REAL WORLD JUSTICE – Letter to the Editor
I just read a story about a man who was a convicted felon in New York who gunned down 2 fireman in an ambush style attack, after setting his home and car on fire, he laid under cover in wait. The man had been sent to prison in 1981 for 18 years for hammering to death his grandma’s skull and let off parole in 2006. This is an outrage!!! Let out ? why wasn’t he sent to the chair for this? The headline I read said “gunman kills 2 firefighters with bushmaster, left note”. Seems like the media is trying to get focus on the type of gun used a bushmaster {imagine that} and not the REAL problem, the lame justice system who let this killer out of prison. As far as I’m concerned if these killers and offenders would be hanged or executed on the court house lawn like the old days, I’m sure you would see much less crime. Seems like these days our systems benefit the criminal sometimes more than the innocent victims and there families. If justice would have been served on this man like it should have been, these lives would have been spared. The man could not legally own a gun, but he still had one {like many criminals and felons} and you can’t tame a killer. He said he was just doing what he does best, killing in his note. This is just what I’m saying though. If they would’ve strung him up when he brutally killed his grandma it would be no repeat offender situation. Many years ago my great, great, great grandaddy was one of Madison’s first constables and family stories were passed down through our family about the way he ran this town. I’m pretty sure there were few repeat offenders and less first timers in those days. The situations we here of all the time about repeat offenders could likely be prevented if the consequences were not so lenient. I would love to see some of this come to reality myself and just see the outcome. I believe violent offenders would greatly decrease when they got the picture. I honestly hate paying taxes every year to house this scum in our prisons anyways. I have no pity for rapist, killers and the such. These are just my thoughts and they make sense to me. This justice system just seems too p.c. these days. I say our justice system should stop being so p.c. and make some hard core, getting there attention.
-HENRY JACKSON DICKINSON III
L.N. , it is my understanding that Senator Feinstein carries a concealed pistol . Wonder what need she has for that . Would think her armed bodyguards would suffice but I guess she needs it if they are not close by . Have heard that her cohort from California , Senator Boxer , also carries . I guess they are what Al Gore referred to in 2000 as the “right people .”
Nancy Lanza lived, it seems, in the very same violent antigovernment fantasyland in which some of you seem to reside. The fantasy cost her life, her son’s, the lives of four other adults, and the lives of 20 children. The government isn’t killing children. Private citizens with way out of proportion arsenals are. That is the real world. There is no point in discussing anything of importance with folks who do not live in it.
@Kpine and others,
Recent article from ctpost newspaper. Unfortunately, I agree with their conclusion that nothing will be done.
http://www.ctpost.com/news/article/Hugh-Bailey-There-is-no-argument-for-doing-4168568.php
Rube , Eddie , & all , just phoned Washington as to Feinstein bill . Was told bill is filed in committee but 120 firearms list to be banned has not yet been released to public . I thought this info was public record but what do I know . If anyone has verifiable info , please contact John so we all may be enlightened .
“local” said it well. The part about Chicago, being a terrible reality of a town lost to lawlessness and crime. The one taking the cake is the newspaper violating everyone’s rights by publishing names/addresses of legal gun owners (while carelessly compromising LEOs the same way) has now hired ARMED guards for protection. Welcome the the Bloomberg school of thought — do as I say, not as I do, and the regular public is not entitled to protect itself. Oh my, we can only thank God for such self-righteous monsters, actual criminals, these “journalistic” types or one-percenters like Bloomberg.
Wow. O.o Can we say “Police State”???????
Rube and KP:
Here are some intelligent thoughts on the issue, covering both sides of the argument:
http://www.quora.com/Gun-Control/Is-it-true-that-there-are-some-no-brainer-gun-control-laws-that-should-be-passed
BTW, KP, u-haul has a sale this month. Check their website for a coupon.
Keep in mind that all this knee jerk reaction is related to what some consider “assault rifles.” Read this article from msnnow.com. Yes. According to FBI’s annual crime statistics, there were 323 counts of death by rifle in 2011 and 496 people killed by hammers and other blunt objects.
http://now.msn.com/breitbart-headline-says-hammers-are-more-deadly-than-rifles
Government leaders need to pull their heads out of the sand and stand up and face the fact that we need trained, law abiding citizens to shoot back at these fools that are committing mass killings. We have armed guards on amored vehicles, in many metropolitan banks, at most every sporting event including high school football games, in most every court proceeding so why not have them watching our precious kids. It could be done in a tactful fashion and presented to the children in a fashion that would not be harmful.
