“…law enforcement needs to be strengthened and there should be restrictions on civilian access to high-powered weapons with extended magazines…”
Why do the cops even need guns?
The police seldom arrive in time to even arrest a suspect, much less use their guns.
The cops initiate most cop/criminal encounters; while criminals initiate the criminal/victim encounters.
Add to this the fact that the police have no duty to protect individuals.
Now, if the police actually need to be armed for a call: Doesn’t logic and reason indicate that if the police needed guns for the call . . . the VICTIMS the police were called for needed to be equally, if not MORE armed, than the police who will arrive with backups?
Non-cops have much more reason to be armed than law enforcement: Criminals go to some trouble to commit their crimes out of detection of law enforcement, while actually preying on non-cops. While the police seldom encounter the criminals in violent attacks: The victims ALWAYS encounter the criminals.
“The Brady Campaign is a national effort named after James Brady . . . ” isn’t that the guy who made millions of dollars, after he was shot in a “Gun Free Zone”, and since has made millions of dollars more every time someone else is murdered in “Gun Free Zones”?
No wonder the Brady Center push so hard to create more of those murder zone Cash Cows!
“Helmke said 32 people are murdered with guns every day in the United States, the same number that was killed in 2007 when a gunman opened fire on the campus of Virginia Tech.”
Wow! Maybe we should pass a law making murder illegal.
How well did Helmke’s idea of “the more helpless you are, when attacked with murderous intent, the safer you are” work for the victims of Virginia Tech?
Where has the Brady scheme of “the more helpless you are, when attacked with murderous intent, the safer you are” been shown to save lives? Columbine? Luby’s? Fort Hood?