I Like Guns

FishyJay sent me this with the simple remark "you might have fun with this." Well indeed I did. I loved it. It helped me to clarify something too. I really can't accept the 2nd Amendment justification which I think is a manipulation and a distortion. Nor can I accept the self-defense one, which I see as paranoia. But, "I like guns" works for me. Why can't the pro gun folks just say that?

The Compton Weapon Exchange

The Los Angeles Times reports on the surprise customer who turned up at their gun exchange this week.

Los Angeles County Sheriff's deputies expected heavy business Tuesday during the department's "gift for guns" program in Compton.

And sure enough, scores of people lined up to turn in various weapons in exchange for supermarket gift certificates.

But they were surprised at the man who pulled up in an SUV with 58 guns -- mostly small handguns but also some assault weapons. Dressed in a sweatshirt and jeans, the mystery man offered his cache in a nonchalant fashion.

As is the policy for such events, the deputies asked no questions and eagerly took the guns. They don't know the man's name, and the donor declined to comment to The Times.

After unloading his weapons, the man received several thousands of dollars in supermarket coupons and drove away.

Sebastian once said he doesn't have a big problem with these exchange programs except for the fact that some valuable older guns might get collected and destroyed. That made me wonder if the cops in charge of the destruction sometimes take a thing or two out for themselves. That's what they do with the drugs and the cash they confiscate, isn't it?

The Compton exchange Tuesday garnered 232 guns, all of which will be destroyed. The Gift for Guns program has been a staple of the Sheriff's Department's crime reduction efforts in Compton, which has seen a drop in homicides in recent years.

Countywide, the program has taken 5,000 guns off the streets throughout L.A. County. At the Santa Clarita station earlier this year, one person dropped off a 20mm artillery shell and another person left 11 guns, including a Thompson .45-caliber submachine gun, an SKS assault rifle and an AR-15 semi-automatic rifle.

To me these are wonderful programs, which although only drops in the old proverbial bucket, actually save lives.

What do you think? Please leave a comment.

Texas Man Shoots 10-Year-Old Daughter

The Dallas Morning News reports on a terrible tragedy that took place on Christmas Eve.

The Oak Point man accused of fatally shooting his 10-year-old daughter on Christmas Eve had been investigated repeatedly by Child Protective Services, and police believe he was probably drunk when he fired the shot, according to officials and court records.

"I could smell ... [alcohol] on him, and his actions indicated to me that he was intoxicated," said Texas Ranger Tracy Murphree, who is investigating the shooting with Oak Point police. "There's nothing right now to indicate that it was an intentional homicide, but the investigation is still ongoing."

Duke Lawrence Watrous, 36, remained jailed Tuesday on charges of manslaughter, criminal negligence and tampering with evidence. Bail was set at $200,000.

He was not charged with illegal possession of a firearm, why? Do the lax gun laws in Texas allow a man with a history of problems with the Child Protective Services to have a gun? That doesn't sound right to me. Is this part of the general attitude towards guns in the Great State of Texas?

Police say Watrous was recklessly handling a revolver Thursday night at his Oak Point home when it discharged, hitting Ashley in the face and killing her.

Her 9-year-old brother and 1-year-old sister were present when the shooting occurred, authorities say.

Watrous then tampered with evidence by moving the gun from the crime scene and locking it in a gun safe, Murphree said. Police later secured a search warrant and removed guns from the home, he said.

Court records paint a disturbing picture of a family racked by conflict and allegations of abuse.

A judge limited Washburn-Rives' custody of the children after a 2003 investigation found she had abused them, CPS caseworker Hiza said in an affidavit filed Monday.

CPS investigators found that Washburn-Rives had emotionally abused Ashley and neglected Ashley and her brother, according to the affidavit.

The caseworker described Watrous and Washburn-Rives' relationship as turbulent and said each has accused the other of abusing the children.

This sad story illustrates the need for stricter standards in allowing people to own guns. Drunkenness and documented mental instability need to be screened and people like Duke Watrous need to be prohibited just like convicted felons and repeat violent offenders.

What's your opinion? Is this just the small price we must pay in order to enjoy our god-given 2nd Amendment rights? I don't think so, but I'd like to hear what you think.

Please leave a comment.

Cop Killings Up in 2009

CNN reports on an alarming statistic.

Six police officers or deputies shot to death in the Seattle, Washington, area since October 31 reflect a troubling trend highlighted by a report released Tuesday.

According to preliminary information compiled by the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund, the number of law enforcement officers killed by gunfire in 2009 increased to 49, compared with 39 in the previous year.

In light of the declining overall murder stats, this is particularly worrying. But what does it mean? Why would it be happening like this? Interestingly, the overall numbers of police officers dying in the line of duty has dropped.

"However, that bit of good news was overshadowed by an alarming surge in the number of officers killed by gunfire."

In 15 of the shooting deaths, which occurred during five incidents, a single assailant killed more than one officer, according to the report. The multiple-fatality shootings included the killings of four officers in Lakewood, Washington, on November 29.

"Multiple-fatality shootings" sure makes me think of assault weapons. Too bad we can't find a way to define them.

What's your opinion? The article goes on the say that the major killer of cops is the automobile. Do you think that has anything to do with the discussion about guns? Why do gun apologists keep bringing cars into it?

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

New York Marks Fewest Murders Ever

That's the headline on CNN, New York Marks Fewest Murders Ever.

Calling a sharp drop in overall violence throughout America's most populous city "one for the record books," New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg announced this week that 2009 saw historic crime-rate declines across the city's five boroughs.

The declines occurred in nearly every crime category, including the "lowest number of murders ever," Bloomberg said Monday.

According to the mayor's office, there have been 461 homicides to date on Monday in 2009. That number is down nearly 11 percent from the same time a year ago, with 516 murders recorded in 2008. Bloomberg said 2009 is on track to have the fewest murders in New York City's history since reliable recordkeeping began in 1963.

This is certainly a wonderful achievement, one which derives from several factors.

The mayor said the drop in New York's crime rate can be attributed to a combination of using new technologies and strong management, using statistics in police planning and responses, adequately funding the department and focusing resources to address problem areas.

Along with stringent gun laws, regulations and enforcement mechanisms, the combination of all these strategies "have helped to substantially reduce the level of violence on our streets," Bloomberg said.

"Along with stringent gun laws," is the way Bloomberg puts it. The gun bloggers on the other hand seem to think it has only to do with improved policing techniques and general trends.

What's your opinion? Do the strict gun laws in New York contribute to the decreasing violence? If some of the "feeder" states had similar restrictions and the ciminal importing of weapons were curtailed, do you think the crime rate in NYC would go even lower?

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

Act Like a Man

H/T Bluegal

"You can act like a man! (slap) What's the matter with you?!"

You can act like a man! sound bite Marlon Brando sound bites

Teaching the Boy a Lesson

Fox News reports on the Florida man who decided to teach a boy a lesson.

According to a St. Lucie County Sheriff's Office arrest report, 39-year-old Christopher Fred Cady shot the boy in the chest with the pellet gun, a Christmas gift, after the child shot an autistic cousin with the gun.

