManJanuary 17, 2013 - 10:50 pm

    In another life you were a Senator of Rome..thinking your Republic was invincible then too...

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • rlw895January 18, 2013 - 1:39 am

    I assume you're commenting on the letter, not my comment.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • G-ManJanuary 18, 2013 - 2:41 am

    With all due respect Counselor...your mind set.. if you believe a word of that letter that's says we can't have a tyrannical gov't..be invaded., (some say we have been)....The most powerful military?..That's debateable..We've spent decades policing the world..China's been a busy little squirrel amassing lots of nuts (ours)..and I would not stake the existence of our Republic on a bet on who would edge out who in an all out war...if it was conventional land warfare you better practice your chopsticks..

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • rlw895January 18, 2013 - 10:27 am

    Well, all right then. If you really believe the probability we will be invaded by China is significant, then it’s a matter of how well you tolerate risk. Admittedly, the probability of anything happening is more than zero, but how infinitesimally small does the probability have to be before you think arming civilians in an unregulated way is worthwhile? Same for an internal tyrannical takeover. Mr. McLaughlin makes good points about why the probabilities are very low, low enough that we should consider, at least, if the cost of mitigating that risk is worth it. We are far better off using our time, energy, and resources in other ways than to allow those who feel the need have military weapons in their homes with virtually no oversight. That’s part of our problem now; those who “feel the need” sometimes go off the deep end. We’re not Switzerland, where every adult male is part of a “well-regulated militia.” I imagine it’s about the same in a place like Israel. The risk you will die today at the hands of some nut with legally owned gun is much higher than you will ever effectively defend yourself from a Chinese invasion with the gun in your closet. So stick with self-protection from criminals; it’s a better argument.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • G-ManJanuary 18, 2013 - 11:50 am

    Probability is your word not mine..try possibilty...your side presents..things like out of control riots,or foreign attacks..are impossible..in this.....wonderful land of OZ.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • rlw895January 18, 2013 - 1:08 pm

    "Probablity" is my word and I'm sticking with it. It's more analytical. "Possibility" is just fear-mongering in this context.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • G-ManJanuary 18, 2013 - 11:59 am

    Then you should realise RLW..that guns illegal and legal rank 9th and 10th in the ways we close each other's eyes..I think bats are number one..the obligatory "blunt instrument"...We can joust. The stats,,and spin..time eternal..human nature is what has to change...You hold your breath..I'Ll hold my Beretta..

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • rlw895January 18, 2013 - 1:11 pm

    Did you read the article in the DR about the 1996 law that bans federal funding of firearm research? The NRA lobbied for it and it was attached to a bill Clinton signed. So how good is our information? The story provides a good case for repealing that law.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • G-ManJanuary 18, 2013 - 1:33 pm

    Fed funding for gun research?...another rat hole to throw some money down..hire a few of the 40,000 Phd's that are long term unemployed...

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • rlw895January 18, 2013 - 10:03 pm

    Federal money is used to reseach all sorts of things. Guns are an exception. So we are left to speculate about the facts and truth in an environment poisoned by the NRA. What does it say when scientific research disempowers a lobbying organiztion?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • G-NannyJanuary 19, 2013 - 2:45 am

    @RLW now you're being bias the left has dished out poison too...If it Wasn't for the NRA..gun owners would really be swinging in the breeze...I as much for research as I am against lobbying...I'm a Conservative so please start by researching how to spend the money and time in the most efficient manner..GOD..is it too freaking much to ask already???