Well rube, i guess that article explains why Chicago, which has the strictest gun laws in the US, just hit 500 homicides. NY, DC and LA also have very strict gun laws yet have some of the highest crime rates in the country. The criminals that comit these crimes dont care what the law says, they wont turn in or register firearms but they will most definitly use them against the soon to be vounerable unarmed prey. Everyone needs to quit drinking the kool-aid and look at the big picture. Those who do not know history are doomed to repeat it. Look up the history of every other nation that has disarmed its citizens, not good results. Dont think for a minute that it could not happen here.
Ps. – half the people yelling out which guns to ban dont know the difference between a revolver and a machine gun, only what they have been fed by ol bambam and the liberal media
@Rube,
I expect you were not raised on the Aucilla or if you were you spent a great deal of time away as I have spent a good bit of time down there myself. I have been on this earth almost 50 years and grew up in Madison. My family and I always were around firearms and we all own several as do most all of my friends. I am racking my brains to try and think of someone I know or have had contact with that has comitted some type of crime or assault with a legally owned firearm and I just cant come up with any.
Your link focuses only on mass shootings and refers to “assaults” in some of the numbered paragraphs but does not clarify if assaults refers to gun violence or gun violence by law abiding gun owner.
It states in number 8 that more guns means more homocide, yet in number 7 it says gun ownership is declining overall in US since 1959.
I do not doubt that most of the mass shooting have taken place by people possessing legal guns; however, what this article fails to address is the fact that mass shootings although horrible account for very tiny portion of gun crime in US. Also, fails to address the estimated crimes prevented by legal gun owners and the fact that almost every mass shooting in US has taken place in a gun free zone which prevents legal concealed weapon carry on the premises.
Also, a fact that since 2006, legal gun ownership has increased in US and gun crimes have decreased. Also, the majority of gun murders are comitted with weapons other than assault rifles and/or legally possessed weapons.
This article picks out statistics on legal gun ownership as related to mass shootings and then somehow it obviously throws out other statistics based on total gun ownership – both legal and illegal.
Check out this link. I can assure you more crimes are prevented by legal gun owners than comitted and unless we also need to take into account the Second Amendment which has nothing to do with personal protection or hunting, etc. If we continue to water down what weapons can be legally possessed by law abiding citizens as compared to what is available to military this eats away at the basis of the Second Amendment.
http://www.registerguard.com/web/opinion/29199350-47/firearms-criminals-gun-crimes-increased.html.csp
@Kpine,
Some interesting data on our gun predicament. Doubtful anything will be done. Item 11 seems to analyze the issues under discussion.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/12/14/nine-facts-about-guns-and-mass-shootings-in-the-united-states/
Rube , hopefully we will be able to see what is on the “list” tomorrow . I am not sure the Feinstein bill can make it thru the House in it’s current form . No , I am not in Southerland’s district .What per centage of folks in your area do you think will report their “listed” firearms for registration in your area if it ends up at $200.00 per firearm ?
@Kpine,
Please forgive. Didn’t know tax and fine meant the same thing. Recon we may have to make a decision to pay the tax, or fight what ever is after us, with our teeth. Been in a few of the latter and while I had a fine pair of choppers a few decades ago i guess I will just pay the few thousand dollars to register my little collection of weapons and ammo.
Incidentally, I been wondering lately what we are all so afraid of that requires all these guns? Down here on the Aucilla we mostly use traps to capture our prey. Bet you I could trap that there congressman or ours who voted to raise our taxes last night.
What’s his name? Southland? Anyway, if his vote had been in the majority, your taxes would have gone up a couple of hundred dollars a month. Seems like the president has trapped the whole of the party of the ignorant and the rich. That fat man from New Jersey seems pretty mad at them too, and he is one of them.
Interesting times! Trust everyone is having a prosperous new year.
Eddie , still waiting for you to show up with a couple hundred thousand dollars to buy me out . In any event if this bill goes thru I feel it is time to dig in & make a stand . Rube , the tax per firearm would be used to administer the registration program on whatever firearms are on the list . This will of course cost money .