Cady reportedly was trying to show the boy that getting shot with a pellet gun can hurt.

According to online records, Cady was booked into St. Lucie County jail Friday. He was charged with cruelty toward child without great harm and was being held on $500 bond. It's unclear if he already has an attorney.

Cady was also charged with violating sex offender laws by failing to report a name or residence change.

What is it with these guns? What is it with this gun mentality, kids shooting each other, adult shooting the kid? It's sick. Of course, because the guy was a sex offender the pro-gun apologists will disavow any association with him. According to them, there are no bad guys among gun owners. But I say gun ownership and gun mentality pervades all strata of society, the responsible and the irresponsible, the honest and the dishonest, the law abiding and the criminal. I was extremely generous when I suggested that only 10% of the lawful gun owners should not have guns. The guy in this story shouldn't even have a toy gun.

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

Street Named After Sean Bell

The Daily News reports on the ceremony in which Mayor Bloomfield named a street after Sean Bell, an unarmed man shot and killed by the police in 2006.

Without mentioning how Sean Bell died, Mayor Bloomberg signed a bill Monday designating the site of one of the city's most shocking police shootings as "Sean Bell Way."

Bell, 23, was killed in a fusillade of 50 police bullets Nov. 25, 2006, just hours before his scheduled wedding. The shooting erupted on Liverpool St., near the Kalua Cabaret in Jamaica, where Bell's bachelor party was held.

Police said Bell was armed, but no weapon was ever found. Three detectives were acquitted of state charges last year, but a federal civil rights investigation is continuing. Also still pending is a civil damage suit against the city.

Can you believe the three "detectives were acquitted of state charges last year?" Can you believe how the friends and relatives of Sean Bell appear in that picture with the mayor? I can't.

Wikipedia links the Sean Bell killing with another famous one, Amadou Bailo Diallo, which took place a few years earlier.

[He was]a 23-year-old Guinean immigrant in New York City who was shot and killed on February 4, 1999 by four New York City Police Department plain-clothed officers: Sean Carroll, Richard Murphy, Edward McMellon and Kenneth Boss. The four officers fired a total of 41 rounds. The shooting took place at 1157 Wheeler Avenue in the Soundview section of The Bronx. The four were part of the now-defunct Street Crimes Unit. All four officers were acquitted at trial in Albany, New York.

Diallo was unarmed at the time of the shooting, and a firestorm of controversy erupted subsequent to the event as the circumstances of the shooting prompted outrage both within and outside New York City. Issues such as police brutality, racial profiling, and contagious shooting were central to the ensuing controversy.

What's your opinion? Are these incidents infrequent enough that they should be considered the price we have to pay for a safer New York City? Do you think this is part of the deal, that the cops are asked to go out there and clean things up with the promise of immunity when things go wrong? Is this the Giuliani legacy being carried on by Bloomberg?

Do you think the fault for this extends beyond the officers themselves who are doing the shooting? Do you think the Mayor and the city and the judges and juries should share in the blame?

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

Detroit Shooting - 3 Dead, 1 Wounded

The Chicago Tribune reports on the terrible shooting that took place in Detroit.

Three people were fatally shot and another wounded when two men opened fire at a house on the city's east side.

Police haven't determined a motive, but Deputy Chief James Tolbert tells The Detroit News that Monday night's attack was planned.

Spokesman John Roach tells the Detroit Free Press that two men, ages 24 and 33, and a 35-year-old woman were shot fatally in the head. A 37-year-old man from Macomb County's Harrison Township was shot several times before reporting the shootings about 9 p.m. He is hospitalized in critical condition.

Police describe one suspect as a thin man with a goatee who was carrying two handguns. The second suspect is described as a man with a heavy build. Both fled in a white Dodge Charger with Florida license plates.

Do you think that man with the goatee was holding the gun sideways and that's why he didn't kill the third guy? What happens when these guys fire two handguns simultaneously, holding both of them sideways? Do you think the recoil causes the upper barrels of the guns to meet and thereby steadies the shots?

The Florida license plate is the real clue. Obviously, the guns and the shooters came from gun-happy Florida to do their business in slightly-less-gun-happy Michigan.

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

California Man Shoots Sea Lion

The NewYork Times reports on the fisherman who shot a sea lion.

YUBA CITY, Calif. (AP) -- A Sacramento fisherman accused of shooting a sea lion in the head has pleaded not guilty to a felony charge of cruelty to animals.

Larry Legans, 43, entered the plea Monday in a Sutter County courtroom.

Authorities say Legans fired his shotgun at the sea lion along the Sacramento River because he was tired of watching the protected animals take his fish.

The 300-to-500-pound animal was spotted with a gunshot wound on a dock in Sacramento on Nov. 11. Authorities say they arrested Legans after a fisherman reported seeing him shoot the sea lion.

The animal is recovering at the Marine Mammal Center in Sausalito, where officials say its condition has stabilized. It could eventually be released back into the wild.

In California, where they have the strictest gun control laws in the country, according to the Brady Campaign, are fishermen allowed to have shotguns with them at the river bank? Are shotguns exempted from all the rules and regulations?

More importantly, I wonder how common this kind of behavior is. He sounds like one of those guys who shouldn't have a gun in the first place. What do you think?

Please leave a comment.

Barack Obama Comes to Save the Day

I've recently become quite disillusioned and reverted back to my cynicism of old concerning the President, but I can admit when I'm wrong. This guy is fantastic.

Bayonetta Has Everything

She's got that body, that hair, and man does she have guns.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Andrew Madoff has a Gun Permit

The Gothamist reports on the latest news on young Andy Madoff.

The Post reports that Andrew Madoff, the 43-year-old son of Ponzi schemer Bernard Madoff, "applied for a license to keep a handgun in his swanky Upper East Side pad more than six months ago -- and his name appears on NYPD and state police lists of approved permit holders." Is he trying to keep up with those alleged Goldman Sachs employees who are packing heat these days?

The Post questions this decision, because Madoff got into an argument with a former employee of his father's firm and the two men ended up in an "entertaining" "bitch fight" on a Upper East Side street earlier this year. A Post source says, "I would think that if the license division knew about that, they would suspend his permit immediately"—because the NYPD "commonly gives them to those with clean records and no history of mental or substance problems"— but, hey, no one was arrested!

The NYPD claims Madoff's application wasn't approved, but the State Police, which gets its info from NYC, says that he appears on the "roster of license holders." Well, at any rate, he is being sued for taking $60 million in ill-gotten gains and can't find work, so this gun kerfuffle is the least of his worries.

What's your opinion? Are the strict gun laws in New York discriminatory against poorer people? That's the inference whenever they talk about the Goldman Sachs guys having gun permits isn't it?

Do you think the Madoff sons could have been innocent of the crimes their father was convicted of and yet have acquired so much of the money? Does that make sense? Maybe the old man made a deal that his family members not be charged criminally, what do you think?

What about that fight Andy Madoff had been involved in? Should something like that disqualify a person from having a gun? What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

The Meteor Man

Thespec.com has a report on a professional meteorite hunter from Portland Oregon.

Rob Wesel recently tracked down the Grimsby space rock, which he's now putting up for sale on the Internet. He says it's unlikely that he'll get back the money he spent on the cross-continent adventure he took to find the 14.5 gram stone.

He figures he'll be lucky to get $2,500 toward a trip that cost twice that for him and a buddy. He's more hoping to trade his gem for a type of meteorite he's missing in his collection of several hundred.

Meteorites frequently fall to the earth, but seldom with as much excitement as the one in Grimsby. It's rare to have video footage of one in the air. The Grimsby meteorite also gave a glimpse at the world of space rock chasers who will passionately fly off to places where meteorites have been reported.

"I liken it to the folks who go tornado chasing, only we get to keep the tornado at the end of the day," said Wesel.

I couldn't help thinking that some of our blog friends like Joe Huffman and Linoge might like to play their beloved word substitution game with this story. It could be fun.

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

2009 Murders in New York City

The New York Times reports on the declining number of murders and other violent crime in the city.

There were days upon days in New York City when not a single person was murdered in 2009. Two such stretches, in February and March, lasted nearly a week each.

There were some pockets of the city where homicide was a singular occurrence: 12 of the city’s 77 police precincts, in locations as varied as Hamilton Heights, in Upper Manhattan, and Park Slope, Brooklyn, had logged one each through Sunday.

The story line of murder in New York is one that has been undergoing constant revision since 1963, when the Police Department began tracking homicides in a way that officials now deem reliable. (Before then, homicides were not counted until they were solved.) There have been rises — the number peaked at 2,245 in 1990 — and subsequent falls. But there have never been as few homicides as this year.

The city is on track, for the second time in three years, to have the fewest homicides in a 12-month period since the current record keeping system began. As of Sunday, there had been 461; the record low was in 2007, when there were 496 for the entire year.

Just like there's shared responsibility when things go wrong, in cases like this where things improve, there's shared credit. Mayor Bloomfield certainly deserves his share. Of course there are many factors, but decreasing gun availability is one of them.

Curbing gun use is linked to lowering the homicide rate, officials said, and Mr. Kelly lauded the mayor’s effort to stop illegal guns from flowing into New York, saying 90 percent of the guns that are confiscated after they are used in crimes come from out of state. He also cited the department’s program of questioning and frisking some people on the streets as a “lifesaving” strategy that had led to the seizure of 7,000 weapons this year, including 800 guns.

“We have a policy of engagement, and I think it’s working,” Mr. Kelly said. “We believe young people who may have a gun think twice before they take it out on the street.”

What's your opinion? Is New York City becoming safer and safer? Is it now the safest big city in America, as we read in another report recently?

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

Shared Responsibility in the Delta Terror Attack

Crooks and Liars posted a fascinating video in which Rep. Pete Hoekstra told Fox News' Chris Wallace Sunday that it is "fair" to hold the Obama administration responsible for the a failure to detect an attempted terror attack. Friday, Hoekstra told the Detroit Free Press that the Obama administration needed to "connect the dots."

Now, I'm all for the idea of shared responsibility, but this doesn't seem to be a case of it. Hoekstra explained that the reason the Obama administration should be held responsible is because they've stopped using the work "terrorist." This has somehow allowed our collective guard to be lowered and a near tragedy resulted in Detroit.

Here's what John Amato has to say about it.

What depths will these conservative hacks sink to as they attack President Obama? For what I have no idea. Hoekstra hasn't even been briefed on the attacks, but he has his talking points ready. Does he also hold Bush and Cheney accountable for the 9/11 attacks, the anthrax attacks and the shoe bomber attack? That would have been a proper follow up question from Chris Wallace, but that would never happen. And since no one was hurt in the newest try unlike what happened under Bush, Hoekstra should be praising Obama.

What's your opinion? Do you think Representative Hoekstra would go for my theory about legitimate gun owners being partly responsible for the gun problems in America? Is it right for him to blame Obama?

Please leave a comment.

DGU by 81-Year-Old Man

The Sacramento Bee reported on this defensive gun use.

An 81-year-old man being robbed inside his Sacramento home Saturday evening scared off his assailants when he fired several shots, police said.

Sacramento police spokesman Sgt. Norm Leong said two black men in their 20s asked to use the phone at the victim's home in the 6000 block of Hollyhurst Way shortly before 6:40 p.m.

When they were inside the house, the robbers pulled a gun on the victim and proceeded to rob the place, Leong said.

However, at some point they left the victim in a room where he kept a gun. The victim fired a few rounds through a door, which caused the robbers to flee, Leong said.

Authorities said the victim, believed to be by himself during the robbery, was not hurt.

It was unclear if he hit either of the robbers, police said.

No other description of the suspects was provided.

That's a wonderful story of a very lucky senior citizen. But most remarkable is the rarity of this type of incident during the holidays. I've read literally scores of headlines about Christmas Eve and Christmas Day shootings. Every major city was represented as well as many smaller ones.

Some say it's disproportionate because of the bias of the main stream media. Others say it's simply that violent misuse of guns makes for more sensational headlines. I don't believe either one of those explanations.

Some people rightly point out that many DGUs require only brandishing of the weapon and result in no reporting of the incident at all. This is offset by the violent misuse of weapons that don't result in shots fired but are nevertheless criminal.

For me it continually becomes clearer. True DGUs are rare in comparison to gun violence.

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

Gun Trafficking Prevention Act of 2009

On the web site of U.S. Senator from New York, Kristen Gillibrand, there's a wonderful explanation of the recently proposed Gun Trafficking Prevention Act of 2009.

A new measure aimed at eliminating the steady flow of illegal guns into New York is being advanced by U.S. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand and Rep. Carolyn McCarthy who point out that nearly 90 percent of the guns used in gun crimes in New York City come from out of state, and approximately 90 percent of these guns are illegal.

Uh-oh, here we go with the 90% claims again. Do you think in this case the phrase "nearly 90% of the guns used in gun crimes in New York City come from out of state, and approximately 90 percent of these guns are illegal," will stand up to criticism? To me it doesn't seem couched in tricky language like the more famous claim that "90% of the guns traced in Mexico came from the U.S." What do you think?

By creating more options and providing flexibility for prosecutors and judges, we increase the tools that are available for prosecutors in the federal criminal justice system to appropriately crack down on individuals who are engaged in every aspect of gun trafficking.

I often hear the complaint that laws like this are unnecessary because the things they legislate are already illegal. This one, however does call for longer prison sentences for gun trafficking as well as increasing the focus on criminal gun dealers.

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

Gun Laws in India

Meri News ran a story about the history of gun laws in India. What I found fascinating besides the Indian-English style of writing is the similarity of the arguments to those in the United States.