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • rlw895January 20, 2013 - 12:08 pm

    Nanny: So why has the NRA essentially banned government research into firearms, when we don't do that for anything else? It all is consistent with the "government is the enemy" narrative. And that's toxic. The fact is, government-funded research has made this country a better place. It's the least biased research done. If it is biased, that resarcher gets cut off. There is a big incentive to do a good job. If we had some decent information and analysis of statistics we could all agree on, it would be the first step to putting this issue behind us. But the NRA thrives on the conflict.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • G-ManJanuary 20, 2013 - 12:34 pm

    @RLW..Now you're just being ridiculous...The NRA has power to ban Gov't research???..please.??..Please that's absurd..About as absurd that Gov't researxh is beneficial..it's basically a front for political slush...gotta be some reason why 2 term Congressman become millionaires on 175K/yr..wake up Clarence Darrow...Did you see the Gov't research on putting a live shrimp on a treadmill??..I can see why you don't practice..ooooy veey!!.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • rlw895January 22, 2013 - 8:25 pm

    G-Man: Yes, the NRA has the power to ban government research into firearms, if you believe this article: dailyrepublic.com/usworld/will-obamas-order-lead-to-surge-in-gun-research/

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • G-ManJanuary 26, 2013 - 4:23 pm

    The NRA has the power to ban government research into guns?????..Too bad they don't have the power to stop Step nFetch it from spending this Republic into oblivion...

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • G-ManJanuary 19, 2013 - 3:26 am

    @RLW..you keep chirping " a well regulated Militia"...the unecessary arming of civilians..etc..all the rationalization..but I don't hear the words that also appear in the 2nd...."The right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms shall NOT be infringed...and if you think some pimple head narcissistic,president with a superiority complex is going to infringe on this most basic right in our Republic...it could get extremely ugly.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • rlw895January 20, 2013 - 12:19 pm

    G-Man: The words are there. I didn't write them. The question is, how should the Court interpret them? I've given my view, that it's an indication that the states wanted to be sure the new federal government would not effectively eliminate state militias by disarming civilians. We are no longer so protective of state militias, yet the Second Amendment is still there. And there is no debate that the independent clause can be interpreted to guarantee an individual's right to own firearms. The debate is over what we must allow to respect that right and what we restrictions we may adopt without infringing on that right. The Supreme Court has rule that the government must allow people to own handguns and keep them in their home, presumably for self protection. That's a deviation from the "original meaning" states' rights, militia-requirement interpretation. I'm OK with that. So what's the problem?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • G-ManJanuary 20, 2013 - 12:26 pm

    Can't be any more simple ..you wanna make it two tier fine..a well regulated militia and the people in a Republic are one in the samemayoy wanna marginalize Militia fine..you still got those pesky words "the right of the people"..not soldiers,not police,nor any other minnions of an abusive Gov't...the people..of by and for RLW..you's do well to remember that..

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • rlw895January 22, 2013 - 10:47 pm

    G-Man: Constitutional law is only simple to people who haven't studied it and think they can pick up the document and find a plain meaning. It's not simple. "Shall not be infringed" are the operative words. The Constitution also says the government may “make no law abridging the freedom of speech,” yet there are constitutional laws and regulations that, taken literally, do exactly that. Same is true for the Second Amendment.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Sandy Hook Black Ops PsyJanuary 18, 2013 - 10:51 pm

    "Twenty children being killed, hell, twenty babies, is enough to make any sane person sick, but then these communistsm (Posters NOTE, not Communits but DEEP BLACK OPS WORKING FOR THE GLOBAL ELITE ILLUMINATI/ Committee of 300/Black Nobility/Great White Brotherhood/Council on Foreign Relations/Club of Rome/Trilateral Commission/MI6/DARPA Mind Control Projects) are not sane except to the point that they know they cannot conquer our armed population. We must let our enemies know that no matter how many MK Ultra, Prozac propelled psychos they let into schools to murder children, they are not going to take our liberty teeth from us so that they can complete the theft of our nation and slaughter us wholesale like their comrades slaughtered the Russian people during the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • ReferenceJanuary 18, 2013 - 10:54 pm

    *******http://anewworldsociety.ning.com/profiles/blogs/sandy-hook-elementary-school-massacre-is-a-possible-false-flag?xg_source=activity

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • G-ManJanuary 19, 2013 - 2:52 am

    Now this person?...no gun..no way..

