Listen to Ross and Burbank weekdays on KIRO Radio 97.3 FM
 Ross+Burbank


Most popular
Help us build a Fisher House
Bonneville Seattle is raising funds for the construction of a second Fisher House at Joint Base Lewis-McChord in Tacoma and we need your help.
AP: 72119f8d-bdef-4da2-bdf7-ead6220da640
Groups that want more gun control think this is the moment - that the Newtown massacre finally is the kind of outrage that will not so easily fade from peoples' minds. (AP Photo/Charles Krupa)

How will gun owners respond?

BY Dave Ross  on December 18, 2012 @ 9:50 am (Updated: 10:24 am - 12/18/12 )

Groups that want more gun control think this is the moment - that the Newtown massacre finally is the kind of outrage that will not so easily fade from peoples' minds.

And we're seeing indications of that - even to the point that CERBERUS, the Wall Street investment firm, announced it is selling its stake in the company that makes the Bushmaster rifle Adam Lanza used.

That comes a day after we heard about how bullets fired in the classrooms ended up penetrating cars in the parking lot. That's how powerful these military weapons are. Police also found hundreds of unfired rounds, enough so that Lanza could have killed everyone in that building.

Any non-felonious, non-mentally ill adult in America can legally own that kind of firepower, and can pretty much store it in a closet if they want to. Some states hold gun owners criminally liable if their guns aren't stored properly and fall into the wrong hands - but of course that kicks in after the damage has been done.

No one knows whether this will tip the balance on gun control. But you know what might make a difference? If this incident motivates gun owners to get serious about how they store their guns.

Maybe more people now will re-think the chances of getting killed with their own weapons, or imagine what it would be like to wake up one Friday morning to a terrifying news bulletin and then get a knock on the door a few hours later from a couple of cops asking if you'd heard what just happened, and did you know your weapons were missing?

Dave Ross, KIRO Radio Talk Show Host
Dave Ross is co-host of The Ross & Burbank Show on KIRO Radio (weekdays 9-Noon) and never too far from the spotlight.
More Ross and Burbank

MyNorthwest.com - Purpose of Comments statement
Bonneville Media encourages site users to express their opinions by posting comments. Our goal is to maintain a civil dialogue in which readers feel comfortable. At times, the comments can descend to personal attacks. Please do not engage in such behavior. We encourage your thoughtful comments which: have a positive and constructive tone, are on topic, are respectful toward others and their opinions. Bonneville reserves the right to remove comments which do not conform to these criteria.

Comments (69)


  • Add A Comment

  • messiah101 wrote...
    If the Gun Owners have a lick of common sense
    December 18, 2012 9:27 am
    They will attempt to self regulate themselves. It is in their best interests other wise the government will likely do it for them and the law will be more draconian then self administered regulation.But since the VOCAL portion of the gun owners will not go along with self regulation the new regulations will be forced down their throats.Stupid is as Stupid does
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • logical open mind wrote...
    As a gun owner, here is what I am very willing to agree to that I haven't heard yet.
    December 18, 2012 10:06 am
    Control the sale of ammo/bullets. Guns are out there now and many are not registered if owned by a crinimal type. I would have my fingerprint taken and a full background check taken on me. Therefore I could not buy until I passed the background. A national phone number be given for citizens to call to alert authorities to check into and even meet with an individual who people think could be a danger. If deemed a danger, guns store data base is updated. The gun show loop hole has to be closed. Mental health authorities need to be able to alert a national data base that this mentaly ill person should not have a gun. Give concealed weapons permits to a couple of teachers and to persons with spotless criminal and mental health records. Throw any crinimal that uses a gun during a crime in prision for a long, long time. COMMENTS WELCOME.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • logical open mind wrote...
    and to the lefties that post on this site like lawn-I didnt spell check so get over yourself!
    December 18, 2012 10:08 am
    come up with a counter point that makes sense for a change.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • William Lawn wrote...
    Since you mentioned me by name.........
    December 18, 2012 12:19 pm
    IMO CCL's are too easy to get in this state. I have had one forever.

    In other states, you not only get a background check, finger prints but there are classes required and even some proficiency requirements.

    The issue on this one, in my mind, is the high capacity mags. Put a five rounder on an AR, it is a lot harder to do this type of thing.

    But the mom here needs a very hard look. She had a troubled son and a house full of high capacity mags, an AR, a couple of high capacity 9 mm, all unsecured.

    BTW, the gun show loophole doesn't close the private sale problem which you can never solve unless each gun is registered to an individual and he/she is responsible for it until that registration is changed (like a car).

