Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti mayors support assault weapons ban, stricter gun laws
Stricter gun laws and an assault weapons ban would make the nation —including Washtenaw County— much safer, according to Ypsilanti Mayor Paul Schreiber and Ann Arbor Mayor John Hieftje.
Schreiber, Hieftje, and more than 850 mayors across the country, have signed two letters drafted by the Mayors Against Illegal Guns coalition in support of stricter gun regulation.
Ypsilanti Mayor Paul Schreiber
Schreiber and Hieftje said neither of them are against citizens having guns, but assault weapons are not needed.
"I grew up in a shooting family and was hunting deer with my father when I was 14," Hieftje said. " I continue to shoot clay pigeons and enjoy it. I'm not anti-gun, but I certainly do not understand why anyone needs an assault weapon."
Schreiber said access to guns shouldn't be as easy as it is now and background checks must be enforced.
"I think it will help Ypsilanti and would help every city," Schreiber said. "I can’t speak of any specific instance, but if you have fewer guns available, you're going to have a safer city and a safer country."
The two letters were sent to House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH), Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev), Democratic Leader Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif), and Republican Leader Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) on Feb. 11.
One of the letters calls on Congress to support the Assault Weapons Ban of 2013, which was introduced by Senator Dianne Feinstein and Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy.
The bill would ban the importation, sale, manufacture, transfer and possession of assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. Exceptions would be made for law enforcement and military use, as well as weapons lawfully owned at the time of the bill being enacted.
"Military-style assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines have been at the center of some of our country’s deadliest mass shootings," the coalition wrote. "Just since July, we have watched in horror as they have been used to gun down moviegoers in an Aurora theater, Sikh worshippers in an Oak Creek temple, and even young children in a Newtown elementary school."
"In order to prevent the next rampage and help save American lives, our nation needs clear and enforceable legislation that will take these weapons and magazines off our streets."
The letter states that while military-style assault weapons are used in mass shootings, they're also a common threat in every day incidents of gun violence.
The second letter supports making gun trafficking a crime as part of a larger legislative package to reduce gun violence.
The coalition is seeking the passage of legislation that would criminalize gun trafficking.
"We believe that this policy recommendation, along with legislation requiring background checks for all gun sales, would go a long way toward reducing gun violence," the coalition wrote.
Schreiber said he's certain there would be differing opinions on the matter, but something needs to happen.
"A lot of people I talk to feel we need to have stricter laws to be able to acquire a gun," Schreiber said. " It's not going to stop all gun violence, but it's a step in the right direction."
Hieftje said the goal of the letters were to help Washington leaders understand that the decisions they make matter. Locally, Hieftje said his support of the two letters signals him "standing up for law enforcement."
"Our police officers have to be prepared to go into situations where a perpetrator may have large clips or magazines and can overpower police and fire power," Hieftje said.
Tuesday, Schreiber plans to bring forth a resolution asking the city council to support stricter weapons laws and regulations. The resolution would be sent to U.S Rep. John Dingell, U.S. Senator Debbie Stabenow and U.S. Senator Carl Levin.
If the resolution passes in Ypsilanti, Hieftje said the Ann Arbor City Council would then get a copy and he "wouldn't be surprised" if they decide to take the issue up as well.
"These are federal issues," Schreiber said."To me, it needs to be a change in the federal law. It's something I think is a national issue, but all politics start local and we should have a discussion locally because it's the right thing to do."
Read the letters here:
Katrease Stafford covers Ypsilanti for AnnArbor.com.Reach her at katreasestafford@annarbor.com or 734-623-2548 and follow her on twitter.
Comments
G. Orwell
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 7:18 p.m.
Our politicians want to create this utopian society where everyone is safe. But their solution always involve giving up our rights and freedoms. Is this an Orwellian trick to make us surrender all of our rights? We were warned about this by our Founding Fathers. "If you give up liberty for temporary security, you deserve neither." Ben Franklin The people that know basic history know why we must never give up our firearms. This has nothing to do with whether you are liberal or conservative. Whether you are a democrat or republican. It is about our right to live in a free society.
