HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Loughner’s Judge Makes Co...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 04:01 PM

Loughner’s Judge Makes Conservative Plea For Gun Control

Larry Alan Burns, the federal district judge in San Diego who just last month sentenced Tuscon shooter Jared Lee Loughner to seven consecutive life terms plus 140 years in federal prison, is no darling of the gun control movement.

Burns is a self-described conservative, appointed to the bench by President George W. Bush, and he agrees with the Supreme Court’s decision in District of Columbia vs. Heller, which held that the 2nd Amendment gives Americans the right to own guns for self-defense. He is also a gun owner.

But while sentencing Loughner in November, Burns questioned the need for high-capacity magazines like the one Loughner had in his Glock, and said he regretted how the Federal Assault Weapons Ban was allowed to lapse in 2004. On Thursday, reacting to last week’s mass shooting in Newtown, Conn., Burns publicly called for a new assault weapons ban “with some teeth this time,” in an op-ed published by The Los Angeles Times.

“Ban the manufacture, importation, sale, transfer and possession of both assault weapons and high-capacity magazines,” Burns wrote. “Don’t let people who already have them keep them. Don’t let ones that have already been manufactured stay on the market. I don’t care whether it’s called gun control or a gun ban. I’m for it.”

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/12/loughner_judge_conservative_gun_control.php

Welcome to the saner side of the debate, Judge Burns.

5 replies, 565 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 5 replies Author Time Post
Reply Loughner’s Judge Makes Conservative Plea For Gun Control (Original post)
morningfog Dec 2012 OP
libdem4life Dec 2012 #1
BainsBane Dec 2012 #2
libdem4life Dec 2012 #3
BainsBane Dec 2012 #4
libdem4life Dec 2012 #5

Response to morningfog (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 04:37 PM

1. Yes. Nothing like having to actually deal with such a tragedy to shift one's opinion. That's when

the philosophical musings and the mangled flesh part ways. Once we have a few in high power stepping up to the plate, the conversation is shifting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #1)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 04:46 PM

2. I hope you're right

And I find it interesting that DU has some of the most intransigent gun owners around.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #2)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 05:19 PM

3. So do I, haven't been here that long. School District Liability is a whole new conversation.

Having been in education and insurance and in non-profits, the financial liability of the schools has been increasing over the years. Recourse and mandatory payments from the General Fund are more common. Bullying being the newest cause. Schools are expected to keep little kids safe from big kids in their care.

Even Members of School Boards have been named individually. Right now, Directors of Non-Profits must/should be covered by insurance because of unknown, but potential liability...at least in urban/suburban California.

Teachers have to strike to get or maintain a living wage and school bonds are failing to keep up with the increased costs even in the anti-tax fervor. This added tremendous cost is prohibitive.

Gun owners here should be adult and mature enough to accept responsibility ... regulation ... taxation and 21st century realities for their weapon/s even as someone else's gun potentially endangers their own loved ones when they are not present to protect them themselves...and that's a good lot of a kid's day. What next, shootout between parents at the soccer or Little League game? There have surely been fistights...but all packing heat? Not.

Last, but not least, teachers and school personal are not generally suited towards owning firearms and learning how to shoot people. And yes, elementary education is mostly women...who knew? Teachers will quit. It will be hard to attract qualified teachers. Education will get worse. There will be more Charter Schools. Whatever.

So, end of rant and thanks for the opportunity ... we need strong public schools, but the school's task is education, not military readiness. Protection from gun nuts needs to come from the gun owners, and the costs born accordingly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #3)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 05:32 PM

4. Arming teachers

Is nothing short of insane. The more guns around, the more gunshot wounds and and deaths. Seems like a basic concept to me.

I agree that teachers have enough challenges. They shouldn't have to deal with defense from mass murder.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #4)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 08:36 PM

5. When do school boards requests funds for a budget item for "Weapons for Teachers and Principals"

not to mention, gun education, training, license renewal ad nauseum. Oh, and what kind of gun...simple handgun? Uzis? Just to make some NRA people feel all warm and cozy? I don't think so. Ludicrous.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread