posted on November 19, 2006 09:27:46 AM
Now that we have new leadership [starting in Jan] I wonder IF they'll start back on their party line of trying to take away our Constitutional RIGHT to own guns.
This article from the WA Times yesterday speaks to the issue of how violating DC citizens right to 'bear arms' hasn't HELPED a thing.
[b]D.C.'s gun lessons[b]
TODAY'S EDITORIAL
November 18, 2006
The incoming Democratic powers-that-be in the congressional leadership and on the Senate and House Judiciary Committees are a who's who of the gun-control movement: Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton, Patrick Leahy, John Conyers, Dick Durbin, Joseph Biden, Ted Kennedy, Harry Reid and Herb Kohl, to name a few.
If and when gun control roars back to life in 2007-08 -- we expect that it will -- the data unearthed this week in these lawmakers' own backyards by reporter Matthew Cella should loom large.
The District of Columbia's gun-murder numbers show yet again that stringent gun-control laws have little or no utility in curbing the violence, even as they strip citizens of their Second Amendment rights.
And indeed the trend nationwide since 1991 has been a drop in crime at the same time gun-control laws were loosened.
Since 1977, the nation's capital has kept some of the country's strictest gun laws on the books. And yet, as Mr. Cella showed Friday in The Washington Times, over the period 2001-05, about 80 percent of murders in the District were perpetrated with guns -- a ratio slightly higher than in New York, Chicago, Baltimore and Atlanta.
Overall homicide levels in the District are troublingly high and have not been helped by gun control.
Which is no wonder: Violent criminals can wield guns confident that they will not get caught, and confident that law-abiding people will not have guns themselves.
In 2004, the most recent year for which data is available, guns were used in 61.1 percent of homicides in New York, 75.2 percent in Chicago, 77.5 percent in Baltimore and 73.2 percent in Atlanta.
The 2004 percentage in the District was 79.3 percent. These numbers show little correlation with the degree of gun-control strictness.
Relatively gun-lax Atlanta's numbers are close to relatively strict Baltimore's, while highly strict New York City and Washington, D.C., are the group outliers.
Gun-control advocates argue that less restrictionist states undermine neighbors' strict laws. Well, for every such hypothetical, the National Rifle Association can name cities and towns that enjoyed drops in crime after gun-control laws were loosened.
Since the 1976 handgun ban, the District has never been off the list of the most violent cities, and on several occasions it has been the most violent place in America.
Beyond the numbers, gun-rights advocates will need to tell the new Democratic leadership in no uncertain terms that the Second Amendment isn't negotiable. Gun ownership is an alienable right.
We'll also be keeping an eye on three incoming Democratic senators, Jon Tester of Montana, Bob Casey of Pennsylvania and Jim Webb of Virginia. All three deployed gun-rights rhetoric on the campaign trail. But all three now face a party leadership with a poor record on gun rights.
It will be interesting to see whether and how they reconcile the conflict.
=================
And many dems CLAIM that their party honors our Constitution. How can they even say that....when they work to take our Const. rights AWAY?
It's a sad joke.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on November 19, 2006 02:23:42 PM
Pure speculation.
Ironically, this editorial doesn't specify which type of guns are being used in the murders, crimes, etc. they comment on.
What are the rates of crimes committed using handguns vs. rifles and shotguns vs. assualt weapons? No, instead to make a biased point, they just use "guns" as the be all end all.
Sure, Americans have a right to bear arms. No argument there, but at what point do we allow people the right to bear certain arms such as assault weapons, machine guns, rocket launchers, grenades, etc?
There comes a point where a criminal becomes a terrorist, so where do you draw the line?
How do you regulate availability of guns from criminals? Background checks? Waiting periods? What really works?
Instead of pointing fingers at Democrats before legislation is even contemplated, perhaps some solutions to the problem should be presented. Isn't that what Republicans always cry about? Here is a perfect chance...
The G.O.P. and W.H. both know the gun issue is a dead issue.
Its just old liar_k trying to ride dead horses again and again and again. Bear needs to come back and support poor old liar_k. She has been abandon by the NEW-CONS.
Liar_k should start seeing ya can't trust a NEW-CON.
The Dem's have long and hard work undoing the great harm this great country suffered under the NEW-CONS for 6 years.
posted on November 20, 2006 10:35:34 AM
That's right Bear and they're repeatedly tried.
No where in our Constitution does it say we can't own guns....and no where does it state what 'type' of guns we are allowed to own.
But for some reason the dems/liberals/anti-gun people won't address that Constitutional RIGHT.....and state why they believe it can just be overlooked....when the SAY the are so supportive of the laws our founders put into place. Again, imo, they just give lip service to the Constitution. And any they don't like....hey...who cares.
=========================
And this WILL be an issue....because it's being presented for a vote....whether it passes or NOT. They're still trying.
Just as old progressive/socialist pelosi has voted AGAINST guns in all the cases where she had an opportunity to REMOVE them. To VIOLATE the Constitutional rights of Americans.
====================
Bear, I hope you and yours have a WONDERFUL Thanksgiving Day. I'll have a houseful....and I can't wait.
===============
profe said: "It's not an "article" Linda, it's an editorial."
YES, profe.....just as it says it is in my OP. Maybe you need to put your glasses on so you can actually SEE what's ALREADY there.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on November 20, 2006 11:51:59 AMAnd this WILL be an issue....because it's being presented for a vote....whether it passes or NOT. They're still trying..
What's being presented for a vote? Is there currently legislation pending covering gun control? I can't find any information on this.
____________________________________________
May 1, 2003, America brings "democracy" to Iraq. November 7, 2006, Iraq brings democracy to America.
posted on November 20, 2006 01:23:12 PM
The state of AR recognizes our CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS to bear arms.
And we have the ability to carry our guns after applying for a permit.
I do have a loaded gun.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on November 20, 2006 03:39:05 PM
Linda_K
posted on November 20, 2006 01:23:12 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The state of AR recognizes our CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS to bear arms.
And we have the ability to carry our guns after applying for a permit.
I do have a loaded gun. """
Then why all the whining and crying?
You're safe from all those terrorists!
Now, please educate us some more and show the legislation pending that will take away our guns.
posted on November 21, 2006 04:27:15 AM
I've got loaded guns too Linda, one here on my desk, a Colt 45, then there's a 12 guage in the barn office and a .223 by the back door for coyotes. Big deal.
Now back to that VOTE you were talking about........
____________________________________________
May 1, 2003, America brings "democracy" to Iraq. November 7, 2006, Iraq brings democracy to America.
posted on November 21, 2006 10:46:04 AM
"No where in our Constitution does it say we can't own guns....and no where does it state what 'type' of guns we are allowed to own."
So, by that same argument... no where in the Constitution does it say women don't have a right to choose whether they want to have an abortion or not, no where in the Constitution does it say that people can't buy and sell drugs, no where in the Constitution does it say that people can't marry someone of the opposite sex, etc...
What's the point??? I've owned my share of guns as well. From what I see, most Americans don't have a problem with gun ownership. What they have a problem with is criminal and terrorist gun/arms ownership.
But again... Linduh won't answer the question put before her. Where do you draw the line of what should be legal arms ownership. Should the average American have the right to own rocket launchers, grenades, heat seaking missiles, canons, etc?
posted on November 21, 2006 03:01:12 PM
I would be interested in coyote or raccoon seeking missiles, if any of you republicans know any shady arms dealers who'll sell me some.
____________________________________________
May 1, 2003, America brings "democracy" to Iraq. November 7, 2006, Iraq brings democracy to America.