Tom Todd
Tue, Feb 19, 2013 : 3:32 a.m.
Don't give me the FREE society bull! check out Michigan the last few years with Dictator rick.
AnnArBo
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 10:57 p.m.
Beardown........your "fear" of worrying about the guy next to you having a gun, is just that, fear, and your "fears" do not allow you to restrict constitutional rights of others. Freedom is described in our contitution, and is written in the bill of rights. Individual "fears" as a current reaction to social issues, and using those "fears" to justify trying to restrict individual rights, do not trump those constitutional rights in a free society.
beardown
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 10:17 p.m.
Please, enlighten us on why we need to not give up our firearms. I have a couple history degrees and I fail to understand your argument. "It is about our right to live in a free society." True, but what if your definition of freedom is not having to worry if the guy next to you has a gun?
dsponini
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 6:05 p.m.
We should all be afraid of the NRA....very, very afraid http://www.meetthenra.org/
Mitch
Tue, Feb 19, 2013 : 1:20 p.m.
Sorry, the NRA has never stopped the safety training.
beardown
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 10:18 p.m.
The sad thing is, the NRA used to be an excellent organization that promoted safe gun ownership. Now they are the tool of gun companies. Heck, the guy who runs it can't even fire a gun without scaring people.
buvda fray
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 5:49 p.m.
Just watch a few of the security camera videos in recent weeks on a2.com to see the brazen gunslingers and car stealers. Close your eyes and imagine yourself in one of those situations. Wishing it was different when it happens will not work. Criminals don't care if you think guns are wrong.
Ypsi Eastsider
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 5:44 p.m.
Mayor Schreiber has repeatedly cut funding for the police department and then claims the city will be safer if he bans assault weapons and standard capacity magazines. It was reported in the Ann Arbor News when Schreiber was threatened by a mentally unstable person, Schreiber had armed police officers escort him to the city council meeting.
Jonathan Blutarsky
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 5:43 p.m.
Why is it gun crime in Canada is so low? http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/cfp-pcaf/res-rec/comp-eng.htm
Mitch
Tue, Feb 19, 2013 : 12:54 p.m.
It is not the speicific gun crimes I am worried about. It is the over all violences, how come the there is ANY gun crimes at all in Britian. How come their violent crime rate is in the 4k per 100k range when the US is in the 500 per 100k range. The rough math comes to 8x UK versus US.
Atlas Shrugged
Tue, Feb 19, 2013 : 12:50 a.m.
Why is gun crime in Chicago so HIGH?
beardown
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 5:51 p.m.
I actually asked a canadian friend this and he stated: Because they have strict gun control laws on weapons you can own, how you can transport them, and they will actually prosecute people who use their weapons illegally, which includes defense cases. Oh yeah, and they have a gun registry and the NRA isn't there.
Jonathan Blutarsky
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 5:35 p.m.
If they ban assault rifles there will just be more drive by stabbings!
AnnArBo
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 5:22 p.m.
This is exactly what happens when politics trumps reality.
G. Orwell
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 5:06 p.m.
This talk of banning or confiscating firearms is VERY DANGEROUS. Those advocating this are going to cause the death of many innocent law abiding citizens AND the police that follow unconstitutional orders. Stop this now before it gets out of hand.
Christopher Kierkus
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 5:02 p.m.
Others have already raised nearly all of the points I would raise, so I will keep this brief: "There is absolutely NO EVIDENCE, NONE, ZERO, that the measures the Mayors propose will reduce gun violence. In fact, just the opposite, every reputable study ever done by serious scholars has shown that these types of measures do ABSOLUTELY NO GOOD." Ladies and gentlemen, this is the equivalent of two public figures proposing fighting a flu epidemic with blood letting and leeches. We should expect better from our leaders, and we should hold them accountable when we next go to the polls. Kind regards, Dr. Christopher A. Kierkus (Associate Professor of Criminal Justice, Grand Valley State University)
shutthefrtdoor
Tue, Feb 19, 2013 : 3:47 p.m.
BAMN!!! You nailed it Doc...
beardown
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 4:48 p.m.
I think our history during prohibition and the "war on drugs" has sufficiently proven that if people want to get something that is illegal, they will find a way to do it, hook or crook. Making these weapons illegal will only a.) increase the black market for certain weapons, and b.) further complicate the lives of our dwindling law enforcement officers. But, it will also make politicians feel better about themselves, so that is why this charade continues. So how about instead of banning certain weapons, we make toughen the restrictions for purchasing weapons legally (once again, can't really stop illegal transactions) and create a real registry of all weapons and ammunition purchased everywhere, including gun shows? If I have to be on a government database for purchasing claratin for my sinuses, I think a guy purchasing guns and ammo should be to.
AnnArBo
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 7:21 p.m.
I buy claratin all the time, no id, no database...........You can database legal ownership and sales all you want, but it has NO effect on illegal sales or illegal ownership, criminals don't participate in databases or databased sales, you're living in a dream world thinking that approach will work. You really want to fine someone whos gun is stolen then used to commit a crime? So the Connecticut killers dead mom should face charges because her son shot her and stole her guns, then commited murder?
beardown
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 5:45 p.m.
I said we need to create a registry to actually know where the guns are being sold and by whom. Fine and punish gun owners who sell guns illegal. Fine and punish gun owners who's weapons are stolen and used in crimes. You cannot stop persons who want to purchase guns illegal with laws. That we agree on. But limiting their access to stolen weapons, as well as logging their purchase of ammunition, is a start. And, oddly enough, the rank and file of the NRA agree with this sentiment. And, claritin d contains pseudoephedrine. Under the Combat Methamphetamine Epidemic Act of 2005, every purchase is logged and recorded and maintained for two years. So yes, it is logged and maintained. But I can buy a couple thousand rounds and not have that logged anywhere.
AnnArBo
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 5:27 p.m.
You contradict yourself..............You state crooks will use the black market to avoid the law, than propose getting tough on legal purchases............how does punishing law abiding citizens who dont break the law, stop criminals who don't buy weapons or ammo legally and will never register their weapons? There is no database for purchasing Claratin.
Jon Wax
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 4:09 p.m.
Don't worry folks. This is a lotta smoke and mirrors: It won't hamper the law abiding suburbanites that are so worried about it. They aren't going to be able to ban "assault rifles". Ar15s will always be there. That's just the way it is. But the whole "Thug Life" era is over. The gun bans are going to REALLY hamper the "thugs" and their property value lowering behaviour. "Pookie and them" that have been hanging around basically loitering and driving away jobs and homeowners are in for a rude shock. "Thug life" has been destroying this country 1 year at a time. Gun regs will do more to put thugs in jail then they will to disarm Ted Nugent and the rest of his knuckle dragging ilk. You want to stop violent crime? You want to fix the country? Start at "ground level". Raise property values first and the rest will follow. There is no reason, none, for any location in the USA to be a "hood" or "ghetto". The violence and illegal behaviour in "the hood" has been eroding the foundation of America for a long, long time. And it gets no traction when it comes to solutions. THIS is the solution. Ramp up the illegal gun regs and then flood the streets with private and public security forces. "Pookie and them" have 4 choices: 1. retire from the game/get a real job/ raise your kids properly 2. stay in the game but stay home and keep it behind closed doors. 3. spend life in jail 4. get blasted by the cops Gun regs will work. They just won't work in the burbs, because the burbs doesn't need em. Peace Wax
mhirzel
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 3:53 p.m.
Yes, let's ban, ban, ban! It worked so very well with Prohibition and the "War on Drugs," after all. It just feels right the geniuses in Washington should have a monopoly on running weapons.
G. Orwell
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 3:49 p.m.
Kennessaw, Georgia is one of the safest cities in Georgia because, in 1982, the city required that all residents have guns in their homes. This proves more guns in the hands of law abiding citizens, LESS crime. Unlike Chicago (530 murders last year). To make our cities safer, the city should encourage and offer firearm safety courses and encourage law abiding citizens to own guns.
G. Orwell
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 5:51 p.m.
beardown, The point is that strict gun control does not work. In fact, it leads to more gun crimes because criminal are the only ones with guns. Thus, they have easier time killing innocent people without much resistance. While more guns in the hands of law abiding citizens greatly deter criminals from committing crimes. The important point about Kennessaw is that crime rates dropped significantly after Kennessaw implemented their gun policy. I bet if Chicago allowed greater ownership of guns for law abiding citizens, gun related murders would drop. Also, less home invasions leading to less robberies, less rape, etc.
beardown
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 5:12 p.m.
There are 100 times the amount of people in Kennesaw located in the city limits of Chicago. Of course there will be more crime. It's not a valid or logical comparison. I'm sure if compared Kennesaw to gun crazy Atlanta, you would find the numbers shocking as well. Or Detroit. Or Flint. Or St. Louis. Or New Orleans...but those don't find into your argument, so most gun advocated leave those out. A more interesting comparison is Kennesaw and Morton Grove, IL. They are the same size and MG has a gun ban. Based on recent crime data, they are pretty much the same on all counts, with Kennesaw actually leading in some. If you compare relatively comparable cities, you find that Kennesaw isn't really all that special.
Kellie Woodhouse
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 3:25 p.m.
For additional context, U-M Prez Mary Sue Coleman has also signed a letter, along with presidents of other top colleges, seeking gun reform.
Mitch
Tue, Feb 19, 2013 : 12:49 p.m.
Yes she did. I still think it is foolish.
Jon Wax
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 4:16 p.m.
yeah. but the u of m doesn't count when it comes to topics like this. this is a local topic. they aren't local. they are just sorta here. and they have their own security and their own insurance to take care of their problems. this is about locals and really about folks in ypsi who have to face stuff daily that would scare most of the u of m students back to the east coast. Peace Wax
G. Orwell
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 3:24 p.m.
"Innocence Betrayed - History of Gun Control" If people believe it can't happen here, you are dillutional and very naive. I am sure the German people didn't believe it could happen to them. Governments are inherently dangerous. Only way to prevent government tyranny is for the public to be armed. http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=nUmKT43j4Tc&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DnUmKT43j4Tc
A2K
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 3:09 p.m.
So...how would you implement this gross-overstep of government? Search law-abiding citizen's homes? Throw hitherto law-abiding people in jail? Seize their property by force? Accost people who pay tens-of-thousands of dollars in taxes every year to the City of Ann Arbor? This would be an ABUSE of power and invasion of privacy. Don't even get me started on "by-back" programs - they don't even come close to reimbursing people for their property. Implement background checks for all guns and rifles, enforce the laws already on the books, but this is going to cause FAR more problems than it solves...and may be the inroads the GOP has been looking for to take over, DON'T give them a box to stand on, but DON'T try stupid bans when the real issue is not having healthcare and mental-healthcare for everyone in this country.
Dan Higginbottom
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 2:51 p.m.
Some more trivia and political correct nonsense from our elected officials. If new gun law would reduce violence how come the thousands already on the books don't? The only thing these clowns want is to make us [you] defenseless from these low life's that threaten us every day. They will always have guns but these so called elected officials want to force us to give up our rights. Calling 911 and begging for your life will not save you our your kids. There are monsters among us, do not buy into this P/C garbage.
sayzme
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 6 p.m.
Because the thousands of laws on the books cannot be enforced due to the Tiahrt Amendment. So I just love the NRA's solution is to "enforce existing laws" when they know it can't be done due to how the NRA watered them down..
G. Orwell
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 2:50 p.m.
Here we go with the gun grabbers. They are so ignorant they do not understand that the 2nd. Amendment is about preventing government tyranny. Or, do they? Plus, if you look at all deaths from guns, the number of people killed by "assault riffles" are minuscule compared to handguns. So, why the push to disarm the law abiding citizens from protecting themselves from a potentially tyrannical government? It is looking more obvious. These Democrats would be violating their oath to defend the Constitution if they pursue disarming the citizens of any firearms.
beardown
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 5:26 p.m.
