The Delaware Senate approved two gun-control bills Thursday after four hours of sometimes contentious debate that included a recess for technical difficulties. By a 13-8 margin, senators sent to the House legislation that would require a permit to buy a handgun and would prohibit magazines capable of holding more than 17 rounds. Sen. Bruce Ennis, a Smyrna Democrat, joined the seven Senate Republicans in opposing the measures in what was otherwise a party line vote. The bills could be considered in a House committee as soon as April 20, the first day back after a two-week break.
- I understand that people don’t want the government telling them what to do, but the idea is to keep people from hastily buying a firearm and committing an act of violence out of haste. It has nothing to do with hindering buying protection for an abused person. If someone is being abused, they go to the authorities. This isn’t the Wild West. We don’t handle our business by killing one another. The government is doing what they think is the right thing. Gun control is only going to become more strict. It is what it is. If the people in this state actually cared, they’d stop putting Democrats in office, but Delaware has been Democratic for a very long time. — Joe Arsenault
- That’s a great thought, but ammosexuals tend to be drama queens. — Elizabeth Magnani
- Of course these gun bans will work. I mean, just look at the peaceful city of Chicago. They have the strictest gun laws in the nation, and because of this, they’ve been able to achieve the highest firearm-related deaths and crimes ratio in the nation. What people don’t seem to understand is that criminals don’t follow laws. Criminals don’t go through legal processes to purchase their firearms and magazines. Law-abiding citizens follow laws and submit to legal processes. Congratulations! You’ve just gotten one step closer to further controlling the law-abiding citizens who aren’t using their guns for crimes. You’ve accomplished nothing in the realm of stopping criminals from committing acts of violence. Let’s talk about all the other violent crimes committed in our nation. People drive cars through crowds. People use knives for stabbings. People fill box trucks with fertilizer for bombs. Why not protect us further by limiting box truck storage capacity, limiting homes to one steak knife per kitchen and limiting fuel tank capacity in vehicles? I understand the need to protect people from violent crimes, but these bills aren’t the answer. They don’t solve the problem. Chicago and California are both prime examples of strict gun laws not working. These bills are passed by the ignorant to pacify the ignorant. — Sean Quirk
- Part of the reason gun crimes are so common in Chicago is that the counties surrounding Chicago don’t follow the laws. So people get guns from there and bring them in. Now, imagine that there was a tax on bullets of $1 per bullet. I wonder if we’d see a massive drop based on the expense of ammo. — John Smith
- I can just say I don’t feel safe around people driving sports cars and people driving SUVs without any passengers are killing our environment, in turn killing us. Alcohol kills quite a bit, too. Everyone should have to lose something they enjoy, not just law-abiding gun owners. Compromise or everyone should lose. Nonessential vehicles, tobacco and alcohol aren’t necessities, so may as well get rid of those, too. — Josh Renner