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • John MillerJanuary 23, 2013 - 8:00 am

    Liberals always tell you the Constitution is a fluid document that can be interpreted to society at the time. They rest of us consider the Constitution a document that that has no need for your interpretion

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • CD BrooksJanuary 23, 2013 - 8:42 am

    Mr. Miller, so do you prefer the GOP version?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • rlw895January 25, 2013 - 12:07 am

    Speak for yourself, John. Liberals and conservatives alike interpret the constitution, and those who are on courts have a responsibility to do so. Some conservatives are "originalists," who try to interpret the Constitution the way they think the Founders did, but that's still interpretation. Not all conservatives are originalists. If the Founders wanted the Constitution to be static, they would have spent more text providing definitions of terms. They didn't do that probably because they themselves couldn't agree on definitions; it was hard enough to agree on what they had. But some Founders realized ambiguity was good in a constitution that was supposed to last essentially forever with amendments relatively infrequent. It's worked for over 200 years. How can you argue with that? In any event, it's not hard to find some good books about the Constitution and its nature. Read up on it.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • MarkJanuary 23, 2013 - 3:04 pm

    The entire discussion of "assault rifles" ignores the some facts. First the definition of "assault rifle" includes full automatic firing, something that can't be bought off the shelf. The rifles that people keep referring to as assault rifles, they're semi-automatic, same functionality as most handguns and a lot of other rifles. Every time you pull the trigger one bullet is fired, heck revolvers do the same. There are numerous rifles out there with the exact same semi-automatic functionality, that aren't considered assault rifles, same ability to be misused in a crime, yet nothing is said of them. In 2011 (latest statistics I could find), more people were killed in this country with knives (1694), hands/fists/feet (728) and hammers/blunt objects (496) than were killed by rifles (323). Those scary assault rifles are a subset of rifles, so our leaders and media are spending all this time, effort and money on a weapon class that was involved in far less than 2% of gun deaths annually (one report I saw said .6% of gun deaths). Where's the outcry for the things that are killing people in large numbers? Drunk driving related deaths...11,000 . More than 35 times the number of people died in 2011 from a drunk driver than from a rifle. Why is the government just now saying they're going to work harder on keeping guns out of the wrong people's hands, when they try and purchase them at a gun store? ~80,000 people were declined for lying on their background checks yet only handful were prosecuted. No person killed by violence deserved to die. All lives are precious, why do we allow the media to flaunt violence, especially gun violence, on one hand in the movies and TV shows and then they turn around and let them make guns out to be bad? They give these mass shooters their 15 minutes of fame, which can spawn copycat shooters. Guns aren't good or bad, anymore than a hammer is. Its how its used, does killing someone with a hammer make the hammer bad? No it makes the person holding the hammer bad. We have a societal problem where human life isn't as valued as it should be. That's what we need to fix.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • G-ManJanuary 26, 2013 - 3:02 am

    Forget it Mark..you're trying to talk to people who have a tuff time with Velcro...obama's minions.."The needy and the naïve...throw in some greedy and you have a good cross section of liberalism in this Republic...sure obama wants your guns..he's got beefy security guards sleeping outside his door...and a wife whose look could strip paint...your guns are just a threat to him...

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Rich GiddensJanuary 23, 2013 - 3:12 pm

    Wev'e attempted gun control before. 1174---importation banned by the tyrant king. 1775---attemption confiscation by the king. 1776----bloody revolution against the king! Speaking of ''Kings''---Martin Luther King applied for a weapon permit and was denied his rights by segregationists from the Democratic Party. Black people! Ask yourselves "what would Django do?".....