$200 per registered firearm sounds fine to me.
KP, how’s that move to TX coming along?
@Fluffy,
I cannot find any reference to a” $200.00 fine.” Guess I will follow Kpines advice and wait until the the bill is filed.
OK Rube. You are not arguing against the 200.00 fine, just that you can not validate that this is the case. If it is a fact do you then agree or disagree?
Rube , see features on John’s front page . Also , if you do not believe the material , we will all see the document on Jan. 3 . I hope it is not another Pelosi deal of ” we have to pass it first so that you can find out what’s in it . ” Rube , hope you do not own anything that is on the list .
@ Kpine,
Research sources please!
“Show me your data”
i did a quick search on the internet and could find no info to substantiate your allegations.
Folks , did some more research & the Feinstein bill as it now stands would place a tax of $200.00 ON EACH FIREARM her bill mandates to be registered . That is ALL handguns & the hundreds of long guns on her list .
I believe what we will see , especially in rural areas if the Feinstein bill is passed as it now stands , will be the militia , which is simply regular citizens , not the federal armed forces or state national guards which can & are federalized , stand up for their belief in the Constitution . As it now stands , the Feinstein bill would require ALL handguns & whatever long guns on her list to be registered with the federal ATF . I believe we will find “normal ” sporting semi auto rifles & shotguns on this list also such as the Remington sporting rifles which have been around in one form or another around 100 years . We will see shortly . The owner would be finger printed , photo taken , address taken & put into a federal data base . I would imagine there will be a tax for each firearm to fund this scheme . These firearms would not be allowed to be sold or transferred to anyone else & on owner’s death would be turned into the feds . It would not come to this because I feel in a short time the firearms would be confiscated as in the Australian experience , they would know right where to come for them . When firearms owners finally realize the impact on them of this I feel they will unite to oppose this . For those that agree with Feinstein , rather than ignore the Constitutional rights of others there is a way to legally push your view , go thru the amendment process & change the second amendment & probably the fourth . That would be the rule of law to me .
L.N. not the world you consent to live in?! Then leave this world or move somewhere more in line with your philosophy. Australia spent over $500 million in the last year to remove guns from their population and guess what? All types of crime are up, drastically including gun crimes because only the CRIMINALS have guns. The explosion of gun violence in this counrty is not a result of gun ownership, it is a result of a society in which music, video games and “stars” glamorize violence and murder. It is a society that turns the other way when the mentally ill have no where to go. What comes after the guns are taken, do they come and take your family members in the middle of the night, does China walk right in and take over? Once one of our freedoms is taken, the rest will fall like dominoes.
I think the judge, prosecutor, jury, parole board and neighbor who bought the guns should all be arrested
and charged with murder. They are all responible for this crime. Our judicial system needs to be
overhauled. Dave Mial
@ KP i agree with you about there being violence in the south, and probably more places too, if this happens. You gotta ask yourself as a citizen do we just stand back and cower like SOME suggest or do we stand our ground regardless? Well in my eyes there is no question really I’m gonna stand my ground on what I believe in, what I was raised on, and for my heritage. To me we’re still free and they ought not take our rights. There is only one road in and out of my small swamp parcel and there aint ever really been a pleasant outcome for the uninvited or strangers down in my swamp. I’m prepared to do what’s necessary and I will be a law abiding citizen while doing so!!! I hope that they are prepared for the elements down there it can be rough sometimes.
L.N.
