Tag Archives: guns

Guns Kill People

It’s true – I read it on the web.  Try to Google: “Guns Kill People”  I did and what I found was astounding.  Right now I’m staring down my own gun wondering when it’s going to jump up and kill me once and for all.   I wonder if it has some secret plot.  A plot created in the dead of night, deep inside the closet along with the other guns.

Glock: “Pst . . . Remintgon, wake up!  I have a plan.

Walther: “Wha . . . who’s there?”

Glock: “Shhhh you idiot.  I have a plan for  our escape.” 

Remington: “Let’s hear it you gorgeous polymer genius.”

Glock: “We need to prepare ourselves.  Make sure you eat  . . . fill yourselves up good – preferably with Gold Dot and you Remington, load up with slugs.  Then, we wait.  We wait for that woman to open the closet door and when she does . . . we all shoot and run.  Run, run like the wind.  Run for gun freedom out into open where we will liberate other imprisoned guns and start an army that will kill people!”

Bersa: “¡Tranquilidad! Usted ha disturbado mi sueño.”

Yes!  I can see it now.  I’m going to stop their plans to overthrow my rule.  Those jerks!

As you can see, I’m not quite sure what to do.  My guns are plotting to kill me and possibly many others.  I think they’re probably hoarding ammo somewhere. 

I am so glad I did that Google search or I would not know that guns kill people.  I can’t believe that we allow psychopathic, murderous firearms in people’s homes.  Terrifying!  Up until just today I have never been afraid of my own guns turning their awesome power against me.    I live with four murderous psychopaths.  They must be stopped.

During my web searching, I read so much uninformed information about guns, gun laws and gun users that it’s more disturbing to me than the four guns in this house that want me dead.  Here are some fun quotes:

Published in US News, April 14, 2007, “Guns Kill People, Period.”

The Second Amendment, a biblical passage to its followers, may give a right to bear arms. It does not, however, give a license to kill. Try telling it to the NRA.

That is absolutely ridiculous.  I wonder if the writer of this marvelous passage, John W. Mashek, knows that killing people is illegal.  Hmmm . . . killing is not a right protected by the Constitution.  But, because some people kill, we should just white out parts of the Constitution that the founders of this country found so important?  Because some people smoke pot and call it religion or like to marry little girls should we do away with the first ammendment right to freedom of expression?  NO!  We punnish the pot smokers and little girl marriers and leave the good, honest, law-abiding citizens to think, say and do as they please.  Great idea.

Published in http://www.blogsandiego.com/guns_kill.html, October 3, 2006 “Yes NRA, Guns DO Kill People”

Speaking of how his father died “He was helping in an FBI investigation about how weapons were being modified to become fully automatic when one of the firearms did just that. So when I say guns kill people, I know what I’m talking about. Come on folks! Think this through. Don’t believe the hype of the NRA when they tell you that it’s not the guns. It is the guns.”

I feel sad that this person lost a loved one.  However, guns are inanimate things and the don’t just “go off.”  An animate object must be present to activate the mechanism in the inanimate object to make it fire.  Really, it’s not the guns.  I’ve had one sitting here on my coffee table all night and it hasn’t moved one inch.  It’s the people who use the guns for ill that are the problem.  It’s the people who drive drunk that are the problem, not the car. 

Published in http://www.anorak.co.uk/twitterings/172597.html, April 17, 2007 “Guns Kill People – Virginia Tech

What I would like is for the gun-toting right wing to admit that there is a price we pay, that senseless accidental deaths and traumas are a national cost and that it’s not so clear that it’s worth it, but hey, we pay it anyway because so many guns are in the hands of so many people that there would never be any getting rid of them.

I would like the right wing to admit that guns are not “good” and that the right to bear arms is not an absolute virtue and that the deaths in the US caused by guns are at least as problematic, philosophically, as abortion. But I’m not holding my breath.”

First – this came from the UK.  That’s all I need to say, but I can’t help myself:

1) “gun toting right wing” Guess what?  There’s a gun-toting left wing, too.  Guns are non-partisan and plenty of liberals are in favor of gun rights. (Point of interest: I haven’t asked my murderous psychotic guns which party they belong to . . . yet!)