    But that is one of those "cold dead fingers" issues and will probably never happen.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • logical open mind wrote...
    lawn-ok I retract my insult.
    December 18, 2012 2:27 pm
    but I still will misssssspellll cause I think it matters not.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    logical
    December 18, 2012 12:04 pm
    I agree,now your thinking
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Hawker12 wrote...
    "Gun Show loophole"
    December 18, 2012 4:18 pm
    This is a term that gets tossed around quite a bit, usually by folks who are not really up to speed. The gun shows in the greater Seattle area generally fall under the Washington Arms Collectors club.. In order to buy anything at those shows you must be a member. Part of becoming a member includes a mandatory background check. There is no loophole.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    Hawker
    December 19, 2012 9:43 am
    You do understand that the MAJORITY of weapons are purchased at Gun Shows.Many of these weapons are purchased without a background check. The LOOPHOLE is that a private citizen is able to legally sell a firearm to someone without a back ground check while a Federal registered seller MUST run a check.At some gun shows ATF has found 1/2 the sellers are private parties. So do you see the potential problem?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • RonJ wrote...
    Your a gun owner
    December 24, 2012 7:21 pm
    like I'm a Catholic priest.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • maplefish wrote...
    Stupid is as stupid posts
    December 18, 2012 4:52 pm
    Self regulate themselves....you stated right off sounding like an incompetent liberal, knee- jerk, whiney baby....LOL!
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • wsualumn wrote...
    Maple
    December 18, 2012 9:42 pm
    Does "self regulate" sound as incompetent and liberal as "self deport?"
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    FISH
    December 19, 2012 9:47 am
    Business often self regulates in order to keep government regulators off their back. The BBB is a perfect example of self regulation,some professional people belong to organizations that provide certification.Gee Fish I thought you said you were previously a Business person.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Saltchucker wrote...
    Hmmm.
    December 19, 2012 7:46 pm
    How exactly does a non gun owner force something down a gun owners throat? By expecting the government to protect them?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • RonJ wrote...
    Messypants
    December 24, 2012 7:14 pm
    it will never happen, keep dreaming.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Seattle is a cesspool wrote...
    The media, that is all.
    December 18, 2012 9:28 am
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yATeti5GmI8
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • ron prevost wrote...
    "Tip" the balance. ... Or perminately disavow the 2nd Amendment ?
    December 18, 2012 9:38 am
    First let me say the only fire ari I possess is a 1903 hunting rifle somewhere in my spare bedroom that I haven't touched for 30 years. .. And the only times in my life I have used a hand gin was for running a firing line in the military.

    That said, the reason, I believe, the NRA and other gin rights advocates never give in is because - to the Left - that 'tip' is a way street. And regardless of reasons or lack thereof, banning fire arms id their only goal. ... And, once banned, never a return.

    Dave, freedom of speech gives us the Westboro 'baptist' 'church' and freedom of the press most blatantly gave us the Spanish / American War. .... And who knows when in the future our freedoms will harm - even kill - others? ...

    At what point should we scrub the entire Bill of Rights as inconvenient , if not outright harmful?

    And it's always guns the left hates. Last spring when 3 or 4 in our area - including those poor little Powell boys, were killed by hatchets, I heard no one calling for a ban on axes. ... And Never knives, even when a perp uses a full saber or Samari sword.

    But it's a mantra that guns are evil. And as Rohm Emanuel implied, the left will not let this tragedy go to unused.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • RonJ wrote...
    And how do you fire a "hand gin"?
    December 24, 2012 7:19 pm
    pray tell
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Chuck Gould wrote...
    Shame on the anti-gun crowd. Shame on their sense of timing. Shame on their willingness to exploit the death of these kids.
    December 18, 2012 10:24 am
    Guns are.

    Let's outlaw chickenpox, herpes, and HIV while we're at it. We'll never have to worry about any of those diseases again.

    The anti-gun people (with whom I empathize, although basically disagree) should be ashamed. There they are, rubbing their excited little palms together, "Oh look! A whole bunch of dead kids! Let's not waste this opportunity to advance our agenda! Anybody who is opposed to more laws making it illegal to have a gun won't dare say anything for a little while!"

