First MASS Blames NH, Now NY Blames Everyone

Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
873
Likes
1
Feedback: 0 / 0 / 0
Seems like the left is trying a new strategy to explain away the failure of Gun Control.

Mantra of the left: It's for your own good, it's always someone elses fault, we need a new law and of course more money.

Link...

http://www.nypost.com/commentary/58577.htm

Excerpt...


Dr. Robert Kurtz, co-director of trauma and critical care at Kings County Hospital, fought to save the life of hero cop Dillon Stewart.


Dr. Kurtz said the time has come to get the guns off the city's streets...


THE country and the city are awash in guns and we have to do something about it.


New York, as we all know, has very restrictive gun laws and a very active police force that works very hard to get guns off the streets.


But when the whole country is deluged with guns, and when people can buy guns very easily in Florida, Georgia, and Virginia and bring them up here, they're much too easily available.


Consider what would have happened yesterday with stricter federal gun controls in effect. If this man were angry at Officer Dillon Stewart, he might have punched him instead of shooting him.


But when he could turn to a gun to settle a dispute, the results were tragic. What an utter waste of a decent young man. What a waste of so many lives.


Why have we allowed our city streets to become war zones — war zones that have made us so experienced at treating gunshot wounds at KCH that we were chosen to train Army nurses and doctors in battlefield medicine?


There have been a slew of bills out there in Congress to curb the gun lobby. But the armaments industry controls the National Rifle Association, and the NRA has intimidated politicians, both Republican and Democratic, making it impossible to pass suitably restrictive gun laws…


We've lectured against violence and we've let people know how important gun control is… Hopefully, the death of Officer Stewart will reignite the people's passion to bring the gun lobby to heel.
 
Consider what would have happened yesterday with stricter federal gun controls in effect. If this man were angry at Officer Dillon Stewart, he might have punched him instead of shooting him.

I'm at a loss for words with this statement. The amazing thing is he ACTUALLY believes it. [shock]
 
Consider what would have happened yesterday with stricter federal gun controls in effect. If this man were angry at Officer Dillon Stewart, he might have punched him instead of shooting him.

Wasn't he shot from one moving car to another? :? Comments like these still amaze me.
 
Come on folks, you don't really believe the story do you? After all it's from the NY Post, not a real newspaper or anything like that.

When the story shows up in the Wall Street Journal (not a liberal rag), then I'll start believing it.

And remember, the Liberal Left has taken some serious hits on gun control lately, so, yes, they WILL grasp at any straw.

The majority of Americans are Pro-Gun or indifferent. A constantly declining minority are Anti-Gun.

And the media and Anti-Gun Organizations know this.
 
Oh, when you need "ammo" (facts) to win an argument as to the merits of gun control, here you are:

There's a state in the nation (Vermont) that has the lowest crime rate, or almost the lowest crime rate.

It has virtually no gun control, for many years it was the only state that did not require CCW permits. It still doesn't, but it's no longer alone.

It's surrounded by two states with high crime rates, and adjoins a state with a low crime rate.

If lack of Gun Control causes a high crime rate, then WHY isn't VT on the top of the list, instead of DC an New York?

Yes, I do believe there IS a corelation between Gun Control and Crime. The more Gun Control, the higher the crime rate. Statistically, I'm 100% correct.
 
Nickle,

What's the matter with you, don't you understand?

They buy their guns at the 7-11 along with candy and soda in VT, then drive to MA or NY to do the crimes!

They don't do the crimes in VT because they know that most Vermonters aren't filthy rich, but everyone in MA and NY is a "stick 'em up" haven! [roll]

<turning sarcastic mode off now>
 
derek said:
Consider what would have happened yesterday with stricter federal gun controls in effect. If this man were angry at Officer Dillon Stewart, he might have punched him instead of shooting him.

I'm at a loss for words with this statement. The amazing thing is he ACTUALLY believes it. [shock]

I know, that's what kills me. I guess that they don't know what the meaning of Criminal means.
 
Nickle said:
...
The majority of Americans are Pro-Gun or indifferent. A constantly declining minority are Anti-Gun.

And the media and Anti-Gun Organizations know this.

The numerous laws and hurdles seem to refute this statement.
 
Not many Anti-Gun laws have passed since Sep 2001, when the public got their awakening. After 9/11, there was a flury of handgun sales. The shocker was that most of the sales were women, buying their FIRST gun.

We used to have a bunch of non-carry states, now there's only 4 states that have no provisions for non-LEO CCW permits.
 
Nickle:
We used to have a bunch of non-carry states, now there's only 4 states that have no provisions for non-LEO CCW permits.

OK. I know from personal experience Illinois doesn't allow non-LEO CCW. What are the other three? I would have guessed Kalifornia & MA; but I've learned that both do allow civilian CC at least in some circumstances (political pull & wealth helps). What other three don't offer non-LEO CCW?
 
all_united_states_phpSWVS3u_all_usa_map.gif
 
Thanks, Nickle. I shoulda looked that up, myself.

I heard WI had a CCW bill in process a couple of years ago when I was considering a move there. I just assumed it passed.

I've read IL dropped all non-LEO CCWs when Alphonse Capone's body guards were found to have CCW licenses issued by the Cook County Sheriff. (Kind of a state-wide backlash, in part fueled by a then-stronger southern-IL looking for a political issue) Makes me wonder if the KA & NE positions are influenced at all by their bloody history.
 
Nickle said:
Not many Anti-Gun laws have passed since Sep 2001, when the public got their awakening. After 9/11, there was a flury of handgun sales. The shocker was that most of the sales were women, buying their FIRST gun.

We used to have a bunch of non-carry states, now there's only 4 states that have no provisions for non-LEO CCW permits.

I guess I am speaking mostly from a Mass. point of view, where it seems the noose just continues to tighten.
 
Coyote33 said:
Nickle said:
Not many Anti-Gun laws have passed since Sep 2001, when the public got their awakening. After 9/11, there was a flury of handgun sales. The shocker was that most of the sales were women, buying their FIRST gun.

We used to have a bunch of non-carry states, now there's only 4 states that have no provisions for non-LEO CCW permits.

I guess I am speaking mostly from a Mass. point of view, where it seems the noose just continues to tighten.

Reality is that this commonly believed misconception is just that, a misconception!

Since 2001 GOAL has won (and this is just of the top of the head):

- 6yr LTC instead of 4,
- Redefined loaded for muzzle-loaders,
- "Maybe" we get the target handguns exempted,
- Put pressure on places like Quincy to change their LTC issuance policies,
- The rest of the 2004 gun bill changes (don't recall them right now).

NO tightening of gun owner restrictions has actually occurred in MA since 2001, not for the lack of HCI/VCPI/Rosenthal/etc. trying.
 
Wisconsin did pass a concealed carry bill last session, but their governor vetoed it, primarily due to police opposition. Their legislature has worked out a revised bill, adding provisions that allow police to check whether someone as a licence (something that was missing in the previous bill) and criminal penalties for any police who misuse this information. The police now support the bill. The governor is still opposed, but the sponsors believe they've veto-proof majorities in both houses if he should veto it.

Ken
 
Back
Top Bottom