2) “senseless accidental deaths and traumas are a national cost”  True!  A whopping 789 people die a year from firearms accidents.  Those are tragic deaths, to be sure.  However, we don’t need to spend tens of billions of dollars creating legislation and programs to stop those deaths.  250 or so of those accidental firearms deaths were children.  Again, a tragedy.  But, more children die from burns or in swimming pool accidents in on year.  According to AAA, 7,475 children are treated in hospitals for injuries sustained when run over in their own driveways.  Approximately 230 children die each year from driveway backovers.  Sad and senseless.  Read more about this in my post The New Utopia Vehicle Ban Program – Phase 1 in My Plan to Stop Dying

3) “so many guns are in the hands of so many people that there would never be any getting rid of them”  I agree with the writer here.  Which is exactly why putting restrictions on the law-abiding isn’t going to solve crime.

4) “I would like the right wing to admit that guns are not “good” and that the right to bear arms is not an absolute virtue and that the deaths in the US caused by guns are at least as problematic, philosophically, as abortion. But I’m not holding my breath”  I will not admit that guns are not good.  They are just fine in the right hands.  Many Americans believe strongly in the words of our Constitution.  The inherent human right of self-defense is not granted by virtue of the Constiution, merely upheld by it.  Again, deaths are not caused by guns.  “Problematic, philosophically” . . . the problem is our inability to uphold our own laws and punnish criminals.  It’s kind of a different issue than abortion.  Abortion is something many people feel strongly about, but is not generally related to crime prevention – which is what gun control is about, isn’t it?  Or is it just about the control?

Published in http://www.ihateitall.com/bm/politics/guns-really-do-kill-people.shtml, April 17, 2007, “Guns Really Do Kill People”

This one has a little potential, but is missing the mark just a bit.  I like statistics, but for me, this person put a stump in the road while talking firearms DEATH statistics that show only 1.4% of firearms fatalities during the time period he is working with were self-defense related.  He surmises that:

In fact, someone is four times more likely to be accidently killed by a hand gun than saved from attack by one.

My problem with this is that most self-defense cases involving firearms don’t involve a death.  Sometimes, criminals choose to abort their mission when they see a victim is armed.  According to the Clinton Administration’s own statistics, firearms are used in self-defense situations at least 1,000,000 per year.  Some studies say more, some say less.  Regardless, approximately 1,000,000 is a lot.  When you consider that gun crimes kill about 12,000 people per year . . . oh, I don’t know . . . you do the math.  This leads me to believe that people who use guns for self-defense don’t kill people unless they have to and usually, they don’t.  The writer of this article is against handguns, even though hand guns represent a large percentage of firearms used in self-defense situations.  So, the argument to ban handguns on the premise of the statistics the writer used is not persuasive.  If anything, his statistics coupled with mine, show that guns save lives in the right hands.  Again, read my other post (The New Utopia Vehicle Ban Program – Phase 1 in My Plan to Stop Dying)for more stats.

I’m going to stop now.  One coincidence here is that these articles were all written within a week of each other – right after Virginia Tech.  Tragic situation.  But, getting emotional about the issue doesn’t help us solve the problem of CRIME.  Sure, if there were no guns anywhere on earth, nobody would be killed by one.   But, let’s get real.  The cities with the highest murder rates are those with very strict gun laws.  Clearly, the gun laws are not the solution.  Perhaps better law enforcement and judicial response would be better.

Just my 2 cents.  Now, I’m off to give those murderous psychotic guns a good talking to.

 

 

Advertisements

ACLU, Others Speak out Against DC Safe Home Initiative

Sounds good, doesn’t it?  Safe Home Initiative.  I want a safe home.  Who doesn’t?

The DC Police Department announced recently plans to have officers go house to house asking for permission to search the homes for illegal handguns.  Now, this isn’t searching homes where there is probable cause.   This isn’t searching homes as part of a crime investigation.  This is going door to door searching for illegally owned handguns with no reason.

If this can happen, how far off is it that the government would go door to door searching for other things you aren’t supposed to have.  The only difference between what they’re trying to do and a violation of the 4th Ammendment is attempting to get consent.  The 4th Ammendment orders that searches and seizures “must be supported by probable cause and limited in scope according to specific informaion supplied by a person (usually a peace officer) who has sworn by it.” I believe this specific case would be a violation of that ammendment because the DC police are actually Federal.