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • G-ManJanuary 24, 2013 - 12:10 pm

    @RlW..of course the Constitition is more complex than the "average" person would have you think...Bull..Lawyers..in your case even ones who don't practice want to "complicate" things..how else to justify the fees..fools..all of you..The Constitution and it's original 600 words founded and served the greatest nation history has known for over 200 yrs...And RLW shame on you for playing the "freedom of speech" clause..We all know the difference between FOS and abuse of the right...I can call obama a communist anti American traitor...but I can't yell" FIRE"..in a crowd unless there is one!!...

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Well then....January 24, 2013 - 12:23 pm

    People should have the right to speak out and tell others that 911 was an inside job....Correct?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • And U do still "Fire" me up!January 24, 2013 - 12:29 pm

    So I really want to know Gary/Henry...should I not have to right to protest w/out the fear of being NDAAed/Disappeared? (PS...KWed or MHed ?)

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • G-ManJanuary 24, 2013 - 12:39 pm

    Which 9/11 was an "inside job"?..The one in 2001?..That's insane..the one last year..well just may be..but only in that the Arab staff@ consulate probably knew what was going down.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • WhateverJanuary 24, 2013 - 12:42 pm

    U are so smooth...no outsmarting U. So KWed or MHed?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • rlw895January 24, 2013 - 5:53 pm

    G-Man: How did this comment get here? Anyway, I'm merely the reporter of truth. Remember, I've never practiced law, let alone been a judge. It's the way it is. The Founders left many terms in the Constitution undefined, such as speech, arms, religion. Rights that presumably were in existence before the Constitution are not defined either; the Constitution often just says those rights, whatever they are, are protected in some way. There is a lot left to interpretation, and we've let the take that role.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • G-ManJanuary 24, 2013 - 8:39 pm

    The Constitution is not complicated convoluted,or contentious..."The right of the people to keep and bear arms"...the right to free speech and peaceful assembly..Freedom of Religion..all seem pretty straight forward to me..

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • rlw895January 25, 2013 - 12:18 am

    I'm sure it does.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • G-ManJanuary 25, 2013 - 12:30 am

    Good..now we can devote our time to enlightening those in the cheap seats.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Tears in HeavenJanuary 25, 2013 - 9:30 am

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6t4Zs5Yq_k

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • rlw895January 25, 2013 - 1:16 pm

    G-Man: I'm sure it does...to you. I'm not agreeing. It's definitely not straighforward unless a court says it is, and they generally haven't. I left the word "courts" out of my last comment. It should have read: "There is a lot left to interpretation, and we've let the courts take that role." There is a lot more case law on the First Amendment than the Second, but the interpretation problems are similar. If you read up on the First Amendment, you will get an idea of the complications.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • G-ManJanuary 25, 2013 - 1:54 pm

    Not straight forward unless a court says it is?...and 2 Appellates and the SCOTUS later may change "what it is"...I'm exercising my free speech right..right now..as for the 2nd amendment..I hear nothing from the left on how where guns are most prevalent crime is not...and the opposite is true where guns are restricted..I hear nothing about how rare tragedies like Sandy Hook and Columbine are..I hear nothing ...certainly not from the left.. about people defending themselves and their families with legal guns...Know this RLW..you have only you to depend on for your own safety..no gun law is going to do that for you...and if you're waiting around for the Police...sit tight it'll be awhile..

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • SpongeBobJanuary 25, 2013 - 2:03 pm

    @Gary.....Very good. I agree.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • G-ManJanuary 26, 2013 - 3:15 am

    @SpongeBob...Thanks! that makes 66,000,002 of us..

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Why....January 26, 2013 - 3:22 am

    66,000,002?.....Honestly Gary do you not have better things to do w/your time?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • G-ManJanuary 26, 2013 - 4:15 am

    Could say the same thing about you..after all you're WRITING to someone who doesn't have a better use for their time..SO THERE!!..I think this was time well spent..