It is a legal search and seizure if the person has a weapon that is illegal. Technically, law enforcement would have the right to enter as a crime is occurring. Same as busting down the doors of drug dealers, raiding blind pigs during prohibition, or any entering the home or business of a perpetrator of a crime. They'd better be sure they are right that the weapons are there as they would be creating a gun advocate martyr, but it is legal. And last time I checked, they were trying to limit the sale of such weapons and were grandfathering in the guns currently owned. But good try and thank you for reading the constitution.
Jon Wax
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 4:14 p.m.
it's not the 2nd that applies: it's the 4th. no illegal search and seizure. THAT'S the card you guys should be playing, but you always go to the 2nd WAAAAAAAAY too fast. and you sound kinda loony when you do. the 4th is there to prevent the govt from going door to door, kicking it in and searching your home for your guns. That's why they won't really be able to do anything to the suburban gun owners when it comes to weapons. if they do break the 4th, which you would see on CNN and FOX about 10 seconds after it started, then yes, you guys can go full "walking dead" mode and start bunkering up, because then you'll have a legit angle to use the 2nd. til then, you guys keep screaming about the 2nd when you're off by 2. Peace Wax
Greg
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 2:16 p.m.
If those like the Brady bunch have not clearly in the past stated that passing bills like the proposed were only the first step, perhaps I could support such a ban. Swimming pools & drowning kill more children (not gang members) than guns, but where is the outrage against pools??? No logic needed by these folks.
jcj
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 2:09 p.m.
How do we keep electing officials that are so ignorant of reality?
Tom Todd
Tue, Feb 19, 2013 : 3:25 a.m.
because lots of folks are jealous of the middle class.
Mitch
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 2:24 p.m.
UofM students and alumni.
Faygo
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 2:07 p.m.
As a former resident of Ypsilanti, who was driven out by Paul Schreiber and his anti-family stances, I cannot believe that his opinion was thought to be relevant here. I wonder what he would say if a Gun Shop was interested in the water street land (as if).
Faygo
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 6:18 p.m.
Simple: Taxes. His efforts to have a city income tax, (Thank goodness for the SCIT campaign) and to pass a millage to pay for water street, coupled with the already crippling property tax rates make it nearly impossible for families, particularly young families to stay. Then add all the crime, no industry, and terrible parks (compared to the township) and It's even less appealing. Ypsilanti was mismanaged before Schreiber, but it didn't have to continue. As someone who was born and raised on the south side, its painful to admit that Ypsilanti is officially no place to raise a family.
beardown
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 5:27 p.m.
"As a former resident of Ypsilanti, who was driven out by Paul Schreiber and his anti-family stances," Do tell as that statement doesn't make an ounce of sense.
Dog Guy
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 1:59 p.m.
Be warned that the American Psychiatric Association is preparing a new edition of The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders which may be expected to include "gun-ban resister disorder" as well as "consensus-science denier disorder". Most comments here would then qualify as evidence of mental illness. APA members voting on the new manual should follow Congress' example by exempting themselves from all disorders in their manual.
RUKiddingMe
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 1:58 p.m.
This is absolutely priceless: "I can't speak of any specific instance, but if you have fewer guns available, you're going to have a safer city and a safer country." Wonderful public admission of extreme shortsightedness and willingness to make sweeping claims based on....nothing. You know, I can't speak of any specific instance, but if you have fewer administrative staff and less time/resources spent on items not critical to the operation of the city, the taxpayers would have a lot more money.
Billy
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 1:56 p.m.
"I can't speak of any specific instance, but if you have fewer guns available, you're going to have a safer city and a safer country." Really now? Are you aware that in the UK, just ONE decade after their handgun ban....that the handgun violence is now DOUBLE what it was preban? YUP THOSE BANS CLEARLY MAKE PLACES SAFER....