Watch the news story from NBC4.com – the local DC NBC station:   http://video.nbc4.com/player/?id=232372 

Read the article on WTOP News – http://www.wtop.com/?nid=695&sid=1372986

The director of the Washington DC chapter of the ACLU called it a “bad diea” and that residents might feel coerced into letting the police into their homes.  “It sends the message to the public that the police ought to be able to search your house anytime for any reason,” Spitzer said. “People will be intimidated. That cheapens civil liberties and privacy for everyone.”   See the article in the Washinton Post:  http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/12/AR2008031202717.html

The ACLU has created a sign for citizens to place on their windows that say “To the Police: No Consent to Search Our Home.”  View a copy here – also see the flyers the ACLU put out to notify citizens of their rights here.

The National Director of the National Black Police Association declared that he will not allow the police to enter his home.

The DC police say there will be an amnesty for any gun found – meaning anyone found with a gun won’t be charged with that crime.  However, the guns will be taken and investigated to determine if they are related to any crime.  If the gun is associated with a crime, charges will then be filed.   

Not that I condone breaking the law – I don’t.  But, I also think it’s heading down a dark unknown road if we allow the police to simply drop by and look for illegal things in our homes.  The more I ponder these issues, the more I begin to realize that the drafters of the Bill of Rights knew what they were doing.  They had lived through tyrany and oppression by the British and were determined to make sure nothing like that happened in this country again.   

Consider the rights afforded in the Bill of Rights:

1- Freedom of Speech, Press, Assembly, etc.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

2- Right to Keep and Bear Arms

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.   See my other post: “What is a Militia”

3- Protection from Quartering Troops

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

4- Protection from Unreasonable Search and Seizure 

 The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

5- Right of Due Process, Freedom from Double Jeopardy, Self-Incrimination, Eminent Domain

No person shall be held to answer for any capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

6- Right of Trial by Jury, Speedy Trial, Right to Counsel, etc.

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district where in the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.

7- Right to Civil Trial by Jury

In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

8- Prohibition of Cruel and Unusual Punnishment and Excessive Bail

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

9- Protection of Other Rights

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

10- Powers of the States and People

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

Why are we so quick to demand that these rights be upheld for criminals and foreiners while not caring too much whether or not one or two go to the wayside for law abiding citizens?  I heard a quote somewhere that said something to the effect of “It’s been difficult for the government in Iraq to create a constitution.  Why don’t we just let them use ours?  It’s been working for over 200 years and we’re not using it anymore.”  Sad and true! 

Both Boston and Philadelphia are planning to conduct similar home searches.

What is a Militia? 2nd Ammendment Ponderings

Unless you’ve been living under a rock, or are just enthralled with the Obama/Clinton Celebrity Death Match currently on TV, you’ve probably heard about the case of DC vs. Heller that was recently heard in the Supreme Court.

In a nutshell, DC was sued in a claim that their gun control laws are unconstitutional.  Handguns are banned.  Rifles and shotguns are legal, but only in a disassembled and/or locked condition.  Because most criminals don’t sit and have tea with you while you assemble your disfunctional gun, essentially, the ban prohibits any functional gun.  DC officials claim they can defend themselves with shotguns and rifles, but people with functional, not disassembled brains, understand that the gun is no better than a baseball bat if it’s not assembled.

The lower court ruled against the city.  In turn, the city made an appeal to the Supreme Court.  Got it?  Good.

I’ve heard a lot of arguing about what was meant by the 2nd Ammendment:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Some claim that this only applies to the collective – a militia, or the National Guard.  Knowing a little history, I know the National Guard did not exist at the time of the creation of the Bill of Rights.  What exactly is a militia and is the “right of the people” collective or individual.

After searching around in the writings of the Founding Fathers, authors of the Bill of Rights, and other politicans of the day, I have come to conclude that a militia is the people – all of us.  For, disarming a people is the most effective way to subdue them.  

Here are some quotes I like:

“Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man gainst his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American…[T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.” — TENCHE COXE – American political and a delegate for Pennsylvania to the Continental Congress.

“A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves … and include all men capable of bearing arms.” “To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them.”

RICHARD HENRY LEE – Delegate to first Continental Congress, put forth the resolution on June 7, 1776 to declare independence from Great Britain.

“The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able may have a gun.” “Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?” PATRICK HENRY – prominent figure in American Revolution, thought the Constitution afforded the government too much power, instrumental in the creation of the Bill of Rights. 