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Pay AttentionJanuary 26, 2013 - 4:24 am

    Still no answer why 66,000,002, where does that figure come from?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • G-ManJanuary 26, 2013 - 4:39 am

    Good Grief!!...Did you grow up under high voltage power lines?...66,000,000 is the estimated number of gun owners in this country...300million is the estimated number of guns in this country (minus whatever Holder,Hussein,and Biden sent AND LOST in Mexico...no wonder every little child thinks they can be president one day...can't get that bar much lower...and finally the "2" was just me having a joke w/SpongeBob..That clear it up for you?...ps:the paint chips you see on your window seals ARE NOT..snacks!!

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Well...January 26, 2013 - 4:39 am

    Say....Buonanotte Gary.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • JoneseyJanuary 25, 2013 - 5:43 pm

    Gee Gary, do I need a Bushmaster or will my Glock & Mossberg surfice while I'm waiting for the police?...

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • G-ManJanuary 26, 2013 - 2:57 am

    I guess you DON'T know much about guns..What type of GLOCK?..a .40 Cal?..I have a GLOCK 17 9mm...(17 shots?.guess that's gotta go)..I also have a MOSSBERG "camper" .20ga.it's a real attention getter...I personally don't care what you do while waiting for the police...but reading your Police Logs they could easily be very busy in another part of town or if you're lucky they'll be next door confiscating weapons.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • G-ManJanuary 26, 2013 - 3:10 am

    @Jonesey..Sorry.. if you are who I think you are..you probably DO know a lot about guns..I remember you chiding me for talking about and dis-closing weapons owned..It must of amused you to see thousands of gun owners "outed" in that newspaper..or people actually stupid enough to put a sign on their lawn advertising their defenseless...like the skull and crossbones on my windows state.."Nothing in this House is worth your life"...Actually practically everything is..but I'm trying to be kind.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • JonesyJanuary 26, 2013 - 2:43 pm

    Well my Glock 17 comes with 10 rnd mag's, this California. And I can hit what I need with ten. Don't worry, you'll get used to ten. Oh wait, with your eyesight I'd stick with the shotgun...

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • G-ManJanuary 26, 2013 - 4:10 pm

    Well Jonesey..I gave you that name didn't I?.Much better...You'll recall the mother recently protecting her children emptied a .38 Revolver into the face and neck of some creep..and he had enough energy to leave the house and drive away...So you should rethink that ammo thing..what if there had been more than 1 guy?...A Glock 17 that holds 10?..should call it Glock 10..oh yeah I forgot California..Call it Glock" lite"..and as for my eyesight..since most shootings are within 5' I think I'll be OK...maybe get me a Braile gun...

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • rlw895January 27, 2013 - 10:59 pm

    Again, G-Man, the research on firearms is tainted by the lack of federal funding for it, unique to any other type of research, thanks to the NRA. We'll never agree until we at least share the same facts, and we won't do that until we open up the research to unbiased parties. So what if there is an inverse correlation between density of firearms in an area and crime? That doesn't tell us anything about causation. I might very well agree with you on a lot regarding this subject if there was good data. So, if you are so confident you have it right, why not let the research flow so I have to concede? I'm on the side of public safety. So are you--I think. So let's start with that. What's the best way to achieve that within the law? That's what I want to know. If it means every house should have a concealed, loaded 45 by the front door and another by the back door, I'm for it. But I want to see the data, because it sounds pretty dangerous to the occupants to me, let alone anyone outside.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • G-ManJanuary 28, 2013 - 12:41 am

    No..I'm for public slaughter..silly boy..of course I'm for Public Safety..But research is just busy work and more waste...Ted Kennedy's car killed more people than my guns..Jonesey's frustrated posts calling me a liar not withstanding..I'm going to try and end my posts on this subject...Firearms will be part of our society long after you and I are staining satin...Good Morning!!

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • rlw895January 28, 2013 - 1:23 am

    G-Man: Research is a waste to those who think they have all the answers. Other than that, we seem to agree on the basics: Public safety is the objective, and we can't and won't get it by eliminating guns. Golly, I wonder if there is any other way? I wish we had more data on that question. Oops, NRA is afraid to look!