Gerry
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 1:53 p.m.
If any limit on gun ownership is a violation of the constitution, and if we need guns to protect ourselves against govt tyranny, then I would like an anti-aircraft cannon.
Goober
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 1:41 p.m.
Politics! I guess we wish to follow in the foot steps of Chicago. Oh - murders have not been reduced?! Go figure!
Hunterjim
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 1:15 p.m.
Can either Mayor provide any incident in either community where the police were "out gunned".
beardown
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 3:08 p.m.
Heat with DeNiro and Pacino?
GoNavy
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 2:16 p.m.
Regardless, the AAPD puts military-grade assault rifles in the front seat of every squad car. You can see them as they are in plain sight; complete with Picatinny rails, red dot sights, foregrips, and everything else you'd expect to see in a Call of Duty deathmatch. When the AAPD start unloading their full metal jacket .223 rounds on Liberty Street in response to "whatever" they think they're going to encounter, I can guarantee you that no amount of "training" will prevent a NYC-style civilian massacre. But hey - we need to give the police "everything they need" to "keep us safe."
Mitch
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 1:35 p.m.
They like the ONE story in CA where where the peritrator was in full body armor, high on cocaine and was on a death march.
Ryan
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 1:04 p.m.
"I think it will help Ypsilanti and would help every city," Schreiber said. "I can't speak of any specific instance, but if you have fewer guns available, you're going to have a safer city and a safer country." Ask the residents of Chicago how that theory is working out for them. They have some of the harshest anti-gun laws in the nation they are having their most violent year in over a decade. When guns are illegal only criminals have guns.; we made most drugs illegal, does anyone have any problems finding drugs? Hiefte: "I'm not anti-gun, but I certainly do not understand why anyone needs an assault weapon." He doesn't understand why the residents of "His" city are angry at having to pay for public art that only benefits a few people either. There are many things that he doesn't get. One thing that I get for sure is that you don't need guns to mass-murder. In 1994 in Rwanda 800,000 people were killed in 3 months, mostly with fists, feet, clubs, and machetes. They offered wealthy people a chance to purchase a bullet to be killed with, if you didn't have the money they beat and hacked you to death. I know that I need an "assault weapon" to protect me from the mentality of people like that. People always assume that things like that could "never happen here". Well, a lot of stuff that people have said could never happen here has, in fact, happened here. We Americans are not immune to the problems that plague everyone else, we are just rich enough to minimize those problems. When the money runs out, though... I'll keep my "assault weapons" ready and my family protected. Here's a little taste of our future: http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/201302110100/METRO01/302110358
AnnArBo
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 5:32 p.m.
Really? How many people were gunned down in Chicago compared to Detroit? I feel much safer in Detroit knowing I can legally carry concealed to protect myself, versus going into chicago totally unarmed and at a criminals mercy because of their ban on legal concealed carry, I would imagine folks living in crime ridden areas of chicago might agree with me.
beardown
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 3:07 p.m.
"Ask the residents of Chicago how that theory is working out for them. " There are more than 7 million people in the chicagoland area. Yet, the possibility of being shot in Chicago is significantly less than in cities like Detroit, Flint, New Orleans, Atlanta, and other major cities with less restrictive or no gun restrictions. The major problem here is that uninformed people quote statistics that they see on facebook memes without actually looking into it themselves. I'm sure you also believe that Bill Gates is gonna give you $5 million for liking his picture too.
Billy
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 1:01 p.m.
I don't support any kind of gun ban....period. I support background checks and licensing...but blanket bans are for scared little children that are completely ignorant of things. I don't stick my head in the sand and I refuse to support any kind of similar behavior.
beardown
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 3:03 p.m.
Most of the rank and file from the NRA hold the same stance. Problem is, their leadership doesn't see it the same way.
Brad
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 12:58 p.m.
"The letter states that while military-style assault weapons are used in mass shootings, they're also a common threat in every day incidents of gun violence." Then what the later is stating is not factual. But it sure does sound scary, doesn't it?
Brad
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 1:32 p.m.