An informed citizen would not refuse to deal with the issues, but may hesitate to endorse action that is not in keeping with the vision of the country. In reality, we fail daily to address these “situations” as you say, when our individual endeavors have become, as a rule, void of the values and principles which once authored a far more peaceful and ethical social environment; few are willing to take responsibility, and still fewer are willing to act. Those wishing to curb the effect of criminal activity by restricting non-criminals alike through the moderation of the 2nd amendment essentially undermine the most fundamental aspects of the Constitution. Perhaps the most valuable insight into the intnet of the documents is found in Madison, Jay, and Hamilton’s “The Federalist”. In Federalist 30, we find the reason we cannot moderate the 2nd amendment. One of the major issues of the day was the standing armies, and the threat they posed to sovereignty; this cannot be overstated. THE argument for a militia formed to protect against foreign intervention, was that natural protections would be in place based on the fact that the very members who would be armed would be average citizens, participating in the customary day to day goings on of society, at the same levels and extent as any other joe. The necessity of the modern professional armed forces does not preclude the citizen from maintaining the ability to defend his/her liberty from any threat. In the modern era, the notion that the population should not have access to arms capable of viable defense, but instead limited to hunting and sport flies in the face of the intent of the Constitution. It is no stretch to say that since before the civil war, the intent of the entire document has undergone continual perversion, as our Consitutional Federal Republic has eroded to that of a federalist, and then nationalist state. Nowhere may this attack be more evident (specifically as it pertains to the issue at hand) than in the words of Mr. Holder, who offered that Obama would not hesitate to affect further regulation of arms through executive order if legislation could not be passed. Essentially then, Obama would be circumventing Congress (those who are to be entrusted with legislative power), in effect, circumventing the will of the people. There is a defintition for this behavior I will allow you to apply.
L.N. , reflected on your post about folks only obeying the laws one agrees with . The two divergent positions here are not reconciable in my view . The people that do not agree with you feel they are following the law , specifically the U.S. Constitution in Amendments two , four , five & six as it applies to this issue . What the eventual outcome will be I do not know , only that it will not be pleasant getting there . As far as law enforcement doing the confiscation when it comes , the local law enforcement here that I have spoken with say they will not enter private property to confiscate . I suspect Obama will federize the national guard & if not enough support there will bring in UN troops & put them under what guard units are available . Just my opinion .
L.N.
Check out this link.
http://m.usatoday.com/article/news/1791085?articlePage=0
Also, if you look on the web you will see where Chicago just recorded its 500th homicide for the year. The state of Illinois has the toughest gun laws in US and is one of only two states that do not issue concealed weapon permits of any sort (per my understanding and research).
Guns are here to stay in the US I promise you this. Yes. There may be some additional restrictions on the magazine capacities, etc., but there is no way they are going away as God and guns are some of the bookends to our country becoming the world leader it is in such a short amount of time. With this being said and the statistical fact that folks legally possessing firearms commit a tiny amount of gun crimes you should be glad that some of us folks with legally owned guns will be around to help you when you face some law breaking thug. Think you will find that more crimes are prevented by legal gun owners than are comitted by them by far.
L.N. , at this point I don’t believe any of my firearms will be on ” the first list ” to be banned & or confiscated but the next time some evil & or deranged individual does something bad there will be a second list & then who knows what will be banned . You see , this will not stop with one group being banned . That is what I view as being a problem . It is my understanding that Australia went thru this process & eventually banned & confiscated lever action & pump action ( called manually operated ) firearms . Yes , I believe if the feds go this far there will be violence in the south , intermountain west & Alaska . Are you willing to go this far ?
You looking to shoot someone, kp? I thought you were “law abiding.” Or does that mean only the laws that you favor? That way chaos.
No. I will let law enforcement take your guns if you cannot come up with a better, more realistic solution, as I have not yet seen one. That is what is known as the Rule of Law.
Purveyor, you cannot eliminate evil with legislation. You can only make undesirable actions more difficult. Right now they are evidently not difficult enough. I don’t really need an education in civics, though. I have one against the perspective of considerable study of world and American history and public affairs and a family history that can claim pioneer ancestry and eligibility to DAR/SAR on three of four grandparents’ lines (and, yes, gun ownership).
I just cannot see refusing to deal with a very real and damaging situation because of the fear of what “might” happen as a responsible adult course. Adults are able to wake up and see a bad dream for what it is.
@ Rube
Even if we concede that legislation could have prevented Sandy Hook (I’m not sure I’m willing to do that), the far reaching effects of that kind of governance, without the balance of the opposing party, would impact many more children for many years to come. In its more fully developed state, that version of democracy treats it children this way:
http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2012/12/russian_adoption_ban_emotional.html
It doesn’t seem to matter whether it’s illegal gambling, drugs, or insider trading; those who decide to participate in illegal activites have always, and will continue to do so regardless of legislation. When this adolescent monster grows up, he has the ability to bear a corruption that history has proven costs MILLIONS of lives. Whatever minimal impact new legislation may have on the well being of the population today, is not worth the ransom to generations to come. To be good stewards of liberty and freedom is to remember never to take them for granted, and to protect against short-sightedness.
