V. Rogers: Background checks benefit everyone

Yes, better mental health care. Benefits everybody. Yes, get automatic assault weapons out of the hands of the public. Benefits everybody. Yes, get the over-sized clips out of the hands of the public. Benefits everybody.

Defending yourself doesn't require spraying enough bullets to kill an army.

The elephant in the room is the "entertainment" industry that teaches that power is being the attacker, and that blowing away people with assault weapons is entertaining, fun and powerful, via video games, movies, videos and music. It's not the media, which decries that kind of action over and over and over and over.

If someone is glorying in blasting the "enemy," or bringing up their kids with this as fun, power and entertainment, they need to think about their part in the problem. What are they teaching? Does it benefit everybody to think gun violence is entertaining, fun and a way to be powerful?

Yes, background checks benefit everybody. Every gun sale should be required to undergo a comprehensive background check. Nuff said.

Vickie Rogers, Otisfield

What do you think of this story?

Login to post comments

In order to make comments, you must create a subscription.

In order to comment on SunJournal.com, you must hold a valid subscription allowing access to this website. You must use your real name and include the town in which you live in your SunJournal.com profile. To subscribe or link your existing subscription click here.

Login or create an account here.

Our policy prohibits comments that are:

  • Defamatory, abusive, obscene, racist, or otherwise hateful
  • Excessively foul and/or vulgar
  • Inappropriately sexual
  • Baseless personal attacks or otherwise threatening
  • Contain illegal material, or material that infringes on the rights of others
  • Commercial postings attempting to sell a product/item
If you violate this policy, your comment will be removed and your account may be banned from posting comments.



RONALD RIML's picture

Firearm Responsibility should include Liability Insurance

The Constitution addressed the 'Right to Bear Arms' with the Militia in mind. The Constitution, under Article I, Section 8, grants Congress the power to call out the Militia to "execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions."

As such, the Militia would be indemnified by the United States for death, injury, or damage caused in the lawful execution of their duties.

But who is responsible for injuries and deaths caused by constitutionally protected weapons when not under the control or ownership of a 'Well Regulated Militia?"

The one who owned and/or possessed that weapon at the time of it's use. And who indemnifies that person for any actions they may take with that weapon?

There is no requirement.

Yet with Rights come Responsibilities; Individual and Shared.

It is time that the individuals who choose to avail themselves of the Right to Bear Arms also be required to insure each firearm for the shared liability incurred by firearm misuse in this country.

 's picture

there already are background

there already are background checks. some people, like that guy that killed the firemen, got someone without a criminal record to buy the guns for them. others steal the guns from background checked owners. i don't think that private sales do, but maybe they should, i don't know how that would work though.
i'd also like to point out that the anti gun people that say that a smaller clip or knife would have killed fewer people completely miss the point. i think it sick that they condone the murder "fewer people" in their arguments against guns. ya i've seen it over and over again in these posts. "someone with a knife could only kill one or two people before stopped", "a smaller clip would kill fewer before stopped". those are comments i've seen here, on the portland press herald, and bangor daily blog sites. if you would rather a mentally ill person kill a few people rather then prevent them from killing, then there there is something wrong with you. not all mentally ill will, but those that are nearing crisis should be paid attention to, and condoning their violence with less then a semi automatic is ignorant.

 's picture

Speaking of missing the point...

Not anti-gun - anti-killing machines, referred to as assault weapons. They were designed and manufactured, with their multi-round magazines, to be killing machines and I'm really, really glad our forces overseas, and those protecting us at home, have them. They are military and police weapons. That's our well regulated militia. These machines are not target pieces. I hope you have a weapon that puts 10 in the black. They are not hunting rifles. I hope you have a gun that brings down a 20-pointer going 285 pounds. A guy on this blog, with a prefix of "Rev." before his name, took me to task because the weapon used at Sandy Hook was "just" a .223, which he called "far from an assault weapon." Guess he thought the guy was using a squirrel gun. Sure took a great deal of skill to put 11 bullet holes in a six-year-old body using only a .223 squirrel gun. We need to stop looking for excuses, we need to stop these emotional and often ridiculous posts, we need to stop with the semantics and deal with common sense. Military weapons belong with the military and police. Individual people are not a well regulated militia. Or ANY militia. They are individuals who should enjoy all the shooting sports with the proper equipment. Keep all your guns and have fun. I say again - military weapons belong with the military and police. In 1791, when the 2nd Amendment was written, the weapon of choice was a flintlock. Please don't try and convince me our founding fathers were so far ahead of anyone else they foresaw assault weapons. That's ridiculous.

MARK GRAVEL's picture

“Yes, get automatic assault

“Yes, get automatic assault weapons out of the hands of the public.”
Done, but leave semi-automatic weapons alone.

“Defending yourself doesn't require spraying enough bullets to kill an army.”
Yes, unless it is the army you are defending yourself against.

Lastly, since you don’t know an automatic weapon is already not available to the general public, which is fundamental to this discussion, you earn the “I don’t know what I’m talking about” badge.

AL PELLETIER's picture

As usual Mark

You bring nothing but negativity to the table.


Stay informed — Get the news delivered for free in your inbox.

I'm interested in ...