The "letter". (the "later"???)
Katrease Stafford
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 12:53 p.m.
The coalition sent a similar letter to President Obama in December. Schreiber and Hieftje both signed that as well. http://www.citymayors.com/society/usa-gun-control.html
Homeland Conspiracy
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 12:50 p.m.
Did we have other more pressing issues to address?
GoNavy
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 2:13 p.m.
Ya we're going to all go stand on the shoreline and order the tide of global warming to halt.
Mitch
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 12:24 p.m.
Again I feel the villifacation from people who do not know me.
Mitch
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 1:01 p.m.
From Fox News in Detroit. "Bonnie and Clyde showed up to announce a holdup, but what they didn't know was they were about to get an AR-15 surprise. ".
missy
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 12:19 p.m.
My contention is that no one is investigating the root cause behind gun violence. Take a look at the research, http://www.ssristories.com/index.php Legal prescription drug use has increased over 400% in the last few years. No one is addressing the underlying issue. Why, is it the money BIG PHAMA is making? I'm not saying that there is not ever a reason to prescribe drugs to help with depression, there is, but it is out of control and the results in the link show that drugs are behind most of the gun violence in our global world.
Jon Wax
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 4:11 p.m.
the root problem is the same with EVERYTHING in the country: "parenting". People stopped raising their kids back in the 70s. Now we have about 3 or 4 generations of "parents" raising kids who had no business having kids in the first place. lack of discipline, lack of structure, basically a lack of parenting. but that's ok: you guys go ahead and keep blaming the video games and movies. Peace Wax
jjc155
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 12:15 p.m.
again I am utterly shocked that the city of ypsi council is publicly worrying about anything other than their own city problems. lol
Arboriginal
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 11:58 a.m.
This is a great idea that should be dropped like so many hot potatoes. These cities don't have the resources to handle the inevitable law suits.
beardown
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 3:02 p.m.
People sign petitions every day for things that they would not put a dime into supporting. This is nothing more than a PR move.
dconkey
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 11:54 a.m.
This is just garbage, first, what is an "assault" Weapon? If I swing a baseball bat at you and hit you, is that considered and assault weapon? I assaulted you with a "weapon" Same holds true with a knife. Just because a gun has a large clip or looks like a certain way, does not make any different from any other gun. Second, stricter laws are not going to solve anything. The people committing crimes with guns are doing so with weapons they have either stolen or gotten on the black market just like that nut job in Sandyhook. Remember, her MURDERED someone to get the guns. He did not buy them No amount of laws is going to change that, It is like anything else, enforce the laws we have.
SonnyDog09
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 1:50 p.m.
It's simple, really. An "assault weapon" is any firearm that Senator Fienstien is frightened of.
hozay
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 11:52 a.m.
"I can't speak of any specific instance, but if you have fewer guns available, you're going to have a safer city and a safer country." That seems pretty specific.
beardown
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 3:01 p.m.
"Also, look at the high crime in US cities with restrictive gun laws." Cities like New Orleans, Detroit, St. Louis, Flint, parts of Los Angeles? Oh wait, those cities don't have restrictive gun laws.
Nicholas Urfe
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 2:30 p.m.
Go read up on violent crime in Britain, where you cannot even carry pepper spray or a pocket knife. People are unarmed, and they are widely preyed upon. They have far more violent crime in britain than the US because of it. So, I say you are very wrong and you are not supported by statistics. Also, look at the high crime in US cities with restrictive gun laws.
Mitch
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 12:40 p.m.
This statment contradicts reality.
Silentmajority
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 11:30 a.m.
We should also make heroin and crack cocaine illegal to get them off the streets as well.
RUKiddingMe
Thu, Feb 21, 2013 : 10:54 a.m.
No, northside, you should assess whether a new law would actually address a problem in any way, or just further inconvenience or negatively impact the rights of people the law is not meant to negatively impact, without doing any good whatsoever.
northside
Tue, Feb 19, 2013 : 12:36 p.m.
