Response to 'Gun Violence in Wisconsin'

Here's some comments from readers of the Badger Herald:

Mr. Hunter (November 23, 2004 @ 10:36 PM):
Being a hunter and talking to many more hunters, we are not, I repeat NOT in favor of banning semi automatic guns. What we want, is when a gun is used as a weapon against another person, the PERSON USING THE gun as said weapon to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. It was not the gun doing the hideous heinous crime but the person PULLING THE TRIGER. Also, this looks like a hate crime. If the gunman was white and the victims were Asian or another ethnic group it would be called a hate crime. But because this was reversed and the shooter was a minority and the victims were not a minority it’s called a shooting and the gun is to blame.
Jeri Bonavia, and state Rep. Christine Sinicki, D-Milwaukee, are once again on the wrong side calling for a statewide ban on such guns. We should ban the trial lawyers that will represent the animal that was pulling the trigger and would blame a gun on such a crime. I could only hope that the voters will look at Rep. Christine Sinicki in the next election and vote in a thinking person into her current position. For her to think a gun committed this crime or a law would have prevented it is utterly stupid.


Anonymous:
In this case "the person PULLING THE TRIGER" had modified the gun with a 20 round magazine. You are definitely right about the "hate crime" aspect - but only white people were killed so it's just a regular crime.
Anonymous:
That's not true. Hate crimes go both ways--the Supreme Court case in which hate crime legislation was upheld as constitutional had black defendants.
"We should ban the lawyers..." Yeah, that's solid thinking. No defense lawyers, for anyone!
"Once they start banning..." I don't see a slippery slope here. The majority of Americans have no interest in banning shotguns, etc. I'm not sure why someone needs a semiautomatic to hunt deer, but given how terrified Democrats are of this issue, you can bet that a comprehensive gun ban is DOA.
Anonymous:
I am convinced that 50% of the people in this city could not accurately define "semiautomatic".
Anonymous:
My condolences to the family members, this certainly is a terrible tragedy.
However, despite what the Wisconsin Anti-Violence Effort would like you to think, the "Assault Weapon Ban" would have done nothing to prevent this crime.
1) the rifle was not on the list of weapons banned2) the guy was from MN, so a WI ban that they are pushing wouldn't do anything to stop this either
and finally, there they are again, throwing around the term "assault rifle." The real definition of an "assault rifle" is a select fire (auto or burst fire) military rifle. The AWB definition is one with a pistol grip, bayonet lug, flash hider, etc etc
Now an SKS is an "assault rifle." These people need to stick with one definition instead of changing it as it best suits their interests.
If the guy had used a single shot muzzle loader to kill 6 people, they would have been calling it an "assault rifle."
If this guy is truly guilty, he should fry. However, taking away SKS rifles which are used by thousands of hunters will not solve any problems.
-Adrian AndrijasevicSecretary, SAFERUW-Madison Gun Clubhttp://safer.rso.wisc.edu
Anonymous:
"2) the guy was from MN, so a WI ban that they are pushing wouldn't do anything to stop this either"
Not true. The ban would apply to all such weapons in the State of Wisconsin, regardless of where the owners of the weapons live. The rest of your post makes a lot of sense, though.
Anonymous:
Our hearts and prayers go out to the victims and their family's. Lets hope that our elected officials focus on the criminal and not the tool used to commit this horrific event. Fellow hunters and countrymen from Rhode Island

-From Badgerherald.com
http://badgerherald.com/news/2004/11/23/6th_person_dies_afte.php