.

Chu: Lax Gun Laws to Blame for the Carnage (Video)

On the House floor, days after the Sandy Hook Elementary slaughter, Rep. Judy Chu (D-El Monte) urged her colleagues to tighten gun laws.

In the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary massacre, Rep. Judy Chu (D-El Monte) explained that she's pushing for tighter gun control before "another school, mall or movie theater is turned into a crime scene.''

Chu, who represents California's 27th Congressional District, which includes Altadena, South Pasadena, Arcadia, Pasadena, Glendora, and parts of Monrovia, addressed her colleagues in the House of Representatives on Wednesday, when she called for a ban on assault weapons. She further would like to ban extended ammunition clips, and suggested a thorough background check for anyone who wants to own a gun.

Last Friday's slaughter of 20 children and six school officials "happened because we turned a blind eye to the carnage our lax gun laws bring us. It's time change those laws'' and "reclaim our security," she said.

Chu had said she'd use her position on the House Judiciary Committee to push for tighter gun control laws.

Related:

LASD Boosts Security After Newtown School Shooting

Local Congressional Reps Join Call for More Gun Control

How to Help Families Affected by Newtown School Shooting

True Freedom December 19, 2012 at 11:10 PM
Personally, I don't think anyone needs an assault weapon; however, the weapons are not the root cause of problem. It takes a person to plan the crime, pick up the weapon, and pull the trigger. We need to look for the root causes. If it's simply undiagnosed mental health issues, we need to try and act on the warning signs earlier. If there are larger societal factors at play (dehumanization thru social media, video games, violent pop culture, breakdown of the family, etc), then we need to focus our efforts there.
Bob Musselman December 20, 2012 at 04:01 PM
The statistics are clear worldwide: more guns, more gun related deaths. Americans own vastly more guns than any other country on earth--88 guns per 100 people (that's men, women, children). No other country comes close. Likewise, Americans suffer more gun related deaths, about 10 deaths per 100,000 population per year. Compare to Sweden 1.5, Germany 1.0, and the UK 0.25. Few guns, fewer deaths.
Jeffrey Flach December 20, 2012 at 05:10 PM
Lol more people are killed a year due to negligent doctors vs by firearms. Should we ban doctors? Until Americans are read to deal with the true issue. They will continue to blame objects instead of themselves. Gun control would not have prevented this. The hand guns were legally owned. No "assault weapons" we're used. Too many sheep in this world not enough sheepdogs.
Joel Mosher December 20, 2012 at 07:51 PM
I think most of what Chu wants (and more) are in effect in California. If the other states want similar laws, let them pass them. There is no reason for the Feds to be involved.
SteveB December 21, 2012 at 02:24 AM
Lol?!? Really? death by guns, death by negligent doctors. Hilarious.
socal December 23, 2012 at 05:00 PM
8:55 am on Sunday, December 23, 2012 The last time we had a ban on certain types of weapons the death rate by guns was considerably higher for that decade. Look up the stats on who was causing those deaths. It had nothing to do with your normal everyday citizen who were restricted from owning a bible thick list of banned weapons. We should negate access to people who have our are being treated for mental illness/irregularities (yes, depression should be included!), people affiliated with felons (yes, I'm talking about that family member who still lives with you and robbed that bank twenty years ago!), people who have documented/suspected gang members that stay/live with them (yes, if you allow slim our shady to stay with you then you should give up your right to own any guns!) and any person who physically harms a family member to cause a police response should be banned from owning any weapon (sorry you cowards who harm parents, wives, girlfriends, sisters etc, etc, etc!).
socal December 23, 2012 at 05:07 PM
This list could go on and on to mirror the element of society that has caused the atrocities that we have seen. There has never been a weapon more dangerous than the human mind with a will to do wrong. We as a society should focus more on that element than worry about the tools that are created. Otherwise the next thing we should be giving up are our cars (bad drivers kill more people every hour than any large capacity weapon!). Stop playing to the media and hype. Do your own research and find that even California's gun laws has loopholes that allows any criminal to possesses a gun/weapon. Stop being sheep!
Bob Musselman December 23, 2012 at 05:51 PM
The assault weapon ban of 1994 referred to exactly 19 specific designs of assault weapons, hardly a list as thick as the bible, which contains about 775,000 words. But my original comment pointed not to assault weapons, but to all guns--more guns lead to more gun related deaths. It is an unavoidable statistic that any mathematician can confirm. When I hear the NRA call for more guns to reduce gun-related deaths I can only shake my head at their willful ignorance of statistical correlations. And to compare gun-related deaths to deaths from medical errors or driving is equally mis-interpreted. The three causes are actually somewhat similar in annual deaths in the US: 20,000 from guns, 34,000 from autos, and 50,000 (the number is widely disputed) from preventable medical errors. But we expose ourselves to automobile risks hundreds to thousand times per year, and those exposed to medical errors are typically in already in a high risk environment--mostly in hospitals. As a society in general we are rarely exposed to gun-related risks, yet the number of deaths are far higher on a per-exposure basis. So those who compare the risks are actually arguing FOR the higher statistical risk of gun deaths than from other causes in society. (I tried to post a similar comment on Thursday, but it is "pending approval." By whom? What's with that?)