We should make decisions on a law based on whether criminals will follow it? LOL.
Macabre Sunset
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 7:17 p.m.
The logic here is that when someone makes a decision to take part in a criminal activity, the laws don't stop him. It's illegal to do drugs. The fact that it's also illegal to sell them doesn't stop the criminal from seeking them out. It's also illegal to go into a school and shoot people. Yet criminals who have done so have either obtained weapons legally or illegally - doesn't make a difference. Hieftje's posturing (as usual) is completely irrelevant. He is simply a politically correct cardboard cutout of a mayor.
northside
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 5 p.m.
Upsets? Silentmajority's "logic" is amusing, but not upsetting. No one has suggested that gun laws - or any laws - will completely end a behavior. That this "logic" is the first line of defense against sensible guns laws is a reminder of there not really being any decent arguments against sensible gun laws.
Macabre Sunset
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 3:45 p.m.
Please stop using logic. It upsets the locals.
motorcycleminer
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 11:07 a.m.
Criminals don't obey laws ..these people never get it...
Jim Osborn
Tue, Feb 19, 2013 : 2:16 a.m.
@GoNavy - I stand corrected. The official police report from the STATE OF CONNECTICUT police from their website works for me. Good find. Still, in all of these cases, an "assault rifle" doesn't really enable a murderer any more than a pistol with multiple bags of 10 round clips, After all, he was at very close range, Then the shotgun... Dingell is correct in wanting to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill and criminals. Banning certain rifles would not reduce this sort of crime, Dingell's proposal will.
a2citizen
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 4:47 p.m.
Northside, if everyone used common sense we wouldn't even have laws. But they don't.
Jon Wax
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 4:37 p.m.
don't bother trying to explain the difference between a saiga and a bushmaster to these folks. most of em wouldn't know the difference between a shotgun and a shotglass. Peace Wax
EyeHeartYpsi
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 3:30 p.m.
Not sure why GoNavy is getting voted down here. The erroneous "Bushmaster in the car, not in the school" rumor is all over the Internet. However, it's been confirmed several times that the Bushmaster was found inside the school along with 2 pistols. There was a Saiga 12 shotgun found in the car trunk - a model that more resembles an AK style rifle than a typical shotgun, which may be the source of the confusion. This link (from Connecticut State Police website no less) contains the press release describing which weapons were found at the scene: http://www.ct.gov/despp/cwp/view.asp?Q=517284
GoNavy
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 2:12 p.m.
@Jim Osborn- I'm not sure why people are still repeating this myth of the "Bushmaster in the car", but we know it is not true: http://www.ct.gov/despp/cwp/view.asp?Q=517284&A=4226 http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57559395/conn-school-shooter-had-4-weapons/ http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/18/us/connecticut-lanza-guns/index.html Hope that helps you in future discussions.
northside
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 2:08 p.m.
"Criminals don't obey laws ..." Using that logic, we shouldn't have any laws at all!
Jim Osborn
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 1:22 p.m.
The letter by the mayors is very misleading. First, no "assault rifle" or any rifle at all was used at Sandy Hook. The only rifle was left in the murderer's car. He used several stolen pistols. At the Aurora theater, the murderer used mostly pistols, as his large capacity magazine jammed. In both cases, a murderer would be more efficient with a sawed-off shotgun, already illegal, but hack saws are available even at a dollar store. Second, less than 400 people are murdered by rifles of any kind in America each year. While too many, this is less than those killed by men's fists or knives. Are those to be outlawed, too. This mayor's letter is more about gaining political points than actually doing anything. Last night, I spoke with US Congressman John Dingell. If I understood him correctly, he wishes to concentrate on instant background checks, mental health, "straw sales" (his words) to others, and other measures that will keep guns out of the hands of criminals. He rightly feels that banning so called "assault rifles" does not have the votes, but who cannot support the measures that he suggested? He is right, as who amongst us wants criminals or the mentally ill to have a gun in their hands?
Ignatz
Mon, Feb 18, 2013 : 12:51 p.m.
That's why we have police and courts.