Steve Benson for July 19, 2016

We can only hope.

So far the first day of the rethuglicon circus has been a hoot.I cant believe how much they knuckle under, put their noses to the grindstone and make lemonade. Pathetic but scary.

Trump wants to do for our country what he has done to his party.

Hate Fest 2016, the right wing loonies are going at it under a full moon.

Or, as Melania Trump would say: “All we have to fear is fear itself.”

Ohio is an “open carry” state, but guns are banned at the Republican convention. Florida, Texas, Louisiana, states with among the weakest firearms regulations in the nation, and we get Zimmerman, Tampa movie theater, Orlando, Charleston, Baton Rouge, Dallas, and everybody packing heat makes us, and the cops, “safer”??

As a gun owner, I"m NOT for bans on legitimate ownership, but as Scalia said, it is the DUTY of government to regulate firearms when you leave your domicile.

The REAL danger in America however is the attitude expressed by Trump and followers, who actually post NO SOLUTIONS other than rhetoric that “I will be great!” Oh, and banning Muslims, immigrants (except for wives who would plagiarize verbatim if they could read prompters or speak English well enough to repeat what’s written for them), end taxes while increasing police presence, start more wars, defund education so more people are ignorant, and of course end support for medical care so more people can avoid the danger of malpractice.

THAT is Turmp’s methodology for a “safer” nation? Oh, right.

Yo, Chevy—.

What we know is that you have been reading too many NRA comic books..

Not only does gun control work, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that some forms of it pass constitutional muster.

.In June of this year, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to even consider “assault weapon” bans enacted by Connecticut and New York: .‘Connecticut’s ban was expanded shortly after a gunman used one of the military-style semi-automatic weapons on the list to kill 20 students and six educators at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown in 2012. Like other laws [in many other cities, towns and states], Connecticut’s ban includes semi-automatic guns and high-capacity magazines, covers popular weapons such as AR-­15s and AK-­47s, and names more than 180 weapons that cannot be sold. . . ..“. . . [T]he justices have . . . passed up the chance to scrutinize lower-court decisions that have upheld the laws banning certain weapons, as well as laws requiring tight restrictions on those who can legally carry guns outside their homes. . . ..“‘Because the prohibitions are substantially related to the important governmental interests of public safety and crime reduction, they pass constitutional muster,’ a unanimous [appellate court] decided.”.( “Supreme Court refuses to hear challenge to Connecticut, New York weapons ban,” https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwj6gcmJzfTNAhXK7iYKHYg4AEsQFggcMAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonpost.com%2Fpolitics%2Fcourts_law%2Fsupreme-court-again-refuses-to-consider-weapons-bans%2F2016%2F06%2F20%2Fd108abf6-34b7-11e6-8758-d58e76e11b12_story.html&usg=AFQjCNFGeqe3gaWmGAl83WKPQXe2aCYdkg ).Banning certain firearms has proven to enhance the chance of living, given the fact that states with tougher gun control laws statistically demonstrate lower gun deaths:“[D]ata from the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, offers some evidence [that gun control saves lives [ . . .. [The Center] graded and ranked every state on the strength of its gun control laws. . . . Each state [was] positioned according to how it was ranked for its gun control laws, from weakest to strongest, and its 2013 gun deaths rate rank, from lowest rate to highest. . .. Other studies have shown that states with more guns have more suicide and homicide; that suicides (which account for about three-fifths of gun deaths) decrease when gun control is tightened; and that countries with more guns have more homicide. Among advanced countries, the U.S. has the highest rate of gun ownership and the highest homicide rate..“What explains all these patterns? So far, gun control critics have only provided weak theories about culture or mental illness. Maybe it’s the guns.”.( “States with Tighter Gun Control Laws Have Fewer Gun Deaths,”.http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/10/02/gun_control_by_state_tougher_laws_mean_fewer_deaths.html.Ya think?

Steve Benson: I too was a law enforcement officer, Federal, and certified also in State of California as Deputy Sheriff.

At the time of the founding fathers, ALL firearms were essentially mlitary style weapons, muzzle loaders without rifled barrels. The SKS btw, all I"ve seen, were made in CHINA not Russia, and the actual Kalishnikovs being fired at me, and that I captured several of , were AK-47s and very good weapons. But of course manufacturing knockoffs has been licensed in a number of countries for a long time. Quality varies widely.

“Open carry” btw isn’t the real problem, it’s the sale of weapons to folks who shouldn’t have ‘em, and the large magazine capacities that lead to these real mass shootings. MAC 9s and 10’s, and numerous other weapons are also quite capable of killing a lot of people, and have even less “legitimate” use for hunting or “target” shooting, unless the target or “game” is on two legs.

Or as Homer Simpson, my favorite philosopher says,“Oh, guns, is there any problem you can’t solve?”

jcuppy – Mr. Benson was certainly cartooningback in the Reagan Era, and he was , at thetime, a conservative, consistently drawingcartoons reflecting his philosophy.They were sharp observations and they were just every bit as strident ( and beautifully drawn)as you’d expect. Then 20 or more years ago, Steve re-evaluatedthat strongly held philosophy. By all accounts,( not the least being Steve Benson’s ) it requiredprofessional risk and, sadly,family relationshipsin a few instances.Steve recounted familyholidays where it seemed he was persona non grata, all for expressing what were for him,hard- won political and expressive transitions.I certainly hope there has been some improvementwith all of that. If this was a bit much for some Steve’s readers from the80’s , i’m afraid it’s their loss.