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • rlwJanuary 28, 2013 - 1:40 am

    Would you say you exhibit a platonic dogmatic love affair with the socratic method? How do you feel about this?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Meant @rlwJanuary 28, 2013 - 1:43 am

    Good Night

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • G-ManJanuary 28, 2013 - 2:33 am

    @RLW...well I DO love Dogs..and depending on my mood and menu of controlled substances ingested it can go beyond platonic..Socrates??..In his day it was spear control,limiting the number of arrows allowed in a quiver etc..see how far we've come?..

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • rlw895January 28, 2013 - 1:49 pm

    @rlw: No Socratic method here, just a rhetorical question, which I actually try to avoid except for a good reason. It's hard to drill into G-Man's skull!

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • StrJanuary 28, 2013 - 1:58 pm

    Sorry that was me...I was just trying to appear smarter than I really am not.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • G-ManJanuary 28, 2013 - 2:14 am

    @RLW esq. There are ways to improve on public safety if as you say it can't be achieved vis a vis gun control...Ever been to Monaco?..There are video cameras everywhere..and I mean everywhere that's public..and then some..Every car and license plate that enters the Principality is filmed..Women can walk the streets after dark dressed in furs and dripping in Jewels without a worry...and while they're expensive..they're open to negotiation.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • rlw895January 28, 2013 - 1:53 pm

    G-Man: We seem to be headed the same direction. But Monaco has what must be at or near the highest income per capita, per acre, whatever measure you want. They can afford a lot of stuff can't. I like using technology for public safety though.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • g-manJanuary 28, 2013 - 2:08 pm

    I don't even know if there is a tax system in Monaco..that aside..we might not be able to afford it..but that's never stopped us before.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • G-ManJanuary 28, 2013 - 2:24 am

    Causation?..You want research on causation?..I'm sure that's been researched to death already..to no avail of course..makes the "investment" in SOLYNDRA look prudent...Let's see...causation..why do people shoot each other?..Anything from infidelity in a relationship..to a parking space..research??..RUBBISH..just enforce the laws on the books,make mandatory sentencing..duh..mandatory..and for God sakes..before it's too late pass the "BRADY BUNCH BILL already!!

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • rlw895January 28, 2013 - 1:56 pm

    What I want to know is the effects on public safety of having lots of legal guns in an area. Does it matter what kind they are? How they are stored? There's a lot to know.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • G-ManJanuary 28, 2013 - 2:30 pm

    GOD MAN!!!..You don't need more research you need to just read what's already been done..not one gun control advocate on this site responded to the stats in DC,Chicago,The UK..etc..more legal guns LESS CRIME..less legal guns MORE CRIME..listen to the Milwaukee Sheriff..he's on the front lines not sitting around posting pithy crap..yeah me too...How are the guns stored??...why not do some research on grip preferences,blue,matte stainless,stainless..give us all a break RLW..

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • rlw895January 30, 2013 - 12:56 am

    Like Benjamin Franklin said in his final address to the Constitutional Convention, as I have aged, I have learned to doubt my own infallibility and to give more respect to the opinions of others. You should do the same. Franklin also said with age he learned to change his mind with more information. That’s where research comes in. Is it so important to steamroll people? It rarely works, and when it does, it often doesn’t result in a sustainable solution. But if you take the time and effort to bring others to your point of view through persuasion, in their own time, everyone learns, and there is the commitment needed for sustainability. I don’t know about you, but I want whatever we do to be sustainable, which likely means it’s right.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • G-ManJanuary 30, 2013 - 6:28 am

    @RLW..et tu brute?..You also didn't address the quandry..more guns less crime..less guns more crime..instead chosing to wax on Ben Franklin..quite a guy..he used to throw the windows open in his house walk around naked saying he's taking an "air bath"..A regular at brothels.he had no shame breaking wind in public..and was said to have quite the potty mouth..that aside..He said something else at the end of the Constitutional Convention..he was asked "what have you created here?"..Franklin's reply..."A Republic if you can keep it"...Yes we hope we get wiser with age..sometimes we just get older set like concrete in our ways...Research into gun violence for me is a non-starter..yet another waste of time and money...As far as guns go you have to know one thing..I read somewhere..Guns are like a parachute..if you need one and don't have one..you'll probably never need one again..