socal December 25, 2012 at 08:38 AM
Ok then, by that kind of statistical reasoning, the average American household has two cars. So if we reduce the amount of autos that each household is allowed to own the national risk of dying by automobile will be reduced by half. So all of us law abiding citizens should rid ourselves of car number two and probably three to save our fellow law abiding citizen. Really!
Steve Lamb December 27, 2012 at 07:13 PM
Bob- You are SELECTIVELY using statistics. For example it isnt true "More guns, More gun related deaths" israel has 100% military full auto gun ownership by its citizens and 1/2 our gun homocide rate. The Swiss also have mandentory Military rifle and pistol ownership for EVERY male citizen, and voluntary for females. They have a gun homocide rate 1/3 of ours. Columbia has SEVERE limitations on personal gun ownership and a gun homocide rate ten times ours. Canada has a very high personal gun ownership rate and a gun homocide rate 25% of ours. Additionally, it is said by anti gun fetishists taht the USA has HALF the privately held small arms in the world, meaning if that is true, we have the lowest homocide rate PER GUN in the world.
Steve Lamb December 27, 2012 at 07:17 PM
Well, Alcohol and Tobacco. If we really care about LIFE, if this argument is about LIFE and not an irrational fear of an object, 30,000 people a year die in america of DRUNK DRIVING, not including all the ones who die of alcohol related disease, thats another 20,000 or so and 50,000 die a year from smoking related cancer....So if its all about LIFE and not about irrational fear, lets see some advocacy for outlawing tobacco and alcohol, and yes Jeffrey, med errors, doctors who dont listen to patients, are not proactive and such lead to an estimated 120,000 american deaths a year, and no one is organizing about that.
Steve Lamb December 27, 2012 at 07:18 PM
Exactly.
Steve Lamb December 27, 2012 at 07:20 PM
Except, Bob, as noted above, you are misusing and selectively using the stats and your conclusions are TOTALLY erroneous.
Steve Lamb December 27, 2012 at 07:21 PM
SO CAL- LOL exactly!!!! Its a loop of false reasoning.
Steve Lamb December 27, 2012 at 07:24 PM
BTW- if anyone wants to see the stats Bob is willfully misusing, you can look them up in your browser one of two ways: For a nifty little chart look up "Gun homocide per 100,000" for a more dsetailed article look up "The Guardian, gun homocides per 100,000" The Guardian article explains a UN report detailing the fact that teh US is NOT the most gun violent nation on earth as is often falsely claimed, and goes on to apologize that the FACTS can not be used to demonstrate this because teh Guardian would preffer the USA be disarmed, but a major argument for that disarming is UNTRUE.
Bob Musselman December 28, 2012 at 06:12 PM
Steve, you are right that I should have added some important qualifiers. The US is has the highest rate of firearm-related deaths (I did not limit this to homicides as you infer) of any country in the world that operates under a well-policed rule of law. The US at 10/100,000/year is followed by Canada at 5, Finland at 4, France at 3, and so on through the UK at 0.25. I admit that El Salvador, Guatemala, Columbia and even Mexico have higher gun-related deaths per capita. As for your comparison of US gun ownership (88 per 100 population) to Switzerland, you are the the one mis-using the data, but I'm sure not "willfully." All Swiss men of military age are are required to keep in their homes government owned firearms for use if their are recalled for military service. They are not allowed to keep ammunition for those weapons. As for private gun ownership in Switzerland, their rate is still the second highest of well-policed countries at 46 guns per 100 population. This compares to England at 6. My conclusion remains statistically correct: fewer guns, fewer gun-related deaths.
Steve Lamb December 28, 2012 at 07:49 PM
And Bob you are WRONG about the Swiss. tehy also in addition to their issued weapons own private guns and they store BRICKS of ammunition in all the Swiss homes I have visited. Your conclusion is still wrong because if we really do have 300 million guns in America we have the lowest rate of death per gun in the world. ,ore guns does not equal more gun deaths.
Steve Lamb December 28, 2012 at 07:49 PM
You cant have it both ways, Bob.
Bob Musselman December 28, 2012 at 09:47 PM
Well Steve, because I'm a numbers guy, I think I can have it both ways. So your new criteria is rate of [gun-related] deaths per gun? Really? But so long as you claim the US has the lowest of that ill-conceived ratio, I'll go there: The US has a gun ownership ratio of 88 guns/100 persons, and a gun-related death rate of 10 [per year]/100,000 persons. That equates to 1 gun related death per 8800 guns. Running the numbers for the UK: 6/100 and 0.25/100,000 = 1 gun related death per 24,000 guns. How about France: 31/100 and 3/100,000 = 1 gun related death per 10,000 guns. Steve, the numbers reveal quite a different answer than the one you claim. It would appear we have the HIGHEST, not the lowest, rate of gun-related deaths per privately owned gun in circulation. Which exacerbates, in the US, the overall statistic that more guns result in more gun related deaths. Oh, and you must not have visited Switzerland recently. The storage of government-owned "bricks" of ammo ended in 2007. But even before 2007 those "bricks" were, in fact, sealed ammo boxes regularly audited by the government.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something