Let me preface this by stating that Open Carry is stupid. In a situation like the one in Dallas, it definitely makes telling the good guys from the bad ones really difficult.

Last year, I downloaded Table 20 of the FBI’s Uniform Crime Report. It’s Murder By State: Types of weapons.

Overall, there were 11,961 murders in 2014.

Total firearms: 8,124, of which 5,562 were handguns.

Total rifles: 248. Yes, including the evil “black assault type” weapons.

You were more likely to be murdered with shotguns (262), knives (1,567), or hands and feet (660).

Shall we ban knives? Let’s ban hands! Feet!

When we look at the cold, hard, numbers, it’s clear that the “ban the assault rifles” crap is purely political, and not based on reality.

And I wish the media would talking about buying guns “over the internet” as if it were like shopping at Amazon. Yes, you can buy guns on the internet, but the guns have to be shipped to a dealer who does the background check. Just like you walked into any other gun store and ran the background check.

248 murders out of nearly 12,000 in 2014. Let’s go after rifles! Because, scary!

It’s politics.

Steve: also as a combat veteran who did some “long rifle work” in ‘Nam, what scared me a long time ago was the dramatic appearance of massive numbers of civilians wearing “cammo” on the streets here at home, as in my time, I could barely get jungle fatigues, and never had any “cammo” ones. Now we have operators in bunkers in Nevada, or aboard SHIPS for God’s sake! Wearing cammo uniforms! Desert cammo on a SHIP! Are they nuts? NO, those are the open carry nuts in cammo at Starbucks in Dallas, or Cleveland.

The assault-style rifle bans that have been upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court have survived constitutional review for two basic reasons:.1. Exotic or unusual weapons like assault-style rifles do not meet the “common usage” standard of weapons deemed constitutionally permissible for self-defensive purposesn by the public, and as envisioned by the Founders through a reading of the Founders’ original intent...2. The presence, display and usage of assault-style weapons in public spaces and places constitutes—according to the many cities, towns and states that have lawfully and constitutionally forbidden their possession within their respective boundaries—a threat to public safety. Once these unusual-class weapons migrate outside private domeciles, they enter the public square, where the Supreme Court has ruled that they are not definitionally suited for protectede status under terms of the Second Amendemnt because they do not meet the acceptable weapon type deemed by the Court to be Amendment-relevent for self-defense of individual persons and their homes..There are other reasons that the High Court has deemed assault-style rifles to not be covered by the 2nd Amendment. Some of those applicable bans are noted and explained in other posts of mine in this thead. All of them have been deemed appropriate, legal and constituionally sound means of weapon prohibition as authorized by cities, towns and states for reasons not relevant to the stated intents and purposes of the Second Amencment..These are not political decisions; rather, they are judicial ones, made by an independent court system established by the Founders in such a way as to be immunized from political pressure through the lifetime appointment (not popular election) of the judges who serve on them..Do your reading before you default to your “hands and feet” argument. Otherwise, you come off looking reactionary, silly and uninformed.

1. “Exotic or unusual.” Hmm. You do realize that the AR style rifle is one of the best-selling guns in America, right? And has been for a very long time. Its action and features are not that different from the M1 Carbine, previously a best-seller. The defining characteristics of these rifles are that they are semi-automatic rifles chambered for intermediate-powered cartridges.

There is nothing exotic or unusual about them. There are tens of millions of them out there, with an incredible variety of accessories built specifically for them.

They’re about as exotic as a Honda Civic.

2. Reread what I wrote. I am opposed to open carry. I think it’s a really bad idea. Concealed carry is another matter. A man in South Carolina stopped a mass shooting the week after the Orlando shooting using his concealed pistol. That didn’t make the news, for some reason.

Please reread what I wrote. I’m not certain you understood it. The main point being that if violence is something you want to tamp down on, rifles are really not where you should start. It’s silly and uninformed and based entirely on emotion to think otherwise.

I’m well aware of what you’re talking about. You’re just ignoring the facts I’m talking about.

So much for: I am also willing change my mind on a given issue, when my own investigation of contrary views present me with evidences that are observable, testable, falsifiable and replica table.

You’re not even reading evidence presented to you, with a citation from the FBI. When it comes to homicides, you’re much less likely to be murdered with a rifle than by nearly any other method. Fact. I’ve done your homework for you. Sorry you can’t see past your rather narrow field of view.

I guess it should have been obvious to me that you weren’t reading or comprehending what I was saying when I had to repeat my opposition to open carry.

I also oppose “stand your ground” or conceal carry without proper training and a license. I’m no fanboy.

I just deal with facts. As a cartoonist, you don’t have to. But for the purposes of this conversation, I wish you would.

But I know you likely won’t. Old man set in his ways, I guess.

As for the Supreme Court, you know good and well that they let the lower court ruling stand because they have a vacancy following the death of Justice Scalia, and thus it would be a tie anyway. Lie of omission, I suppose.

Well, Lin W, when you don’t have a rejoinder, you ignore recent case law and retreat to your gun cave. I accept your surrender.

Your retort is actually a question, so ending it with a string of exclamation marks is, well, kinda stupid.