After putting an end to mutiny of 1857, British viceroy Lord Lytton (1874 -1880), brought into existence the Indian Arms Act, 1878(11 of 1878);an act which, exempted Europeans and ensured that no Indian could possess a weapon of any description unless the British masters considered him a "LOYAL" subject of the British Empire. Father of Nation M.K.Gandhi referring to Arms Act of 1878 remarked "Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest" (page 238, My Experiment with Truth, M K Gandhi).

After a lengthy description of modern laws which have left the Indian people disarmed still, the author presents these ideas.

Many may say,'What difference will possessing arms make?'. The right answer to this question could be perfectly answered by ones logical mind. On 26/11, even if 10% of the crowd at Taj Hotel beared arms, there wouldnt have been a human slaughter! The simple reason being atleast 50% of the 10% arms owner would have had the guts to shoot-down the terrorist. It has been one complete year for 26/11 event and still our Indian Government are busy requesting quotations from foreign arms manufacturers.

Although we have a few "well-known" shooters in India (on state/national level) only a few make it to the Internationals. Why? The reason being stringent gun laws. Today, if a professional shooter is to import a "air-gun" , he/she has to go through the whole officials hierarchy just to acquire the permission ! Believe it or not , Indian made "air-guns" are good for level 0-1 only , ammunition and shooting range charges excluded . If one decides to take the shooting sport professionally , he/she has to think it twice (from money/time aspect).

It has always been talked about guns affecting the crime rate of a country, but never ever has it been thought, to take an effective action on illegal arms trade, which in turn will reduce the crime rate itself. A fact never known to the law abiding comman man, is that, these criminals posses pistols/revolvers which are as sophisticated as a .44 magnum, whose one bullet is sufficient to take down a 85kg healthy man. Whereas our Indian police use the same old Service Revolvers/Pistols , which malfunction when they are needed the most!

Legally armed citizen, in fact can help government to curb the crime and fight militancy.There have been many instance in country where citizens snatched weapons from criminals/terrorists and foiled their designs thus preventing loss of life and property. In one such incident,reported from Jammu and Kashmir, a girl not only killed one militant commander but also scared others to run for their life without doing any harm to her family.These results can be optimized by helping these citizens getting armed with adequate knowledge and arms as they have full right to protect their life and property,after all they are law abiding citizens of this country.

Fascinating, isn't it? What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

Vegas Gunrunners - The Weiss Brothers

The Mercury News reports on the guilty verdict in the case of the Weiss brothers in Las Vegas.

William Weiss, 37, was dressed in street clothes. A large man who was free on bail, he kept his chunky hands nervously clasped behind his back.

Jonnatan Weiss, 29, wore blue jail togs and ankle chains. Smaller and slighter, he was on familiar ground as a repeat felon.

Both are from Southern California. Both committed their crimes in Las Vegas. Both were pleading guilty before U.S. District Court Judge Philip Pro to conspiracy to receive, transport and deal in firearms—one count of a 19-count indictment in a long-running gunrunning scheme ferrying Las Vegas firearms to California and then to Mexico.

Schemes like this explain a lot as far as why strict gun control laws in one place are failing because of the lax laws in another.

Tyler Olson, a special ATF agent in Las Vegas, said in a sworn court filing that he first learned of the Weiss brothers last February, when an employee of the Citadel Gun and Safe store off the Las Vegas Strip telephoned the ATF about a suspicious purchase.

The employee said William Weiss was at the shop buying three firearms for $6,000 in cash, using $20 bills. Olson and other agents hurried to the store and spotted two men loading the guns into the rear of a blue Volvo hatchback with California license plates. The weapons were a .50-caliber Bushmaster rifle and two .22-caliber pistols.

The agents went to work. They found that William Weiss carried dual driver's licenses, in Nevada and California. He listed his address on Rustic Oak Court in North Las Vegas. When the owner of the Rustic Oak Court property told Olson he had never heard of Weiss, the agent was sure he was on to something.

Agents questioned employees and checked sales receipts at a number of local gun stores and discovered that William Weiss had purchased 19 firearms on 13 occasions since December 2008—including four pistols on the day he received his Nevada driver's license, Olson said.
The agent next checked a U.S. Customs database and found that William Weiss had crossed into Mexico the day after buying the Bushmaster and pistols—and that the Volvo had crossed the border 25 times in the past two months.

By June, Olson and fellow agents were tracking the Weiss brothers. Now William was driving a Jeep Liberty with Mexico plates. He purchased two more firearms—another Bushmaster and a 9 mm pistol from a North Las Vegas pawnshop. He also again falsified the ATF disclosure form by using the phony Rustic Oak Court address.

So they brought him in for questioning. At the local field office, William Weiss admitted he actually lived in California. And, Olson said, he confessed that the firearms were meant for his brother Jonnatan Weiss, who lived in California but often stayed with their mother in Tijuana, where the weapons were resold.

The Citadel Gun and Safe store off the Las Vegas Strip is a place that does it right. Suspicious activity is reported to the ATF. If only there were more of that, we'd be in better shape.

What's your opinion? Is it mainly straw purchases like this that account for the guns in criminal hands. Or does theft account for most of the problem?

Please leave a comment.

The Virginia Hostage Taker

The Madison Independent Examiner ran a story about Warren Taylor who took some people hostage in a Virginia post office. I noticed the story yesterday because it took place in a "no-gun" zone, but only today did I read about the perpetrator's motives.

Warren Taylor, the alleged gunman accused of taking three people hostage in a Virginia post office, was angry "about the government taking over the right to bear arms ... he was angry at the government over taxing us," and railed against President Obama, according to hostage Jimmy Oliver, who spoke to the Associated Press.

From where could Taylor have possibly gotten that misinformation?

Informed people know that the Obama administration and the democratically-controlled congress have made absolutely no attempt to curtail the right to bear arms in any way.

This guy is a fascinating example and somewhat representative of many pro-gun folks. These are people who have become so convinced, not to say brainwashed, by all the hysterical right-wing talk that they have lost touch with reality. The facts do not break through their pre-conceived ideas about the government.

Although Taylor popped off a few rounds, thankfully, no one was hurt or killed and the hostages were peacefully released - this time. The three police officers that were murdered by Richard Paplowski, who was led to believe that Obama would be taking away his guns were not that lucky. Nor were the two killed and seven injured by Jim David Adkisson at a Knoxville, TN church shooting because he "wanted to kill...every democrat in the Senate and House, [and] the 100 people in Bernard Goldberg's book" entitled, 100 People Who Are Screwing Up America. Nor was Dr. George Tiller, shot in the head and killed in church after Bill O'Reilly spent 29 episodes of his show on Fox News describing him as "Tiller the Baby Killer" who will "kill your baby for any reason." Goldberg also happens to be a regular guest on O' Reilly's show.

What do you think? Is the Examiner article pointing out that there must be shared responsibility. People who spout off with thoughtless exaggerations are taken quite seriously by some. Here's a recent example by Joe Huffman. I called it "morally reprehensible" in the comments.

