-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Police: Guns from north feeding crime
- Thread starter Coyote33
- Start date
Yea, because that's just where they can get the best information. You know, they don't have any issues with guns there. It's one of the safest places in the US because NO guns are allowed there.
C-pher said:
LOL Yea talk with the DC Mayor. When you guys are done blowing each other you can smoke some crack too. [roll]
http://www.safestreetsdc.com/subpages/murdercap.html
Oh give Mumbles a break...he can't do anything about the crime rate, so he's gotta blame it on the northern states, since they're so lax in their gun laws. I mean, after all, our gun control in this state is doing a wonderful job, right? So he can't blame that.
And I guess the reason a couple of those nasty northern states with the lax gun laws have lower crime rates than Massachusetts is due to the strict gun laws here? More evidence that when you support gun control, rationality is a luxury you can't afford.
Ken
Ken
Must be global warming that caused North Carolina and Georgia to move farther away than they used to be. It is a much faster to drive to VT, NH, or ME now than it was 6 years ago... [roll] What a crock.
![[wink]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/002.gif "Wink [wink]")
Too lazy to search to see if this has been posted:
NH's response
Sunday, Dec. 4, 2005
SHOOTINGS in Boston are up 28 percent over last year, The Boston Globe reported last week. One culprit the Globe singled out: New Hampshire gun laws.
The paper noted that police have traced some guns to "New Hampshire and Vermont, where firearms laws are less strict and easy for criminals to manipulate."
Or, to put it another way, they have traced guns to New Hampshire and Vermont, where firearms laws are less strict and citizens have an easier time obtaining guns for self-defense. If our firearms laws are the cause of high gun crime, then why is most of the crime in Boston?
Boston mayor Thomas Menino professes to be angered by the guns coming into his city and wants to meet with regional and national officials to "stop the flow of guns across state borders," according to the Globe. That, of course, is impossible, but no doubt the mayor will try anyway. It beats taking responsibility for controlling crime in his own city.
We can sympathize with frustrated Boston residents whose neighborhoods are terrorized by criminals bringing danger from out of state. Why, right here in New Hampshire we are witnessing an explosion in crimes fueled by heroin addiction. Dominican gangs based in Massachusetts are the predominant suppliers of heroin to New Hampshire, according to federal officials. Where are the Bay State officials outraged about drug dealers crossing state borders?
In New Hampshire, we realize that citizens having ready access to guns is beneficial, as national data show that guns are used more often for defensive than offensive purposes. If Mayor Menino were to succeed in preventing guns from crossing state lines, he would effectively disarm many Massachusetts residents, thus making them more vulnerable to criminals. Just because a gun crossed a state line does not mean a criminal carried it over for criminal purposes.
If Boston leaders really want to reduce gun-related crimes in their city, we have a suggestion. Forget the guns; catch and lock up the criminals. The guns aren't going to go out on the streets and shoot by themselves.
Perhaps New Hampshire can help out, though. We could make a deal. We'll keep all our guns if Massachusetts keeps all its drug dealers.
NH's response
Sunday, Dec. 4, 2005
SHOOTINGS in Boston are up 28 percent over last year, The Boston Globe reported last week. One culprit the Globe singled out: New Hampshire gun laws.
The paper noted that police have traced some guns to "New Hampshire and Vermont, where firearms laws are less strict and easy for criminals to manipulate."
Or, to put it another way, they have traced guns to New Hampshire and Vermont, where firearms laws are less strict and citizens have an easier time obtaining guns for self-defense. If our firearms laws are the cause of high gun crime, then why is most of the crime in Boston?
Boston mayor Thomas Menino professes to be angered by the guns coming into his city and wants to meet with regional and national officials to "stop the flow of guns across state borders," according to the Globe. That, of course, is impossible, but no doubt the mayor will try anyway. It beats taking responsibility for controlling crime in his own city.
We can sympathize with frustrated Boston residents whose neighborhoods are terrorized by criminals bringing danger from out of state. Why, right here in New Hampshire we are witnessing an explosion in crimes fueled by heroin addiction. Dominican gangs based in Massachusetts are the predominant suppliers of heroin to New Hampshire, according to federal officials. Where are the Bay State officials outraged about drug dealers crossing state borders?
In New Hampshire, we realize that citizens having ready access to guns is beneficial, as national data show that guns are used more often for defensive than offensive purposes. If Mayor Menino were to succeed in preventing guns from crossing state lines, he would effectively disarm many Massachusetts residents, thus making them more vulnerable to criminals. Just because a gun crossed a state line does not mean a criminal carried it over for criminal purposes.
If Boston leaders really want to reduce gun-related crimes in their city, we have a suggestion. Forget the guns; catch and lock up the criminals. The guns aren't going to go out on the streets and shoot by themselves.
Perhaps New Hampshire can help out, though. We could make a deal. We'll keep all our guns if Massachusetts keeps all its drug dealers.