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • mnpat wrote...
    Thank you Chuck
    December 18, 2012 11:15 am
    You took the words right out of my mouth.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    CG
    December 18, 2012 3:42 pm
    In case you haven't noticed our friends on the Right have brought up the rare cases where someone with a gun actually stopped a crime.As I have sometimes stated human beings move on EMOTION not on LOGIC,those that want stronger gun legislation are 100% correct to move full speed a head even at this time of tragedy.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • RonJ wrote...
    Messypants
    December 24, 2012 7:21 pm
    just because the media refuses to report on these instances does not mean they don't happen..let me spell it out in terms you MIGHT understand...just because you don't know about it doesn't mean it didn't (or did) happen. Anybody hear that bear grunting in the woods?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • cigarfan wrote...
    How will gun owners respond?
    December 18, 2012 10:55 am
    By purchasing more guns of course! You can't dispel right-wing self-induced fear.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • lemmelone wrote...
    Peace of mind rather than fear
    December 18, 2012 11:43 am
    Rather than acting out of fear, I purchase firearms to pursue my favorite hobby - hunting. I also utilize firearms as personal and home defense tools. Not out of fear rather the knowledge that there are those who would not bat an eye at harming others or their property and that, as a free citizen, I am able to take measures to protect myself and mine. The only fear in my heart is the fear that one or more of my RIGHTS could be jeopardized by the OPINIONS of those who disagree that I should have them. That IS scary.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • lemmelone wrote...
    Firearm Ownership
    December 18, 2012 11:12 am
    I don't think that the inhuman, barbaric actions of a few psychotics has any bearing on my whole hearted support of constitutional recognition of my innate right to bear arms. Firearms are a valuable tool - one that made it possible to win, shape and keep the great nation we are all fortunate enough to live in. The hills and valleys have always groaned beneath the weight of lock and barrel and those tools are what they have always been...tools. The hands placed upon them are the issue. Perhaps this is a good time to take a good look at the societal, familial or situational conditions producing these shooters and not the instruments they employ in their evil deeds.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • AtheisticallyYours wrote...
    NON-mentally ill adults owning these types of guns?
    December 18, 2012 11:37 am
    How exactly is it determined YET as to WHO is "mentally ill" or not, whether they can have access to these types of weapons or not, and also, WHY the persons who DO own/want these types of weaponse are NOT FRIGGING CLASSIFIED as "mentally ill" themselves?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • It's me! Ha ha! wrote...
    How will we respond?
    December 18, 2012 11:39 am
    WE ARE! By pointing out how preventing law abiding citizens from having guns will do NOTHING to stop this and evil like this happens in the future.

    Law abiding American guns owners killed NO ONE today yesterday and the day before. And yet the Left wing Parrots here on these boards, as well as the Obama ministry of Propaganda the MSM, do as programmed and call for "Gun Control" without the slightest idea of why. Just because it makes them feel like they are doing something. In all reality all they are doing is continuing to support their Dear Leader even after giving him 4 more years of immaculation and by not looking for real answers, paving the way for the next mass killing like this.

    Yes Parrots when the smoke clears you may have some watered down version of some kind of new Gun laws "Forced down our throats" just to pacify the mindless here in this nation.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • cdbtx wrote...
    A Novel idea
    December 18, 2012 11:50 am
    That probably offers a much better solution than Gun Control.. which won't accomplish a thing.

    Why doesn't the "All Powerful" Media refuse to disclose the name of the criminals. Limit the data released - This elminates the Number One Motive for these guys. It takes away their power.

    Of course - that will never happen - the power of the dollar is more powerful than the lives of innocents..

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    I heard the NRA referred to as a "Shadow Government"
    December 18, 2012 12:24 pm
    The NRA was not elected to any position by the people they are simply a Lobbying group who solicits dues from its members and works hand in hand with gun manufacturers to insure that the message is made that everyone needs MORE guns.The ATF reported in 2010 that 5,459,240 weapons were produced in the USA 95% for use in the US market,3,252,404 additional weapons were inported.Between 2006-2010 47,856 people were killed by firearms here in the USA.Do you gun supporters really want this "Shadow Government" dictating the distribution of lethal weapons here in the USA?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Howdy wrote...
    another "Shadow Government"
    December 18, 2012 12:48 pm
    *grabs tinfoil-makes hat* Don't we have enough of those already?

    Just curious, of all those firearms that were produced and inported, how many were actually sold?

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    Howdy
    December 18, 2012 1:30 pm
    Companies that manufacturer products that are not sold go out of business.Does that answer your question?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Howdy wrote...
    Does that answer my question?
    December 18, 2012 1:59 pm
    Not really. "Companies that manufacture products that are not sold go out of business"- like the Chevy Volt?