What's your opinion? Is it irresponsible to exaggerate the opposition's position to the degree that Fox News does? Is Joe Huffman's talk about "killing tyrants" irresponsible given the fact that some of his readers are probably as deranged as Warren Taylor? Joe himself denied that he was referring to Obama, but here's one of the comments:

The word "tyrant" needs to be pluralized; otherwise the quote is very relevant for the time we are in. And Mike, if the shoe fits it ain't "our" fault...
emdfl

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

Gun Purchases by Region

FatWhiteMan sent me the link to this fascinating article about gun purchases. But his accompanying remark to me was the best part of it.

Here is a neat chart I found. I am sure you can pervert it to your own agenda, especially the handgun part of the Southeast :)

Rather than provide a lengthy analysis of the handgun purchases in the Southeast and how they obviously feed the iron pipeline, I actually find the shotgun folks up north more interesting. And it was not lost on me that FatWhiteMan himself resides within the confines of shotgun heaven. My question is, why. Why do folks in Ohio and its neighboring Great Lakes States buy so many shotguns? Is there a psychological explanation?

It's definitely a fun chart which I accept from FatWhiteMan as an early Christmas present and offer to you in the same spirit.

Merry Christmas everybody.

Perpetual War

On Opinione there's a wonderful post and interesting discussion going on about what Il Principe calls the perpetual state of war.

...the lack of involvement being asked of the American people in the perpetual war by chicken hawk politicians, is one of the most immoral and offensive displays of the ever growing unequal distribution of wealth and privilege in American society.

These are strong words, which to me make perfect sense. The author went on to explain how this has been made possible in part by the all-volunteer military. Although one of the commenters disputed these claims, insisting with statistics and lengthy argument that the makeup of today's military is representative of society at large, I don't buy it. How could it be?

The other controversial aspect of the Prince's views was whether the Nixon decision to abolish the draft was what undermined and ended the anti-Viet-Nam-war movement or the successful result of it. All fascinating issues.

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

Illinois US Senate Candidates on Gun Control

The Chicago Tribune reports the results of an Associated Press poll, in which candidates for the Senate were asked the following:

Please explain your views on gun control, including whether the federal ban on "assault weapons" should be revived.

Here are the responses:

DEMOCRATS:

--Alexi Giannoulias: "No one needs a semiautomatic weapon on the streets of Chicago, and no convicted felons or domestic abusers need a weapon anywhere in Illinois."

--David Hoffman: "I believe in the Second Amendment and believe that local communities that suffer with high levels of gun violence deserve strong programs to reduce gun violence and control the illegal flow of guns into their communities."

--Cheryle Jackson: "Violence thrives on poverty and despair. It blossoms when there are no good jobs, no good schools and no good prospects."

--Jacob Meister: "Particularly in urban areas, there is a need to put reasonable restrictions on the purchase and use of firearms, including assault weapons." ------

REPUBLICANS

--Patrick Hughes: "I believe in a person's Second Amendment right and would not support a federal ban on 'assault weapons."'

--Mark Kirk: "I support the Second Amendment and sensible measures to reduce illegal gun violence."

--Andy Martin: "The 'assault weapons' ban was a joke and matters should be left as they are without any new legislation."

--Kathleen Thomas: "Criminals will always have access to weaponry. Why would we ever want to limit the law-abiding citizen from having firearms?"

Besides the fact that we have to ask those Democrats what exactly is an "assault weapon," what do you think about the response of Cheryle Jackson? Is she a hidden gu supporter among the Dems?

The rest are fairly expected and uninteresting for me, except for the first Democrat, Mr. Alexi Giannoulias. What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

More Guns - Less Crime in 2009

FishyJay sent me a wonderful article from the Christian Science Monitor, which I'm sure won't be the last one on this subject. As these crime stats come in, the pro-gun movement will have much to capitalize on.

FBI's latest crime report, for the first half of 2009, shows America is a less violent place even though ownership of guns has surged. Deterrent effect may have a role, but others see no correlation.

So, some say more guns produces a deterrent effect and therefore we have less crime and another group says there's no correlation. I think I'll number myself in the second group, but I must admit this is good stuff for the pro-gun folks. It is exactly what they predicted.

Pro-gun groups jumped at the FBI report, saying it disproves a long-running theory posited by gun-control groups and many in the mainstream media that gun ownership spawns crime and violence. “Anti-gunners have lost another one of their baseless arguments,” Alan Gottlieb, founder of the Second Amendment Foundation.

Well, of course Mr. Gottlieb would say that. But isn't it a bit premature to draw such conclusions? Aren't there any number of other factors involved in something as sweeping as crime stats?

The debate over whether guns spur or deter crime has been under way for decades. So far, research has come out with, in essence, a net-zero correlation between gun sales and crime rates. More likely factors for the crime rate decline have to do with Americans hunkering down, spending less time out on the town with cash in their pockets and more time at home with the porch lights on, experts say. So-called "smart policing" that focuses specifically on repeat offenders and troubled areas could also be playing a role, as could extended unemployment benefits that staved off desperation.

So there you have a couple of viable factors, including the economy, which some say would add to the crime rate. This article points out how that can work in reverse. Of course, the way the police do their job, which hopefully is always improving, would have a positive effect too.

One of the ideas mentioned was the fact that this debate has been under way for decades. Any six-month change has to be watched for a while to determine if it's nothing more than a temporary fluctuation. So, let's keep watching, by all means.

What's your opinion? Is the first-half-of-2009 stats an indication that more guns equals less crime? Do you think this is the beginning of the end for the gun control argument that guns are a major part of the problem?

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

The ACLU and Christmas

Liberal Viewer posted this video and posed the following question:

Which seems more in keeping with the Christmas spirit, the ACLU's message of tolerance or those smears and false personal attacks from Bill O'Reilly and Ann Coulter?

The Thomas Jefferson quotes are the best. I wonder what he would have thought about a biblical justification for bearing arms?

Jamaican Guns

The Jamaica Observer printed a letter to the editor concerning the gun problem on the island.

Dear Editor,

Gun violence is all over Jamaica, every day, every month and every year. It is the main cause of homicide. Gun violence does not exist because we are naturally violent, or because we have a violent culture. It is there because of a long string of bad decisions made by individuals in the communities. When a citizen, young or old, male or female is struck down by a bullet, it is not because the person is in the wrong place at the wrong time. It is because some way, somehow, the perpetrator is able to get a gun when the easy access should have been prevented.

For years, intelligence-gathering in Jamaica uncovered numerous sources or ways that guns arrived in Jamaica illegally – especially from the United States and Haiti. Efforts have been made to curtail the flow. But I believe that too many guns are on the island. Guns by themselves are useful tools in the right hands but they become deadly weapons or instruments in the wrong hands. Therefore, strong gun-control laws must be put in place to prevent guns from reaching the wrong hands.

Let us all try to have a peaceful and violence-free Christmas season.

Charlie Brown

Morant Bay, St Thomas

The man who wrote this letter was not necessarily an expert on guns or the gun flow problem on the island of Jamaica, but he seems to understand perfectly that easy access to firearms is the problem. I agree.

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

Gun Trafficking

Philly.com published an article by Monica Yant Kinney about the gun trafficking problem. She described how one gun trafficker, she named Jerome, got into the business. Thanks for the tip Laci.

Under Pennsylvania law, with a clean record, Jerome could buy as many guns as he could afford. The only snag? It was illegal.

"Almost from the beginning," he said, "they knew what I was up to."

Jerome was referring to the gun dealers, the legitimate gun dealers who sold him 160 guns over a two-year period and now shrug their shoulders and say, "I didn't do anything wrong."

Eventually Jerome went to jail for a couple years and seems to have learned his lesson. His current attitude is this.

Watching the news, Jerome knows he's partly responsible for the city's crisis of violence. But he thinks there's blame to go around.

"I knew it would come to an end for me. I just wish those gun dealers were held accountable."

What do you think? Is there "blame" to go around?

Please leave a comment.

Guns and Health

The Brady Campaign posted one of the most powerful indictments against gun owners that I've ever read. In light of the discussions and debate on the Health Care Bill, Paul Helmke put together some relevant statistics. In response to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s “manager’s amendment” (the compromise version of the health care reform bill coming out of the Senate) Mr. Helmke offered these points among others.

I wonder if Sen. Reid knows that the risk of homicide is three times higher in homes with firearms; the risk of suicide is three to five times greater; and that a gun in the home is 21 times more likely to be used against the homeowner or family member in a completed or attempted suicide, a criminal assault or homicide, or an unintentional shooting death or injury, than used in self defense.

I wonder, finally, whether Sen. Reid knows that among gun-owning parents who reported that their children had never handled their firearms at home, 22% of those children, when questioned separately, said that they had, and that of youths who committed suicide with firearms, 82% obtained the firearm from their home, usually a parent’s firearm.

How anyone in their right mind can justify owning guns in the light of these facts is beyond me. I believe gun owners who are able to be honest with themselves should immediately drop all the rationalizations and take steps to disarm. The wishes of a powerful and vocal minority should cease to prevent common sense from prevailing.

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

New York City Traces Guns Used in Crime

The Manhattan News at DNA Info reports on the tracing of two guns used in the Upper West Side shooting. Thanks to Microdot for pointing this story out the me a few days ago. It's now taken on new interest.

When three generations of a family were found slain last week in an apparent drug-related homicide, it appeared to be just another example of the violence associated with Manhattan's drug trade.

But investigators say two hand guns found during the investigation of the Amsterdam Avenue slayings highlights another major New York crime problem — the illegal flow of weapons into the city using so-called straw buyers.

The two guns — one found at the scene and the murder weapon discovered in a nearby trash can — have been traced back to out-of-state gun shops.

A .380 Beretta semi-automatic, which police believe was used to kill two of the three victims, was traced back to a legal purchase at a gun store in Miami, Fla., in May 1990.

The ATF's Crime Gun Center, in New York, traced a .380 Hi Point, which was found at the scene, to Smitty's Sports Shop in Blakeslee, PA.

Both the gun store and the man who purchased the Hi Point — identified as Adigun Nicholson, 46, — are well known to the ATF. The ATF had identified Nicholson as a straw buyer, someone who legally buys guns that end up in the hands of criminals.

In January 2007, a gun was recovered by officers in the 46th Precinct in the Bronx and was traced by the Crime Gun Center to Smitty's where Nicholson bought it in December 2006.

An ATF investigation of Nicholson revealed multiple purchases — usually two guns at a time — by Nicholson from Smitty's between March, 2006 and February, 2007, the ATF said.

During an interview with Nicholson, he admitted to the ATF that he bought the guns for David Gonzalez from the Bronx, according to the ATF.

In May 2007, an undercover ATF agent arrested Gonzalez after selling him four guns in a sting operation. Gonzalez eventually pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 39 months in prison, a law enforcement official said.

Nicholson pleaded guilty in September 2008 to falsely stating on federal forms that he was the intended user of the guns and is serving 20 months in federal prison.

What's your opinion? Is New York City good at tracing guns used in crime? To me it seems very fast. And the information gathered seems very useful to the efforts at eliminating this criminal activity. What do you think?

The Castle Doctrine in the U.K.

Thanks to FishyJay we have the following report from Sky news Online.

The Tories want to give people who kill burglars while defending their home more protection from prosecution, according to the shadow home secretary.

You don't suppose those crazy Tories are talking about getting away with murder like they do so easily in America? It seems to me that even in the United Kingdom they understand what constitutes "lethal threat," or am I wrong?

Laci provided a link to another article from the Guardian. Here's Laci's post on it.

Talk of the Englishmen defending his castle provokes such a rush of blood to the Conservative head that judgment disappears. Last week Munir Hussain was sent to prison for inflicting violent vengeance on a particularly vicious burglar, and now Chris Grayling has said he wants to rip up the reasonable force test that restricts self-defence. The shadow home secretary's proposal is a populist perennial, but one that never quite blooms, as it makes no sense.

What is so difficult about differentiating between justice and vengeance? I never understood it, but I believe "that's what's the deal we're dealin' in."

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

Zappadan Festival 2009 - Day 21 - Last day

Happy birthday Frank Zappa.

Thanks to Fried Green Al-Qaedas for the wonderful roundup. Just go there for so many videos, photos, stories and everything Zappa.

Gun Permits Surge in Massachusetts

Boston.com reports on the latest statistics on gun permits.

The number of gun permits issued in Massachusetts surged by more than 15 percent over the past two years, reversing nearly a decade of steady declines and marking a pronounced departure for a state known for its antigun sentiment.

The magnitude of the rise, evident in nearly every corner of the state, surprised law enforcement officials, and gun advocates and opponents alike.

Some saw it as an echo of similar spikes across the country after President Obama’s election, when heavy gun sales were attributed to fears that he would impose strict new gun laws. But with more women and elderly residents signing up for gun classes in Massachusetts, many said the increase here has also been driven by worries about crime and a growing sense of vulnerability in the wake of the financial collapse and lingering fallout of the damaged economy.

More guns, less crime. That's what some people say. What I say is time will tell. If the trends continue, the increase in gun violence should become clear and obvious. And how could it not? Some folks say 80% of the guns in criminal hands are stolen from lawful gun owners. No one can dispute that some lawful gun owners turn bad, the percentage is debatable, but the incidents are documented. There have also been reports of gun licenses issued mistakenly to folks who should not qualify.

All this would have to show eventually, depending on all the other factors, in an increase in gun violence. What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

The NRA on the "Gun-Show Loophole"

The Baltimore Sun reports on a poll which shows most NRA members are at odds with their leadership on the question of closing the so-called gun-show loophole.

A recent poll shows National Rifle Association members overwhelmingly favor closing the gun show loophole, and that has the NRA fuming. Never mind that the poll was conducted by Frank Luntz, a Republican pollster who is on Fox News so often that he may as well be considered a network personality. Or that the same poll shows NRA members do support many pro-Second Amendment positions (against a national gun registry, for example).

Once again, the NRA's leadership is out of step - not only with average Americans but even with people who identify themselves as NRA members. That kind of extremism may help the organization raise money from its base, but it's only making the country more vulnerable to criminals who can now purchase firearms at a gun show in most states without a Brady criminal background check.

The article goes on to speak only about gun shows and not at all about private sales outside gun shows. To me it seems limiting the requirement to gun shows only is not going far enough. But perhaps the ones pushing this legislation know better than I do. Perhaps preventing criminals and other prohibited persons from easy access at gun shows is enough to accomplish the goal.

Still the most amazing part of this whole argument is the resistance by so many gun owners. Even the majority of their fellows agree this is necessary, yet they, the vocal minority, persist with all possible arguments. Why is that? Are these people so self-centered, fearing further restrictions which would inconvenience them, that they fight against these obviously necessary measures?

What's your opinion? Is there another explanation for the resistance? Please leave a comment.

Happy Hanukkah from Adam Sandler

Via Liberality.



Put on your yarmulke
Here comes Chanukah
So much funukah
To celebrate Chanukah
Chanukah is the festival of lights
Instead of one day of presents, we have eight crazy nights

When you feel like the only kid in town without a Christmas tree
Here's a list of people who are Jewish just like you and me
David Lee Roth lights the menorah
So do James Caan, Kirk Douglas, and the late Dinah Shore-ah

Guess who eats together at the Carnegie Deli
Bowser from Sha Na Na and Arthur Fonzerelli
Paul Newman's half Jewish, Goldie Hawn's half too
Put them together, what a fine lookin' Jew

You don't need "Deck The Halls" or "Jingle Bell Rock"
'Cause you can spin a dreidel with Captain Kirk and Mr. Spock- both Jewish

Put on your yarmulke
It's time for Chanukah
The owner of the Seattle Supersonicahs
Celebrates Chanukah

O.J. Simpson, not a Jew
But guess who is? Hall of famer Rod Carew- he converted
We got Ann Landers and her sister Dear Abby
Harrison Ford's a quarter Jewish- not too shabby

Some people think that Ebenezer Scrooge is
Well he's not, but guess who is
All three Stooges
So many Jews are in showbiz
Tom Cruise isn't, but I heard his agent is

Tell your friend Veronica
It's time to celebrate Chanukah
I hope I get a harmonicah
Oh this lovely, lovely Chanukah
So drink your gin and tonicah
And smoke your marijuanikah
If you really, really wannakah
Have a happy, happy, happy, happy Chanukah
Happy Chanukah

Zappadan Festival 2009 - Day 16

As Laci suggested, I offer Hungry Freaks Daddy, afterwhich we have a lengthy and interesting introduction to Son of Mr. Green Genes.

Mr. america, walk on by your schools that do not teach
Mr. america, walk on by the minds that won't be reached
Mr. america try to hide the emptiness that's you inside
But once you find that the way you lied
And all the corny tricks you tried
Will not forestall the rising tide of
hungry freaks daddy!

Roderick Scott Acquitted

RocNow.com reports on the not guilty verdict of Roderick Scott in the killing of the unarmed Christopher Cervini.

Cervini, his 15-year-old cousin, James Cervini, and friend Brian Hopkins, also 15, stayed overnight beginning the evening of April 3 in the basement of James Cervini’s home on Fireweed Trail, within sight of Scott’s two-story colonial home at 58 Baneberry Way. But after drinking purloined gin while James Cervini’s parents were asleep, they went out to walk loudly around the neighborhood about 3 a.m. during an early spring storm.

After taking a circuitous route down Buttonwood Drive and over to Baneberry, and trying to get into cars along the way, they walked up to the garage of Scott’s home. Scott and his girlfriend, Tracy L. Allen, who were sleeping separately because of an argument the night before, both heard voices outside and got up to check.

Both said they saw three people walk from their driveway to a driveway directly across the street at 57 Baneberry and try to open the door of a truck. Scott told Allen to call 911, got his legally permitted .40-caliber pistol from the top of an armoire, and went outside in what he said was an attempt to stop a possible theft and hold the people responsible until police arrived.

When he got outside, the three people had moved west one house to 39 Baneberry. One person continued walking on the sidewalk toward Manitou, but Scott said he found two others between a pickup and a sport utility vehicle. The dome light of the SUV was on, indicating that someone had just entered it, he said.

Scott said he ordered the two people — Christopher and James Cervini — to hold still, warning them that his wife had just called 911 and telling them he had a gun.

But both bolted, he said. One ran around the front of the pickup and escaped toward Manitou and the other ran at him, shouting “I’ll get him!” or “I’ll get you!”

He said he fired twice because he feared for his life, not knowing if the person running at him was armed or would try to take away his gun and use it on him.

The person ran past Scott and collapsed in the street, where he said, “I’m just a kid” as he bled into the gutter, according to Scott’s testimony.

It would be hard to find a better example of a legitimate gun owner facing that split-second life-or-death decision. In spite of what the jury decided, I find the idea that Roderick feared for his like incredible. He was a big man with a gun facing teenagers. He shot and killed an unarmed 15-year-old. How that can be justified is beyond me.

The escaping cousin described the scene totally differently. He said the two cousins were obeying orders with their hands in the air when the first shot was fired. That sounds a bit incredible too, but if the truth is somewhere in between I think it was probably closer to that than the ridiculous assertion that an unarmed 15-year-old was charging and had to be stopped with bullets.

What's your opinion? Do you think Mr. Scott was right to leave his house, gun in hand to investigate car theft? Isn't that kind of thing the duty of organized neighborhood watch groups or the police themselves? Was it his duty to protect the neighborhood from vandals?

Whether the jury was right or wrong, I believe this story perfectly illustrates the problem with legitimate gun owners and their attitude towards criminals. In so many cases these armed citizens are not up to the task of differentiating between a tense and dangerous situation and one that is truly a lethal threat. If Roderick Scott had not owned a gun or had stayed in his own house and waited for the police, what's the worst that could have happened? For sure, whatever would have happened would have been a lot better than this.

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

Glenn Beck on Jay Leno

The National Examiner recaps some of Glenn Beck's best quotes of 2009. Also provided is a recent Jay Leno interview in which Beck claims to be just a regular guy speaking his mind and not the polarizing figure he's often described as. I completely agree with Il Principe that posting about this guy is feeding the "weapons of mass distraction" machine, but I can't help myself.

Today Glenn Beck went on Jay Leno's show and while there were many interesting moments from the interview the most striking was Beck's claim that he "is not a polarizing guy." Instead Beck says he is just a guy from a small town saying "the things that have to be said."

Merriam Webster defines "polarize" as "to break up into opposing factions or groupings." While Beck may contend his rehotoric is benign many would beg to differ. A simple google search turns up the following Beck quotes which many would see as very "polarizing."

What's your opinion? Is Glenn Beck's definition of Libertarian a good one? Is that talk about hating both major parties and being a Libertarian himself sincere. What do you think? Please leave a comment.

The Cost of Gun Violence

Laci again provides us with a thought-provoking post.