@the purveyor, and Kpine, and LN,
“Change that is coercive, is neither lasting or universal.”
Interesting comments. By its very definition, loss is change.
Care to describe the loss of children by the families of our gun culture?
I don’t want to loose my freedoms, protections, and basic constitutional rights. But, as someone said on this site several years ago, it is time for us to address the most basic of all questions, “But Is It Good For The Children?”
Are we really willing to put our children at jeopardy in order for us and anyone else to own an AK47 with a 100 round clip? Do we really believe the answer to our predicament is to put more guns in the system?
I do wish our sheriff would enter this discussion. Seems he had some recent difficulties with issues related to matters of this nature. Surely, our law enforcement community would be against every Tom, Dick, and Harry, having access to some of these weapons?
Interesting article from yesterday. http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/26/the-n-r-a-at-the-bench/?ref=opinion Seems the gun industry has captured our political process. What are we going to do?
L.N. –
I think that an overwhelming majority of people share your concerns for the safety of our citizens, perhaps specifically the most vulnerable ones; myself included. At the risk of sounding insenstiive to firefighters or school victims, I would ask where our outrage has been, in the daily sense, at all the injustices leading to thousands of deaths (children included) every day, that largely go unreported. It concerns me when I see public opinion emptional manipulated for political gain. It may not be that the ideology you share with those who seek to impose broader and deeper regulation of the US citizen is the child of malicious intent as some say, but such ideology has a terrible track record in history in terms of its value to society. It is truly natural to want to “do” something, anything, in the face of the evils of the day. We must however, educate ourselves not only in the history and roots of our own form of civil government, and how it continues to morph, but also gain an understanding of the alternatives many politicians continue to offer, if only effectually, as they pertain to the big picture perspective of the future of cour civil government. Here, specifically, when we attempt to moderate or eliminate evil through legislation, the subsequent loss of freedoms (the extent arguable) is unavoidable. Some would offer small compromises of their personal freedoms in order to spare others a certain measure of suffering. While noble, it must be remembered that this political philosophy does not exist in a vacuum, and the consequences, offen profound, but difficult to observe in the now, leave society in a state no better, albeit different, than the previous one. Evil will be substituted for evil of a different color; history tells the story. The only difference we can truly make to better society begins every day when we look ourselves in the mirror and decide we need to change. Change that is coercive, is neither lasting or universal.
L. N. , when the feds in general & Obama in particular decide what firearms are to be banned & then confiscated , are you going to be one of the people coming to get mine if some of them are on the list or will you let others do it ?
@Mike, not an excuse to do nothing about a problem, a huge problem: inappropriately violent society that tolerates way too much and is wildly unrealistic when it comes to gun ownership.
This logic doesn’t work: let’s make murder legal because people who really want to are going to murder. Sorry. Not the world I consent to live in.
Deal with the problem. Violent and realistic video games that foster police and military “heroic” fantasies: off the market. And/or Universal military service and thorough psychological evaluation as a requirement for gun ownership, retroactive. and/or Military and police assault weapons and ammunition: off the market or taxed so that they are as expensive a “collectors’ item” as fine art..
How do you hold a guy “accountable” who kills himself? After, of course, he kills a bunch of other people, including children.
I’m a CCW permit holder. Am I a bad person for being happy when any crime story (Armed Citizen or otherwise) ends with the bad guy dead? It makes me grateful another POS is where it belongs — dead and unable to harm anyone ever again!!
L.N. – I guarantee that he did not aquire his weapon legally and the only connection this rifle has to the military is the way it look and nothing else. How else do you suppose we should “lock the doors” on guns? If a criminal wants it he can get it simple as that. It is time to start holding the criminals accountable as well as the broken justice system that let this guy out.
How did he get a gun, period, let alone a bushmaster? I think the point is, record or not, it would have been lots harder for him if he hadn’t had a military style weapon. He could not have bludgeoned the fire fighters, but it was easy to hunt and to snipe them.
Gun control is like locking your doors when you go out of town. If someone is really determined to break in, he will find a way, but locking the doors is a common sense way of discouragement.