    Reply | Report abusive comment
.

Solano News

 
 
Fall Harvest Festival brings children back to school

By Susan Hiland | From Page: A3 | Gallery

 
No new murder trial for Calkins, judge rules

By Ryan McCarthy | From Page: A3

Optimist Club brings youth together for Halloween golf

By Amy Maginnis-Honey | From Page: A3

 
Cut-a-thon to help fight cancer, abuse

By Susan Hiland | From Page: A3

 
School board candidates forum set next week

By Susan Winlow | From Page: A4

Haunted hikes offered for brave souls at park

By Susan Hiland | From Page: A4

 
Staying active may prolong your life

By Scott Anderson | From Page: B8

 
Suisun City police log: Oct. 23, 2014

By Susan Hiland | From Page: A9

.

US / World

Suspect arrested in death of 2 California deputies

By The Associated Press | From Page: A1

 
KC-10 from Travis lands in Houston, smoke in cockpit

By The Associated Press | From Page: A3

Reagan astrologer, Joan Quigley, dies at 87

By The Associated Press | From Page: A4

 
Jury says castrated sex offender should be freed

By The Associated Press | From Page: A4

Remains belong to missing Virginia student

By The Associated Press | From Page: A5

 
Dallas nurse receives thanks, hug from Obama

By The Associated Press | From Page: A5

School gunman was Homecoming prince, students say

By The Associated Press | From Page: A5

 
Lava creeps toward road on Hawaii’s Big Island

By The Associated Press | From Page: A5

NY, NJ order Ebola quarantine for doctors, others

By The Associated Press | From Page: A9

 
Gunman in Canada attack complained about mosque

By The Associated Press | From Page: A10

Egypt declares emergency in northern Sinai

By The Associated Press | From Page: A10

 
Militant group said to be using chlorine bombs

By The Associated Press | From Page: A10

Putin accuses US of undermining global stability

By The Associated Press | From Page: A10

 
.

Opinion

Vote, and make a difference

By Letter to the Editor | From Page: A8

 
Yes on Measure A

By Letter to the Editor | From Page: A8

Spering best choice for county supervisor

By Daily Republic | From Page: A8

 
Return Garamendi to Congress

By Daily Republic | From Page: A8

Editorial Cartoons: Oct. 25, 2014

By Daily Republic Syndicated Content | From Page: A8

 
SEIU shouldn’t own Board of Supervisors

By Letter to the Editor | From Page: A8, 1 Comment

.

Living

Today in History: Oct. 25, 2014

By The Associated Press | From Page: A2

 
Community Calendar: Oct. 25, 2014

By Susan Hiland | From Page: A2

Horoscopes: Oct. 25, 2014

By Holiday Mathis | From Page: A7

 
My mother-in-law wants me to convert to Catholicism, but I don’t want to

By Kathy Mitchell and Marcy Sugar | From Page: A7

Hello Kitty turning 40, and the birthday bash will be ‘supercute’

By Mcclatchy-Tribune News Service | From Page: B8

 
.

Entertainment

TVGrid

By Daily Republic Syndicated Content | From Page: B9

 
TLC cancels its ‘Honey Boo Boo’ series

By The Associated Press | From Page: B9

P.D. James’ riff on Jane Austen comes to TV

By The Associated Press | From Page: B9

 
.