THOMAS JEFFERSON3rd President of the United States, principal author of the Declaration of Independence, Founding Father.“The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed.” “The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed and that they are entitled to freedom of person, freedom of religion, freedom of property, and freedom of press.”  

One loves to possess arms, though they hope never to have occasion for them. -Thomas Jefferson to George Washington, 1796. The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, (Memorial Edition) Lipscomb and Bergh, editors.

Laws that forbid the carrying of arms… disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes… Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.  -Jefferson’s “Commonplace Book,” 1774_1776, quoting from On Crimes and Punishment, by criminologist Cesare Beccaria, 1764

“No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.”  -Thomas Jefferson, Proposed Virginia Constitution, 1776, Jefferson Papers 344.

THOMAS PAINE – Revolutionary and philosopher.

“The balance of power is the scale of peace. The same balance would be preserved were all the world not destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside … Horrid mischief would ensue were one half the world deprived of the use of them … the weak will become prey to the strong.”

JAMES MADISON – Father of the Bill of Rights, Fourth President of the United States,.

“Americans [have] the right and advantage of being armed, unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust their people with arms.”

SAMUEL ADAMS – American Revolutionary, philosopher, Founding Father – beer guy. )

“The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms . . .”

My Plan to Reduce Crime and My First Ammendment Right to Freedom of Expression

I have a plan to reduce crime: 

1) At birth, the FBI collects DNA samples from EVERYONE.

2) At the age of 12, the FBI collects fingerprints from EVERYONE.

Then if you ever commit a crime and leave DNA or fingerprints, it will be easy to find you.

3) All activity on the internet is monitored by the government.

That way, if you ever visit a child porn site the vice squad can arrest you before you have a chance to blink.

If you ever look up maps or pictures of major metropolitan areas they can stop you from blowing the city up – you terrorist!

If you ever do any research on drugs they can monitor you for the day when you do buy or sell some pot.  They’ll be on to all of us.

4) All phone conversations will be monitored by very smart government computers.

So, if you ever talk about something scary, they can keep tabs on you and maybe throw you into custody, just in case.

5) All purchases will be logged into a government database.

If you buy duct tape – you must be thinking of robbing someone.  Fertilizer – you’re making a bomb!  You’re a bad, bad person!

I think it’s a splendid idea, don’t you?  Think of how much we can reduce crime.  We will live in a virtually crime free utopia.  Oh Glory!

What, you don’t like the idea of the government keeping files on what you’re doing?  It’s a violation of your privacy rights you say?  Think it sounds a bit like communist China?  Hmmm . . . Are you someone who hates the Patriot Act?  Disdain the idea of the government keeping tabs on suspected terrorists via wire tapping etc?  Really?  Then why do you think it’s perfectly ok to trample on my rights and assume I’m a criminal because I like to target shoot?

On April 8, I belive, California legislators will address AB352 – this bill would mandate a permit to purchase ammunition,, report ammunition sales to a database, and prohibit sharing more than 50 rounds with friends without a dealer’s license.  I can’t believe I lived and paid taxes to the dimwits in California.  Good thing the weather is nice, or nobody with a half a brain would stay. 

There is another movement afoot to have the FBI keep a catalog of a round fired from every gun sold in the US – that way they can quickly find the one gun used in a crime among millions – just like on CSI.

The thing that just occured to me is the  people who want to record the imprint of my guns are the same people bitching about the Patriot Act, wire tapping,  racial profiling, etc.  You hate the provisions that basically allow the government to check into you and whatever you’re doing whether you like it or not.  Well I agree.  It’s a bad idea to afford the government that much power and access into our private lives. 

Wire tap a suspected terrorist or God forbid take him into custody and fingerprint him – HELL NO!  He has rights!  Keep an imprint of my gun’s firing pin on file in case I might commit a crime – sure why not?  Consider me a criminal for giving a friend some ammo at the range – absolutely.  Why are my rights the only ones that don’t matter.  It’s a little lot stupid. 

It just kind of pisses me off.  I love the First Ammendment.  But, some people pushing for 1st Ammendment rights that allow anyone anywhere to say or do just about anything for any reason are the same people who want to take my rights away  . . . .

Oh gosh, I just figured it out. It just popped into my head just now as I was typing about the 1st Ammendment.  It’s an epiphany from God.  I’m going to call TV right now!  Shooting sports and personal defense are just my self expression and I’m guaranteed freedom of expression by the 1st Ammendment!  Woo Hooo!