I was curious as to how much this "Freedom" and "right" costs the American public and found John Rosenthal's December 15, 2009 post Health Care Costs and Gun Violence. He's a businessman, not a public health professional, but even being in business would give him an ability to assess the costs. He gives the figure that:

On average, guns kill or wound 276 people every day in America. Of those, 75 adults and 9 children will die. In the US there are more than 30,000 deaths and over 100,000 injuries related to gun violence each year.He also states that:

According to the Public Services Research Institute in 2008, firearm homicide and assault cost federal, state and local governments $4.7 billion annually including costs for medical care, mental health, emergency transport, police, criminal justice and lost taxes. They also state that when lost productivity, lost quality of life, and pain and suffering are added to medical costs, estimates of the annual cost of firearm violence range from $20 billion to $100 billion. According to the National Center for Disease Control, the cost of firearm fatalities is the highest of any injury-related death. In fact, the average cost of a gunshot related death is $33,000, while gun-related injuries total over $300,000 for each occurrence.

What's your opinion? Do you find those numbers compelling? What's Laci's conclusion?

Rights come with responsibilities. I think that the sale of firearms, ammunition, reloading supplies, and other gun related items should be heavily taxed to defray the cost to society since it is society that must bear the burden of their "right". But why should society be burdened and why has society allowed itself to be burdened by those who claim this right, yet are not willing to shoulder their responsibilities?

If they can't exercise their right in a responsible manner, then this right should not exist in the matter of public interest.

I wish I'd said that.

Death Penalty in Review - 2009

The New York Times reports on a fascinating phenomenon taking place in the administration of capital punishment.

Death Sentences Dropped, but Executions Rose in ’09

More death row convicts were executed in the United States this year than last, but juries continue to grow more wary of capital punishment, according to a new report.

Death sentences handed down by judges and juries in 2009 continued a trend of decline for seven years in a row, with 106 projected for the year. That level is down two-thirds from a peak of 328 in 1994, according to the report being released Friday by the Death Penalty Information Center, a research organization that opposes capital punishment.

“This entire decade has been marked by a declining use of the death penalty,” said Richard Dieter, the executive director of the group.

It must mean that each year there are fewer people on death row than the year below. But killing them off doesn't seem like the right way to do it. If the use of capital punishment is declining as reflected by the sentences handed down, the incidents of carrying out those sentences should also decline. Hopefully we're heading towards abolition and these guys who are being executed in increasing numbers won't be around to have their sentences changed to life without parole.

The sentencing drop was most striking in Texas, which averaged 34 death sentences a year in the 1990s and had 9 this year. Vic Wisner, a former assistant district attorney in Houston, said a “constant media drumbeat” about suspect convictions and exonerations “has really changed the attitude of jurors.”

Whatever the reason for the sentencing drop in Texas, doesn't the fact that it went from 34 to 9 indicate that some of those 34 got a bad deal? Isn't that a sort of proof in and of itself? If in 2009, the juries decided in 25 or so capital cases that a life sentence was the right punishment, what does that say about the ones who received the death penalty before?

I say the administration of capital punishment is so broken it should be halted immediately.

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

New York Helps Indiana

WishTV.com reported on the appointment of Frank Straub as Public Safety Director of Indianapolis.

Straub has a doctorate in criminal justice. He became commissioner of Public Safety in White Plains, New York in 2002.

Before going to White Plains, Straub was a special agent with the United States Department of Justice. He was also the New York Police Department's Deputy Commissioner of Training, responsible for developing and implementing the New York City's Police Department-wide, first-responder training.

Deputy Chief of Staff Robert Vane told 24-Hour News 8 police will be on board with the selection of Straub because of his experience.

Vane said, “At the same time as the attacks as the September 11th attacks at the World Trade Centers, commissioner Straub was a member of the executive staff of New York City Police Department and in charge of training. New York has a population of about 8 million.”

This could be of enormous importance in the struggle to stem the flow of guns from Indiana to other states like Illinois and New York. The Indy Star had this as one of Dr. Straub's priorities:

Controlling gun trafficking

"My own personal perspective is we have way too many guns on the street and way too many people that own guns," Straub said, adding there is no clear national policy dealing with guns.

"The policy has to start at the federal level and then work its way down to the states and to the local level. Until we control the flow of guns between states . . . you have a problem."

Did it take a New Yorker to come in there and say that? What's wrong with the State of Indiana that something as obvious as this has to be pointed out by an outsider? Of course the pro-gun crowd, threatened by Straub's common sense observations, do not see it that way.

Roberta X says "Dr. Straub doesn't look to be likely to fit in." Caleb cites the Constitution in reference to Straub's assertion that there "no clear national policy."

I guess time will tell how well Dr. Straub fits in. And perhaps Caleb will stop pretending that he doesn't understand what is meant by the "national policy." The obvious idea is to get all the States on the same page as far as interpreting the Constitution. Heller, so often cited as a gun-rights victory, left the door wide open for reasonable restrictions which, some people think need to be applied everywhere.

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

Assault Weapon Use by Criminals on the Rise

USA Today reports on the increase in assault weapon use by criminals. Via Southern Beale.

Criminals increasingly are choosing high-powered firearms such as assault weapons, a new survey of 166 U.S. police agencies shows. Nearly 40% of the departments reported an uptick in the use of assault weapons, according to the Police Executive Research Forum, a law enforcement think tank.

In addition, half reported increases in the use of 9mm, .40-caliber and 10mm handguns in crimes — among the same types of weapons that police use. The survey offers one of the broadest indications of officers' concerns about the armed threat from criminals involved in murder, assault and other weapons-related offenses.

I like the comment by Southern Beale about this.

Nobody could have anticipated that allowing the federal assault weapons ban to expire in 2004 would have resulted in criminals’ increasing use of assault weapons.

Who indeed could have anticipated such a thing?

The two sides in the gun debate were represented in the USA Today article.

National Rifle Association spokesman Andrew Arulanandam says officers' concerns are largely misplaced: "The real issue is the high-caliber criminal, not the high-caliber firearms." He says repeat offenders are overwhelming the system and could increase as states send fewer to prison to cut costs.

Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, says the high-powered weapons endanger officers. If police say there's a problem, "public officials should be listening."

Now, I admit I have a soft spot for Paul Helmke. As a short time resident of Fort Wayne Indiana, the city which he presided over as mayor, I've always felt a connection with him. But, in the light of that tired old NRA line about "guns don't kill people, people kill people," I think Paul makes great sense when he urges lawmakers to listen up when police departments are talking.

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

What Obama Should Do

Via The Existentialist Cowboy.

Obama should get off his butt and insist upon war crimes trials of George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and Condo Rice. That Iraq had WMD was a bald faced lie to justify the seizure of Middle East oil fields! Ergo --every Iraqi death following is one count in a WAR CRIMES INDICTMENT on the scale of those charged to Adolph Hitler and high mucky mucks in the murderous Third Reich.

Zappadan Festival 2009 - Day 14

Via NIMBIN TELEVISION