Sports

Hamilton helps Vanden sink Vallejo, 35-0

By Nick DeCicco | From Page: B1

 
Vintage rolls past Armijo, 55-8

By Mike Corpos | From Page: B1

Mustangs fall flat in rout by Wildcats

By Marcus Lomtong | From Page: B1

 
Royals beat Giants 3-2 for 2-1 World Series lead

By The Associated Press | From Page: B1 | Gallery

Vargas to take on Vogelsong in Game 4 of Series

By The Associated Press | From Page: B1 | Gallery

 
Falcons hang with Wolves in 34-8 setback

By Paul Farmer | From Page: B1 | Gallery

Judge halts New Jersey’s sports betting plan

By The Associated Press | From Page: B2

 
Joe Maddon exercises opt-out, won’t return to Rays

By The Associated Press | From Page: B2

Jamie McMurray bests Chase drivers to win pole

By The Associated Press | From Page: B2 | Gallery

 
Attorney: NFL, Ravens not helping union in Rice probe

By The Associated Press | From Page: B2

SCC women’s soccer team falls to Mendocino 3-1

By Daily Republic staff | From Page: B2

 
Unfazed, 49ers coach Jim Harbaugh doing it his way

By The Associated Press | From Page: B2

Lloyd leads US women past Mexico 3-0

By The Associated Press | From Page: B2

 
Raiders’ Woodley, Young expected to be placed on IR

By The Associated Press | From Page: B2

Henley’s putting gets him lead at Sea Island

By The Associated Press | From Page: B2

 
This date in sports history for Saturday, Oct. 25, 2014

By The Associated Press | From Page: B3

 
.

Business

Procter & Gamble taking out its batteries

By The Associated Press | From Page: B4

 
UPS expects double-digit surge in Dec shipments

By The Associated Press | From Page: B4

US new-home sales close to flat in September

By The Associated Press | From Page: B4

 
US official: Auto safety agency under review

By The Associated Press | From Page: B4

Ford profit falls in third quarter on truck costs

By The Associated Press | From Page: B4

 
.

Obituaries

Mark Dean Lindsay

By Nancy Green | From Page: A4, 1 Comment

 
Dr. Robert M. Takamoto

By Nancy Green | From Page: A4

Melvin Tate

By Nancy Green | From Page: A4

 
.

Comics

B.C.

By Daily Republic Syndicated Content | From Page: A6

 
Dilbert

By Daily Republic Syndicated Content | From Page: A6

Get Fuzzy

By Daily Republic Syndicated Content | From Page: A6

 
Rose is Rose

By Daily Republic Syndicated Content | From Page: A6

Garfield

By Daily Republic Syndicated Content | From Page: A6

 
Baldo

By Daily Republic Syndicated Content | From Page: A6

Baby Blues

By Daily Republic Syndicated Content | From Page: A6

 
Frank and Ernest

By Daily Republic Syndicated Content | From Page: A6

Sally Forth

By Daily Republic Syndicated Content | From Page: A6

 
Wizard of Id

By Daily Republic Syndicated Content | From Page: A6

Blondie

By Daily Republic Syndicated Content | From Page: A6

 
Zits

By Daily Republic Syndicated Content | From Page: A6

For Better or Worse

By Daily Republic Syndicated Content | From Page: A6

 
Peanuts

By Daily Republic Syndicated Content | From Page: A6

Pickles

By Daily Republic Syndicated Content | From Page: A6

 
Beetle Bailey

By Daily Republic Syndicated Content | From Page: A6

Cryptoquote

By Daily Republic Syndicated Content | From Page: A7

 
Crossword

By Daily Republic Syndicated Content | From Page: A7

Bridge

By Daily Republic Syndicated Content | From Page: A7

 
Sudoku

By Daily Republic Syndicated Content | From Page: A7

Word Sleuth

By Daily Republic Syndicated Content | From Page: A7

 
.

Home Seller 10/25/14

Real estate transactions for Oct. 25, 2014

By Daily Republic | From Page: HSR2