    I understand what you are saying, I was just asking for sales figures since that would be more relevant to the issue. I agree that is a large number of firearms on the market and whether you believe it or not the people that are the most concerned about them getting in the wrong hands are the legal gun owners.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    Howdy
    December 18, 2012 3:40 pm
    If you count yourself among those concerned gun owners what are your suggestions for reform ?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Howdy wrote...
    That's a tough question
    December 18, 2012 4:00 pm
    I don't have any meaningful suggestions at this point. Honestly, I don't think any amount of reform can truly prevent massacres from happening. We just have to accept the fact that there are people who do evil deeds and individually we take steps to protect ourselves and our families.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    Howdy
    December 18, 2012 7:02 pm
    Perhaps a look back at the history of folks killing groups of people indiscriminately is in order its a fairly recent phenomena Many people feel that the introduction of violence by way of tv,video game,movie,books has more of an impact on certain types of people.Much like the side effects some people get from certain medications add the easy access to hi powered firearms and you have problems.Restrictions to firearms would be only a partial solution we need to attack the issue from several areas.Like other rules in a society everyone is affected by the actions of a few.But your response seems as if you feel that as a society we just need to accept these killings and that your only idea is to carry a weapon of your own. Well who is going to protect your family when your not present or your children when they are at school?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • ron prevost wrote...
    Just what world do you live in, messiah ??????????
    December 19, 2012 6:35 am
    "Perhaps a look back at the history of folks killing groups of people indiscriminately is in order its a fairly recent phenomena".

    Oh, I see. The operative word is 'indiscriminately'. .. Mass killings were SOOOOOOOOOOO much more tolerable then butchers has REASONS for mass killings. .......... Right.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Saltchucker wrote...
    New phenominon?!?
    December 19, 2012 7:53 pm
    The Mongol horde killed pretty indiscriminantly as did Viking raiders as did.......on and on and on. Do you do stand up part time as well? C'mon now CH this is funny stuff, make some $$$ on it!
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • rational wrote...
    messiah101
    December 18, 2012 7:33 pm
    Do you gun supporters really want this "Shadow Government" dictating the distribution of lethal weapons here in the USA?

    Nice, you start by saying you heard the NRA referred to as a Shadow Government and you end by assuming that accuation is correct. Classic liberal lack of logic there dude.

    If you want to look for shadow governments you can do far better than one lobby...how about the powers that run the federal reserve, for just one possible direction to explore?

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    rational
    December 19, 2012 9:57 am
    My definition of a "shadow government" would be non elected individuals or groups that effect policy or law changes.AIPAC and the NRA. The insurance lobby,the oil lobby are others.Are you Denying that the NRA lobby has kept the Feds off the gun makers and gun owners backs as far as limiting the regulations they operate under?Now thats TRUE liberal LOGIC at work. We Libs have the ability to connect the dots the Right has a very difficult time in that department.You have shown some ability to connect dots by bringing up that tired old example of the Federal Reserve.LOve or hate the Federal Reserve it seems to have served us well for about 100 yrs (corrupt or not)
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • rational wrote...
    messiah101
    December 19, 2012 5:14 pm
    My definition of a "shadow government" would be non elected individuals or groups that effect policy or law changes.AIPAC and the NRA.

    Oh, you mean like the unions, Hollywood and George Soros. So do you approve of some "shadow" governments and not others?

    And to answer your question, I very much expect that the NRA has been successful in affecting legislation or they wouldn't keep spending money to do so...just like all the other PACS and Lobby groups.

    We'll have to disagree about the fed reserve serving us well, especially recently now that they are devaluing the dollar by $85 Billion per month. That functions like a hidden tax and disproporationatly harms the poor and middle class. Odd that the left doesn't dispise the fed reserve as much as fiscal conservatives....guess conservatives care for the poor more than the left does.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • rational wrote...
    cdbtx
    December 18, 2012 7:39 pm
    Why doesn't the "All Powerful" Media refuse to disclose the name of the criminals. Limit the data released...

    I heard a discussion on this suggestion that made a few reasonable points. At first blush the thought sounds reasonable, but try to project to some future event where a group of people were killed. In the wake of that event there is essentially a media information blackout. Perhaps some general information is doled out. Can you imagine the conspiracy theories that might arise from such a situation? and to give the conspiracy nuts a little credit, how would we know they weren't correct...we really wouldn't. And how do we have trials without the risk that someone is going to leak the story...either documentation wise, or one of the jurors.

    And what does that say about freedom of information and the press? The first ammendment? Lots of moving parts and ultimately, do we want to trust the government where they could kill someone, tell the press some vague information and know that they could easily frame someone? (I suppose they could already do that, but it's much easier with a media blackout).

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }