The Last Stand
Advertisement
Steamboat Springs — High demand for concealed weapon permits, in part prompted by large-scale acts of violence across the country, means the Routt County Sheriff’s Office is offering more training opportunities than ever before.
Back in 2002, the Sheriff’s Office only taught two concealed weapons classes a year. Last year, citizen demand prompted the Sheriff’s Office to lead five courses, and Sheriff’s Office Investigator Ken Klinger expects even more this year after first-come, first-serve registration for last month’s course filled up in only two hours.
“The carry classes are always full,” Routt County Rifle Club President Bryan Tuck said.
“When they get ready to do a class, there’s always a huge line of people waiting at 7:30 in the morning to sign up. Good grief.”
State laws are impacting local gun ownership as well.
“In 2003, the state of Colorado went to a shall-issue state, so we had a huge wave of them,” Klinger said. In order to be issued a concealed weapons permit, the applicant must meet a series of criteria, including achieving a certain level of gun safety education and passing a background check.
In 2003, 173 people in Routt County had a permit. Klinger said last month that “hundreds” of people now have a concealed weapon permit in Routt County.
Because permits are good for five years, the county is experiencing a second wave of applications as the majority of the 2003 group of permit-holders returns to renew their permits, Klinger said.
“There’s still a very heavy interest in this community for individuals to have concealed weapons permits,” Klinger said. “I see it going up again even more this year, between the reissues and the new permits.”
Last year, the demand for concealed weapons permits shot up most markedly in May, which Klinger attributed to current events at the time.
“The common thread there seemed to be concern over the Virginia Tech shooting. It’s about self-empowerment,” Klinger said. “We saw the same spike in 2001, after the terrorist attacks.”
In addition to those who are motivated to seek permits for personal protection, others want a concealed carry permit because they “believe in handguns,” Tuck said.
“People have a right, and they want to exercise that right,” Tuck said.
Concealed weapons permits can be revoked for reasons including felony convictions, domestic violence incidents, mental illness or drug addiction, or simply because of a change in residency, since each county administers permits differently.
In the past two years in Routt County, only two concealed weapons permits have been suspended or revoked. One was suspended while an out-of-county criminal case proceeded; the other was revoked after a domestic violence conviction, at which point a person can no longer own or possess a firearm.
“This is typical statewide — very, very few are rescinded or revoked,” Klinger said.
Training
Now in its ninth year, the two-day concealed weapons training course taught by the Routt County Sheriff’s Office is one of the most comprehensive in the state, Klinger said.
“The state just says that you have to take a handgun safety course,” he said. “There are instructors on the Front Range that are teaching these classes in somewhere between four and six hours.”
Routt County concealed carry permit-hopefuls start with classroom instruction, reviewing the Colorado Revised Statutes that relate to the use of deadly force.
“We try to clear up a lot of misconceptions. A lot of people think that if there’s someone in your house, you can just blast them — and that’s definitely not true,” Klinger said.
Courses then move to the range where people get to practice their shooting from all types of conditions — no light and lowlight, as if seated or in a vehicle.
“By the end of the second day, they’re shooting from positions of cover, they are shooting and moving. They’re doing all the things they may need to do if they become involved in a deadly situation as a private citizen,” Klinger said.
Approximately 35 percent of class attendees are female, Klinger said.
The Routt County Rifle Club, which hosts the concealed weapons course, also offers a variety of training including a first-time shooters course and women and youth programs. A skeet league and beginner’s trap and skeet begin this month.
“It’d be nice to see more women and youngsters out there,” Tuck said.
— To reach Melinda Dudley, call 871-4203
or e-mail mdudley@steamboatpilot.com
Community comments
Note: The Steamboat Pilot & Today doesn’t necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy.
MtnWarlock (anonymous)
June 1, 2008 at 11:24 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Well, if God made man…..then Sam Colt and Smith &Wesson made them equal! LOL! Have a good one!
smoke (anonymous)
June 1, 2008 at 2:04 p.m.
› Suggest removal
great… yahoos compinsating 4 there shortcomins looking 4 somone to shoot at. i feel so safe now.
80488mom (anonymous)
June 1, 2008 at 2:52 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Smoke - allowing people to carry actually reduces crime. Even the bad guys don't want to get shot. The applicants are thoroughly checked and the permits aren't given out randomly.
One person carrying in a classroom when a lunatic goes off definitely could save lives. The guy shooting in that church in Colorado Springs could have killed more people if he wasn't shot first.
bloggyblog (anonymous)
June 1, 2008 at 3:17 p.m.
› Suggest removal
blog thinks knowing how to handle and properly fire a firearm is a good thing. but, the public having more concealed weapons is probably not so good. unless your a trained professional, you'll probably cause more harm then good.
housepoor (anonymous)
June 1, 2008 at 4:13 p.m.
› Suggest removal
take a look at all the deaths caused by firearms in routt county…….has anyone other than the gun owner themselves or their loved ones actually been shot? the only one I can think of is when the hells angels came through town…I know of 2 legal gun owners who shot themselves in the past 6 weeks & every year a hunter or 2 shoots their dad\uncle\son
grannyrett (anonymous)
June 1, 2008 at 4:51 p.m.
› Suggest removal
If you are a crook, who are you going to go after? Someone you know is disarmed, or a granny you know is carrying? Makes sense to me.
bloggyblog (anonymous)
June 1, 2008 at 5:19 p.m.
› Suggest removal
granny makes a good point. its not the thought of someone like her carrying a concealed gun that woriies blog, its all the knuckleheads. but thats a freedom you have to chose as an American,so…plus it makes blog smile to picture a couple thugs with a snub nosed 22 trying to hold up granny, only to have her draw her hollow point loaded 45 and say 'feeling lucky punks?'
colowoodsman (anonymous)
June 1, 2008 at 6:33 p.m.
› Suggest removal
housepoor- the most recent local gun death I recall was Mario- who was killed by self-defense.
housepoor (anonymous)
June 1, 2008 at 8:56 p.m.
› Suggest removal
2 sucides, not pretty.
grannyrett (anonymous)
June 1, 2008 at 10:45 p.m.
› Suggest removal
no talk–just action.
edskis
June 2, 2008 at 5:09 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Let's see….The U.S. ranks first in the world in private gun ownership and 41st in the world in homicides, states with right to carry laws have lower violent crime rates (Lott), Florida has issued 1.3m concealed carry permits and had 165 crimes after licensure involving firearm, accidental deaths per gun owner = .001875%, accidental death per physician = 17.14%, homicides with firearms =12,253, alcohol on the highway deaths =16,885.
As President Reagan said: “facts are stubborn things.” Or maybe Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan: “you can be entitled to your own opinon but not your own facts.”
And lastly before I sip my chardonnay…Chief Justice Joseph Story: “The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered as the palladium of liberties of the republic….”
jester1cp (anonymous)
June 2, 2008 at 6:48 a.m.
› Suggest removal
I'm split on this issue.I have a couple of guns for protection.Like they say “Better have it and not need it ,than need it and not have it”But what i dont like are all the guns in this country to begin with.I read an article that stated only 17 people in all of westrn europe were killed by guns in 2005.That is a slow week in da hood here in the good 'ol usa.
housepoor (anonymous)
June 2, 2008 at 9:03 a.m.
› Suggest removal
I am not anti gun, just think a little more thought needs to go into the reasons of owning one, especially a hand gun.
JazzSlave (anonymous)
June 2, 2008 at 9:25 a.m.
› Suggest removal
“unless your a trained professional, you'll probably cause more harm then good.”
That'd be more compelling if you had any data to back it up. Carry permits don't come in Cracker Jacks boxes - you have to pass the requisite background checks and then pay to undergo the mandated training and testing.
For those opposed: do you wish the 9/11 pilots had been armed? How about any of the Columbine teachers? If not, why not?
If you're ever in a position to need a gun, you'll need it pretty badly, and nothing else will make a good substitute.
freshair (anonymous)
June 2, 2008 at 9:45 a.m.
› Suggest removal
'I am not anti gun, just think a little more thought needs to go into the reasons of owning one, especially a hand gun.'
' More thought'????? How about the need to protect your life and/or property should someone decide to relieve you of both? Or do you think the police are going to be there when you need them?
The only thing that needs 'more thought' is your thinking that it needs 'more thought.'
housepoor (anonymous)
June 2, 2008 at 10:15 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Just had a friend shoot himself. Longtime gun owner who blew his brains out in what appears to be a knee-jerk reaction to a tense emotional situation. Didn't appear to be thought out but one never knows. Anyway he might be alive today if not for the easy access to the gun.
shadow (anonymous)
June 2, 2008 at 10:33 a.m.
› Suggest removal
House, Your friend could have started his car in the garage with the doors closed and accomplished the same, (and saved on the cleanup.) Maybe cars and garages should be outlawed. Someone who wants to take their life can find plenty of alternative methods.
I had dinner the other night with a couple that were present at the New Life Church shooting in Dec. They watched three people shot immediately next to them as their daughter was on the floor hiding behind some furniture where the shooter was taken out. They were sure thankful the security lady was armed.
Jazz, you're right on with your closing, as the old saying goes, “I'd rather have a gun and not need it than need one and not have it.”
JoeB (anonymous)
June 2, 2008 at 10:34 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Housepoor;
Better stay away from Vermont. No permit needed to carry there.
Suicide by gun not pretty?
My friend had access to a gun and chose to hang himself. Guess he's less dead. Don't know about the “prettier” bit.
The teenage son of a woman I know couldn't get to a gun so he hanged himself. It was a spontaneous act. He is now a six foot plus, semi-paralyzed infant. Mom is terrified of the day she can no longer care for him and he goes back to the institution she removed him from, due to neglect and abuse. That's where he will eventually die, probably from a staph infection, but at least he didn't shoot himself.
Jimmy_the_One (anonymous)
June 2, 2008 at 12:20 p.m.
› Suggest removal
edskis misconceptions: US ranks first in the world in private gun ownership and 41st in the world in homicides..
.. but first of the (~30) western industrialized countries, either in homicides or gun homicides, maybe both.
ed: states with right to carry laws have lower violent crime rates (Lott)..
.. montana enabled shall issue ccw in 1991 & since then her violent crime rate tripled. Wvirgina doubled since si-ccw, both dakotas near doubled (tho still very low), & pennsylvania has not seen violent crime rate fall below her 1989 siccw start year. This while the rest of the country experienced drops in violent crime rates, including states with stricter guncontrol laws (hawaii stayed at parity).
.. StLouis enabled shall issue ccw in 2004 (city & county) & what happened in 2005? St Louis vaulted to the city with the highest violent crime rate in the USA, number 1, none higher; ccw lowers violcrime rates? wha happen in StLou?
.. more guns more lies.
ed: accidental deaths per gun owner = .001875%, accidental death per physician = 17.14%…
.. this is an invalid & meaningless comparison, there are estimated 80 million gun owners, how many physicians?
ed: As President Reagan said: “facts are stubborn things.”
.. RR hoists edskis on his own petard.
Jimmy_the_One (anonymous)
June 2, 2008 at 12:36 p.m.
› Suggest removal
jazz: Carry permits don't come in Cracker Jacks boxes
.. in vermont & alaska they do.
.. if guns make the country so much safer, how come 8 of the 10 states with the highest violent crime rates (2005) are PRO GUN states? (pro gun socarolina #1, only guncontrol Md #3, & neutralish delaware in the middle).
.. how come 21 of the most dangerous 25 metropolitan areas were in PRO GUN areas/states? .. detroit (progun now) #1, memphis #2;
.. how come 16 of the most dangerous 25 cities are PROGUN cities? While 15 of the SAFEST 25 cities are guncontrol cities?
.. more guns more lies.
http://www.morganquitno.com/cit07pop.htm…
PS: 7 or 8 of the 10 safest states are progun states, but these are sparsely populated states, dakotas 700,000 each, montana 1.1 million, & all of them combined total maybe 8 million, which would be offset by socarolina's population alone.
.. NYC, a relative pinprick on the map, has 17 million in it's metro area (incl newarknj), while those 8 progun states with 8 million comprise ~1/4 the land mass of conus.
edskis
June 2, 2008 at 1:03 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Jimmy the one….ah yes…. When you don't like the way the discussion is going you can't help yourself but to resort to ad hominem attacks to make your point. By the way, why didn't you cite the D.C. gun law and crime statistics to make your point? Or how about a quote from a Bristol Florida police officer: “As a police officer in the State of Florida for 20 years I have yet to be available as a crime against a person was being committed. If citizens cannot defend themsevles of the situation at the time of the incident the police are only there to take the report…..” Did someone mention an inallenable right?
housepoor (anonymous)
June 2, 2008 at 1:23 p.m.
› Suggest removal
If he didn't have a gun he would have had to think a little more than just pulling the trigger….might have been just enough time to come to his senses
edskis
June 2, 2008 at 2:12 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Just like the poor beaten husband in Connecticut with, God rest their souls, a dead wife and two dead daughters. It pains me even to use this horrific example to make a point about the basic human right of self defense.
Jimmy_the_One (anonymous)
June 2, 2008 at 3:28 p.m.
› Suggest removal
edskis: why didn't you cite the D.C. gun law and crime statistics to make your point?
.. there are thousands of things I didn't cite in my brief posts, what kind of absurd rebuttal is that? you didn't rebut any of the points I made. (& pls cite the alleged 'ad hominem' attack I made against you, I couldn't find one)
.. as for DC, I lived in the md suburbs for 30 years, within 4 miles of DC line;
.. DC bans the death penalty(DP) while it is surrounded by 2 states, virginia & maryland, which have the DP - I don't believe there is any other US city >75k population with a similar situation. Killers often either bring a victim into DC to execute him, or bring the body into DC & dump it there so as to avoid the DP if caught, this inflates DC's murder rate.
.. progun richmond va, DC's sister city 100 miles south, similar demographics, had a ~2005 murder rate about 45 vs. DC's ~36, wha happen? more guns more lies.
… in 2005 DC's violent crime rate was 26th in the USA, with the following cities in progun states having higher vcr rates than DC: StLouis, Detroit, Flint, Memphis, MiamiGdns, Orlando, LIttle Rock, Atlanta, Birmingham, Nashville, NCharlestonSC, PompanoBch, StPeteFl, Tampa.
http://www.morganquitno.com/cit05a.pdf
.. you asked me to cite DC's crime rate, so I did, but it only demonstrates the pro gun tactic of pointing out an odorous smell, while ignoring the stink in their own backyard.
more guns, more lies.
Jimmy_the_One (anonymous)
June 2, 2008 at 3:37 p.m.
› Suggest removal
edskis: It pains me even to use this horrific example to make a point about the basic human right of self defense.
.. the basic right to self defense has been around for thousands & thousands of years, the 2nd amendment had nothing to do with it's inception.
.. your belief that many of these murders could have been prevented were a gun used in self defense is specious & beggars belief.
.. pro gun crowd lives a delusion, some 2nd amendment mythology which masks the truth about guns & adheres to some fabricated 2nd amendment mythology bible which preaches an armed fantasy doctrine, where armed citizens walking the streets make the country safer, rather than causing more grief.
.. guns are more the problem not the solution.
.. gun people, tell me what you (think you) know, about switzerland.
rsssco (anonymous)
June 2, 2008 at 3:56 p.m.
› Suggest removal
This will solve all your gun issues:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C0vyxgJLJ…
edskis
June 2, 2008 at 4:04 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Well Jimmy , thank God we do have a Bill of Rights in this Country. It's funny that the Founding Fathers didn't even think we needed to codify them because the rights contained therein were so obvious to them; I'm glad they did. It seems what was so obvious to our Founding Fathers is lost on some indivduals today. However, our interesting discussion would not be possible without the First.
Permit me one more Ronald Reagan quote: “you can disagree with me but you don't have to be disagreeable.”
By the way my petard is perfectly fine.
OnTheBusGus (anonymous)
June 2, 2008 at 6:10 p.m.
› Suggest removal
rsssco - LOL!! Watched some of the related videos, they were pretty good too.
jester1cp (anonymous)
June 2, 2008 at 7:06 p.m.
› Suggest removal
This is my favorite
I love American Dad
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6bbXgUNO…
jester1cp (anonymous)
June 2, 2008 at 7:20 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Smoke, please do us all a favor. Put down the BONG and take a basic grammar class.
JazzSlave (anonymous)
June 3, 2008 at 12:50 a.m.
› Suggest removal
From George Orwell, the former Socialist:
“That rifle on the wall of the labourer’s cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there.”
He was speaking in political terms at the time – the laborer’s rifle as a bulwark against state excess, which, of course, is true. It’s a principle that applies equally well to the law abiding citizen against the criminal. Only the deluded would believe that a prowler would choose to break into my armed household instead of Jimmy’s unarmed home.
I’d also like to see the foundation for his assertion that: “Killers often either bring a victim into DC to execute him, or bring the body into DC & dump it there so as to avoid the DP if caught, this inflates DC's murder rate.” That one almost made me laugh.
The PDF he links to cites a national average of 469 violent crimes (murder, rape, robbery, aggravated assault) per 100k in population, vs. Washington DC’s rate of 1,401. But it’s only because rapists robbers & thugs are trying to avoid the death penalty. Riiight. The gun ban has nothing to do with it.
According to the CDC, in the 29 years for which data is available after the DC gun ban was imposed in 1977, DC’s murder rate rose precipitously relative to other cities. During the ban, DC’s murder rate was either 1st or 2nd for 15 years, and 4th for another 4 years. By contrast, the DC murder rate in 1976 was 15th.
In the 5 years before the ban was imposed, the DC murder rate fell from 37 to 27 per 100k. 5 years after the ban, it was back up to 35. During that same period (the 5 years leading up to the ban), robberies had declined from 1514 to 1003 per 100k. 5 years after the ban, robberies had risen 63% to 1635 per 100k. Since robbery doesn’t carry the death penalty, one wonders what could be responsible for the “inflation.”
Chicago experienced a spike in its murder rate after its 1982 ban was implemented (but I’m sure those numbers were “inflated” by death penalty avoiders). That doesn’t explain what happened in England after their ban was instituted in 1997. Death and injury resulting from gun crime skyrocketed 340% (not a typo) in the 7 years from 1998 to 2005.
Jimmy’s “more guns more lies” mantra is kind of amusing. I have more guns than I need (but not as many as I want). Anyone who wants to commit a crime against me in my home is welcome to try. I’ll leave it to others to determine whether I’m lying.
ybul (anonymous)
June 3, 2008 at 1:09 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Switzerland is a nice place, which does not spend near a trillion dollars on its national defense. It does not appear to have the disparity in wealth that the United States does. While there, it did not appear to have the gang, drug issues.
Jimmy, have you ever heard of the The Battle of Athens
2 AUGUST 1946
On 2 August 1946, some Americans, brutalized by their county government, used armed force to overturn it. These Americans wanted honest, open elections. For years they had asked for state or Federal election monitors to prevent vote fraud — forged ballots, secret ballot counts, and intimidation by armed sheriff's deputies — by the local political boss. They got no help.
They would be labeled terrorists today and only were patriots, trying to oust corrupt politicians. We have a few today, as McCain and Clinton both violate campaign finance laws, and the amount of wealth transfered to the rich via subsidies is egregious. It is unfortunate that the congress no longer sees any use for being constrained by the constitution.
That is the reason for the second amendment Jimmy. Your ignorance will enslave you.
ColoradoNative (anonymous)
June 3, 2008 at 2:46 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Go ahead. Make my day. I dare ya.
MtnWarlock (anonymous)
June 3, 2008 at 5:01 a.m.
› Suggest removal
I guess the day they outlaw guns, only outlaws will have them! They will take mine from my cold dead finger on the trigger! :-{ Have a good day!
edskis
June 3, 2008 at 5:10 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Jazz Slave, yubul, Colorado Native, Mtn Warlock,
Good ones! Nice to have some Constitutional company!!!
Jimmy_the_One (anonymous)
June 3, 2008 at 6:03 a.m.
› Suggest removal
jazz: I’d also like to see the foundation for his assertion that: “Killers often either bring a victim into DC to execute him..
.. I laid the foundation, guess you lead a gunnut to text but you can't make him read.
.. DC is invested (surrounded) by two states, Maryland & Virginia, both states where guns can be easily bought. It is little difficulty to bring a gun into DC from Md or Va, there are no border checks, you simply hide the gun in your car & drive in thru one of the hundred or so entrance roads (or bridges from Va). The handgun ban is the only hindrance, & if you're caught the typical excuse is 'didn't know you can't do dat'.
.. & there is no 'gun ban' in DC, there are 100,000 legally owned rifles & shotguns which can be used to defend life & home; the longgun must be either trigger locked or safekept when not in use, this practice has resulted in DC 6 year period from 1999-2005 when only 1 child aged 0-16 was fatally killed by a gun, next to perfect record. Not too many pro gun STATES can match that record. DC does not infringe on gun laws, just restricts them, the longgun is the firearm of choice i america by 2-1 margin over handgun, except for criminals who prefer handguns.
jazz: rapists robbers & thugs are trying to avoid the death penalty. Riiight.
.. DC having the death penalty would only deter killers or potential killers, duh. You sharp today.
jazz: 29 years for which data is available after the DC gun ban was imposed in 1977, DC’s murder rate rose precipitously relative to other cities.
drama queen, murder rate tended to rise & rise precipitously across the board from the mid 70's thru the early 90's, ignoring the stink in your own backyard again.
.. due the problem (more severe back then) with young black males carrying guns, the handgun ban enables cops to arrest anyone with a handgun on their person. This has prevented thousands of crimes & hundreds of killings, but is not perceptible to gunworld. You will have no significant lasting reduction in murder or violcr rate if handguns are legalized in DC by supr ct this month, similar to what happened in StLouis in 2005 when si-ccw was legalized, StL became city with highest violent crime rate.
jazz: Chicago experienced a spike in its murder rate after its 1982 ban was implemented (but I’m sure those numbers were “inflated” by death penalty avoiders).
.. duh, chicago is not surrounded by two states which have the death penalty. I believe chicago adheres to illinois policy as per death penalty. No 'incentive' for killers to bring & dump in chicago when the same penalty if they do it anywhere in illinois (moratorium on DP in affect now). DC is an entity unto itself & can set it's own rules in opposition to Md & Va, thus the 'incentive' for killers to bring or dump in DC. Do try to keep up with the class to avoid future embarassments.
Jimmy_the_One (anonymous)
June 3, 2008 at 6:10 a.m.
› Suggest removal
correction, clarification to my above post:
jazz: rapists robbers & thugs are trying to avoid the death penalty. Riiight.
.. DC having the death penalty BAN would not have any affect on rapists or thugs, just killers or potential killers, who would bring in victims, dead or alive, to avoid the death penalty in Va or Md where both states have death penalty.
bloggyblog (anonymous)
June 3, 2008 at 7:05 a.m.
› Suggest removal
blog thinks some of you didn't read the article. it was about concealed weapons permits being on the rise. blog doesn't have an issue with firearms. if you feel the need to carry an concealed weapon then you can. its one of your constitutional rights as an American. but you darn sure better know what your doing before you pull it on anyone. jazzslave, owning a firearm will not deter a prowler. its usually one of the first things they steal!
Jimmy_the_One (anonymous)
June 3, 2008 at 9:45 a.m.
› Suggest removal
bloggy: .. if you feel the need to carry [a] concealed weapon then you can. its one of your constitutional rights as an American.
.. uh no, for a couple reasons, there is no universal well reg'd militia these days & any rkba was incumbent upon military/militiary service (tho supr bozos will likely subvert this soon).
.. secondly, concealed carry has frequently been outlawed or regulation has been included in state's constitutions. Hope this clears up the delusions dagunnuts are under:
1876Colo: The right of no person to keep and bear arms .. shall be called in question; but nothing herein contained shall be construed to justify the practice of carrying concealed weapons.
1875 Missouri: .. but nothing herein contained is intended to justify the practice of wearing concealed weapons.
1912 NMex: ..but nothing herein shall be held to permit the carrying of concealed weapons.
1907Okla: .. but nothing herein contained shall prevent the Legislature from regulating the carrying of weapons.
1879Lousian: A well regulated militia.. This shall not prevent the passage of laws to punish those who carry weapons concealed.
1891 Ky:..subject to the power of the General Assembly to enact laws to prevent persons from carrying concealed weapons.
1889 Montana:.. but nothing herein contained shall be held to permit the carrying of concealed weapons.
1907 Okla:.. but nothing herein contained shall prevent the Legislature from regulating the carrying of weapons.
1978 Idaho: this provision shall not prevent the passage of laws to govern the carrying of weapons concealed on the person
1890 Mississ: , but the legislature may regulate or forbid carrying concealed weapons.
1876 Texas: ..the Legislature shall have power, by law, to regulate the wearing of arms, with a view to prevent crime.
progun source: http://www.law.ucla.edu/volokh/beararms/…
ybul (anonymous)
June 3, 2008 at 9:51 a.m.
› Suggest removal
I think that I would rather have people with concealed weapons as opposed to everyone walking around with guns on their hips. Seems more appropriate for the times.
The knowledge that people might have a firearm would deter a prowler if you are home. Most prowlers do not go into a house they think is occupied as they do not desire confrontation, especially if they are not sure they have the upper hand.
seeuski (anonymous)
June 3, 2008 at 10:23 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Jimmy…….
Are you serious? People commiting murder in the surrounding states and then dragging dead bodies to DC! Not a chance, you give the creeps alot of credit, WOW. What premeditation. Besides, with forensic science today you can tell what, where, and when so avoiding the penalties from the states where the crimes occured is out.
first of all tell me the last time MD executed someone. Here is a recent story from the Wash.Times.
http://washingtontimes.com/news/2008/jun…
As a long time resident of the MD suburbs I can tell you that the only people who gave a hoot about the DC gun ban were the law abiding gun owners who would now suffer the criminality of these dumb laws and the robberies that the bad guys would carry out with impunity. The criminals carried on business as usual.
Where were you when DC held its gun buyback days?
Look at how many old peices of crap come out of the woodwork, I'm sure the young gang bangers that rule SE and NE give a darn about the death penalty when they are poppin a cap in someones rear end. PLEASE spare us your take on what the murderers do.
housepoor (anonymous)
June 3, 2008 at 11:04 a.m.
› Suggest removal
ybul how would a would be prowler know you have a gun in your house? Sign on the front lawn?
edskis
June 3, 2008 at 11:15 a.m.
› Suggest removal
My last blog on this subject. The militia argument doesn't hold water. For those interested in some esoteric reading on the indivdual's right under the Second Ammendment see Senior Circuit Judge Silberman's opinion in the D.C. Court of Appeals case decided March 9, 2007(No.04-7041).
JazzSlave (anonymous)
June 3, 2008 at 12:01 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Jimmy writes:
“.. DC having the death penalty BAN would not have any affect on rapists or thugs, just killers or potential killers, who would bring in victims, dead or alive, to avoid the death penalty in Va or Md where both states have death penalty.”
Fine. Substantiate the assertion. Show me the study delineating this exodus of murderers from one jurisdiction to another. Just because you think it's a fact doesn't mean it is. If there was so much as a particle of truth to it, death penalty advocates would have been shouting it from the mountaintops for decades. Honestly, that's one of the most ridiculous claims I've ever seen - it doesn't even come close to passing the stink test. You might want to investigate the aroma in your own backyard before sticking your nose into someone else's.
If I understand you, the DC murder numbers were artificially “inflated” because of this trend you can't document. How is the 63% spike in robberies explained in the wake of the ban? Or Britain's 340% increase in gun crime related death & injury after its prohibitions were enacted? No death penalty to avoid in either instance.
You write: “…there is no 'gun ban' in DC…” Wrong on its face (I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and presume that you're merely inattentive, as opposed to a liar) . Handguns are explicitly banned in the District, and the statutes regarding long guns require those weapons to be disassembled, unloaded, and locked up. I'm sure the gang bangers & junkies desperate to score always wait patiently for the homeowner to unlock, re-assemble, and load his rifle before doing anything untoward or illegal. I've heard the criminal element is very reasonable under those circumstances.
Your characterization of DC's rank of 26th in terms of violent crime, while accurate, is nonetheless disingenuous. In cities with populations over 500k, DC remains the murder capitol of the US (as of 2005).
Nice job with the name-calling, by the way. It's entertaining, in a juvenille, 'mine-is-bigger-than-yours' kind of way.
blog:
My guns are locked up when I'm not home. Assuming they got past my 85 pound Bouvier, 4 Arnold Schwartzenaggers in their prime couldn't budge the safe they're stored in. Although, they could easily break into the locked nightstand where my bedside revolver is kept. I'd hate to lose it - it belonged to my mom.
If they break in while I'm home, good luck to them!
justathought (anonymous)
June 3, 2008 at 1:14 p.m.
› Suggest removal
I'm not going to argue this one, those that want to ban guns are the same one's that believe the government should take care of us instead of us being responsible for ourselves. To inject a little humor (below), I am definitely a redneck when it comes to my guns.
Democrat, Republican, or Redneck
You're walking down a deserted street with your wife and two small children. Suddenly, an obviously deranged man, carrying a huge knife, comes around the corner, locks eyes with you, screams obscenities, raises the knife, and charges at you. You are carrying a Glock cal 40, and you are an expert shot. You have mere seconds before he reaches you and your family. What do you do?
democrat's answer: Well, that's not enough information to answer the question!
Have I ever done anything to him that would inspire him to attack?
What does my wife think? What about the kids?
Could I possibly swing the gun like a club and knock the knife out of his hand?
Does the Glock have appropriate safety built into it?
Why am I carrying a loaded gun anyway, and what kind of message does this send to society and to my children?
Is it possible he'd be happy with just killing me?
Does he definitely want to kill me, or would he be content just to wound me?
If I were to grab his knees and hold on, could my family get away while he was stabbing me?
Should I call 9-1-1 ?
Why is this street so deserted?
We need to raise taxes, have a paint and weed day and make this a happier, healthier street that would discourage such behavior.
Hey, it's not his fault - it's ours for being here at this time!
If we had given this man more welfare, social security and other benefits, he would not be angry at us.
Somehow, I know Bush had something to do with this!
This is all so confusing, I need to discuss with some friends over a latte and try to come to a consensus.
republican's answer: Bang!
redneck's answer: bang! bang! bang! bang! bang! bang! bang! bang! bang! Click… (sound of reloading) bang! bang! bang! bang! bang! bang! bang! bang! bang! Click
Daughter: 'Nice grouping, Daddy! Were those the Winchester Silver Tips or Hollow Points?
Son: 'You got him, Pop! Can I shoot the next one?
Wife: 'You are not taking that to the taxidermist.'
seeuski (anonymous)
June 3, 2008 at 1:45 p.m.
› Suggest removal
thought,
That is hilarious.
JazzSlave (anonymous)
June 3, 2008 at 1:58 p.m.
› Suggest removal
seeuski:
It's funny because it's true.
Jimmy_the_One (anonymous)
June 3, 2008 at 3:51 p.m.
› Suggest removal
seeuski: People commiting murder in the surrounding states and then dragging dead bodies to DC! Not a chance .. with forensic science today you can tell what, where, and when so avoiding the penalties from the states where the crimes occured is out.
.. you are the one full of baloney - when there is little substantive evidence that the murder happened out of state, it can be left with DC to prosecute the case in their jurisdiction; you surely remember the rash of car burnings with ducttaped faces, to cover evidence. Lots were brought in from out of state, inter alia payback for bad drug deals.
Killers also bring victims INTO DC & then execute them (as I said above).
seeuski: I'm sure the young gang bangers that rule SE and NE give a darn about the death penalty when they are poppin a cap in someones rear end. PLEASE spare us your take on what the murderers do.
.. I didn't say it accounted for the bulk of DC murders, I said it inflated the murder count & rate, maybe a remedial reading comprehension course would do all you gunnuts good.
.. I once befriended a homeless guy who lived in the maryland woods behind a mcdonalds ~1/2 mile from the DC line near stanton rd (metro station near there now). Used to come in sundays & give him a bigmac on a 2for1 coupon; couple months later didn't see him & counter clerk told me he'd been shot dead the past week, asked him where he was shot, out back in the woods? he said something like 'probably, but they found him on the DC side of the DC/Md line', so don't tell me it doesn't happen bimbo, cause I know it for a fact it do.
.. Of course, this one would be easy to trace back to Md, a blood trail, but it provides certainty that attempts are made, & many are successful.
.. & from your link, this occurred with the gun ban in place, & there is no substantive evidence that guns galore in any place would reduce DC's crime & murder problem, as evidenced by st louis:
(link)…. The killings put the [DC]'s total for the year at 72, compared to 67 killings at the same time last year. [DC] recorded 181 killings last year - far below the peak total of 479 killings logged in 1991 but the first increase since 2002.
bloggyblog (anonymous)
June 3, 2008 at 4:20 p.m.
› Suggest removal
blog kinda had a feeling this was gonna be a hot topic. politics, religion and guns always seem to get people fired up(no pun intended). seriously, my only strong feeling on the topic is that proper handling and responsibility should be at the forefront of all gun ownership. blog thinks too many people resort to violent means to solve their problems. if you've ever been arround any true warriors then you know their usually the last ones to use force and will avoid trouble even if it means appearing weak. and lastly anyone who thinks their gonna charge in with guns ablazing and stop a bad guy, probably watches too much T.V.
Jimmy_the_One (anonymous)
June 3, 2008 at 4:33 p.m.
› Suggest removal
jazz: Handguns are explicitly banned in the District, and the statutes regarding long guns require those weapons to be disassembled, unloaded, and locked up.
.. who's the liar? you just told two lies. More guns more lies; Handguns can be legally owned in DC by retired cops, home business owners (hundreds if not thousands of home businesses in DC), & handguns owned prior to 1976 ban year are legal — thousands of legal handguns in DC… DC is actually a may issue ccw 'state', but very difficult to get ccw.
.. next lie from jazz, straight from gunworld's 2ndA mythology bible, about DC longguns needing be disassembled. Go back & read what I wrote above, the only requirement is for a trigger lock to be on it, OR it can be safekept. OR, it can be left out in the open if it is disassembled - disassembly is only an alternative way to store it, & is often used to justify one working on it so as to make that work legal.
.. a trigger lock on the rifle leaves it accessible for 99% of instances where a gun would dissuade criminal intent or need be used defensively. Spare me rambo dropping thru the roof & shouting 'give me money or you're dead'.
Jimmy_the_One (anonymous)
June 3, 2008 at 4:42 p.m.
› Suggest removal
jazz: Or Britain's 340% increase in gun crime related death & injury after its prohibitions were enacted?
.. another LIE, another misconception from the 2ndA mythology; You are pathetically misinformed:
Number of Deaths from Firearms Injury - United Kingdom, 1997 to 2006 .. 1997 198, 98 229, 99 207, 00 204, 01 193, 02 181, 03 187, 04 191, 05 185, 06 210.
Patients admitted to hospital in England as a result of gunshot injuries 1998–99 134 … 1999–2000 117 … 2000–01 102 … 2001–02 155…. 2002–03 129
Injuries to Police Officers Crimes recorded by the police in which a police officer on duty was injured by a firearm –03 97-98 serious injury 3, slight injury 3
02-03 serious injury 1, slight injury 11
http://www.gun-control-network.org/GF07….
.. the above figures might occur within a couple months in many big US cities, including progun dallas or houston or nashville or memphis, so if you think this horrendous how do you explain US hospital admissions? iirc gunshot wounds cost US 80billion dollars a recent year, england maybe 1 billion if that.
.. about half of britain's increase in guncrime is due airgun crime, or airguns converted to (presumably) single shot 'zip gun' types, & subsequent minor injury which usually ensues, nothing even like what a monster bullet 22 caliber short can do… (said facetiously since you guys aren't all that swift at comp).
.. advice, stop believing **** you read in your gun lobby & nra propaganda magazines, & start treating them with suspicion, you'll be wiser.
seeuski (anonymous)
June 3, 2008 at 4:52 p.m.
› Suggest removal
jiminy _the_cricket
you said:”so don't tell me it doesn't happen bimbo, cause I know it for a fact it do.”
You think you can start calling people who disagree with you names?
Beat it kid.
Oh, and good grammer.
Jimmy_the_One (anonymous)
June 3, 2008 at 5:04 p.m.
› Suggest removal
jazz: Your characterization of DC's rank of 26th in terms of violent crime, while accurate, is nonetheless disingenuous. In cities with populations over 500k, DC remains the murder capitol of the US (as of 2005).
.. he uses the word 'disingenuous' in the same sentence he calls DC a murder capitol (sic, capital), of cities >500,000… gong, a LIE, or at best 'disingenuous'.
.. there are about 35 US cities with pops >500,000, & of course NYC with 7 million is largest US city, & will often have the highest murder total, simply because it has 3 to 14 times more people than the other ~34 big cities >500k.
.. so DC with 181 murders last year can't possibly be tops in total, which leaves murder rate for the 35 larger cities, & at about 36 murder rate it might take topspot, but not when you include all ~360 american cities with pops >75,000.
.. 'murder capital' title includes all US cities, stop data mining & moving the goalposts.
rsssco (anonymous)
June 3, 2008 at 5:05 p.m.
› Suggest removal
From DC v. Heller:
“To summarize, we conclude that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms. That right existed prior to the formation of the new government under the Constitution and was premised on the private use of arms for activities such as hunting and self-defense, the latter being understood as resistance to either private lawlessness or the depredations of a tyrannical government (or a threat from abroad). In addition, the right to keep and bear arms had the important and salutary civic purpose of helping to preserve the citizen militia. The civic purpose was also a political expedient for the Federalists in the First Congress as it served, in part, to placate their Antifederalist opponents. The individual right facilitated militia service by ensuring that citizens would not be barred from keeping the arms they would need when called forth for militia duty. Despite the importance of the Second Amendment's civic purpose, however, the activities it protects are not limited to militia service, nor is an individual's enjoyment of the right contingent upon his or her continued or intermittent enrollment in the militia.”
Amen!
bubba (anonymous)
June 3, 2008 at 6:53 p.m.
› Suggest removal
I'm all for gun control. I can't hit anything!
bloggyblog (anonymous)
June 3, 2008 at 7:55 p.m.
› Suggest removal
all this talk about guns has got blog thinking. bloggy wants to film an action movie in steamboat with lots of guns and explosions. how about 'die hard in the boat', no wait, too long. something shorter 'boat hard', nope thats no good, sounds like a porno. i know 'Blogbo'! former special forces bad ass john blogbo has retired in steamboat springs trying to lead a quiet life when….disaster strikes. a friendly group of locals are waiting patiently at the gondola on a powderday when some terrorists snowboarders cut in line!!! one call to Blogbo remedies the problem. he springs out of hiding at the bottom of the run and mows down the terrorists snowboarders with a machine gun, “you may of got first tracks but Blogbo got first blood'. what do you think? there's also an alternative ending where Blogbo saves angelina jolie from a broke down chairlift
MtnWarlock (anonymous)
June 3, 2008 at 9:52 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Hand guns are made for killing, plain and simple. They are tools for killing. Like any tool, misuse it, there is going to be trouble, intentional or not intentionally! I grieve when I hear of people committing suicide, or people accidentally shooting themselves because of ignorance of guns or intentionally harming innocent folks. I have been around fire arms since I was little. I Taught my kids how to use guns! In my grown years, I used my marksmanship in the military. No matter what you use to kill someone, you will achieve a killing if you really want it, no matter what you use! Be it a car, gun, knife, ball bat, bomb, ice pick, poison, hand to hand combat, etc., you will get the same result, it’s just that some are more unprofessional and make it personal that creates messiness. A pro will sit a thousand yards away with a .223 magnum rifle and fulfill their dirty deeds! Those guys scare me because you never hear the bullet coming to bite you! Of course, a scared kid with a gun is another scary situation! Thousands of folks get murdered by all kids of things other than by guns every day in the US and around the world! It seems that when a gun is used, we have a literal sh!t fit and publicize the hell out of it! My form of gun control is placing my bullet precisely where I aim it to go! As far as a militia goes, my abilities will aid the local law or military in a national crisis! Yes, I do own assault rifles, hand guns, and tons of ammo. I collect them! Before we outlaw anymore of our fire arm freedoms, let’s just outlaw the idiot first! Maybe guns won’t get such a bad rap! Have a good day!
id04sp (anonymous)
June 3, 2008 at 10:18 p.m.
› Suggest removal
People who have lived in the big cities and watched the news on TV know who is committing the gun crimes. They are not people who own guns for home protection.
Moving here to get away from them was the best idea for how to deal with it.
armchairqb (anonymous)
June 4, 2008 at 12:51 a.m.
› Suggest removal
I know a lot if people who think it is safer to have a gun in one place and the ammo in another in order to avoid an accident. This however just makes the gun a very expensive hammer.!!!
spukomy (anonymous)
June 4, 2008 at 1:01 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Jimmy the One, I still can't figure out if you think people should have the right to have a gun in their home. Also, are you citing stats from “violent crimes” or “crimes involving a firearm”? Thanks.
Jimmy_the_One (anonymous)
June 4, 2008 at 6:09 a.m.
› Suggest removal
spukomy: .. Jimmy the One, I still can't figure out if you think people should have the right to have a gun in their home. Also, are you citing stats from “violent crimes” or “crimes involving a firearm”? Thanks.
.. so far I think it's been violent crime stats for american figures, & then jazz mentioned british GUN crime so I profferred UK guncrime stats in reply.
.. people can own a gun in their homes for all I care (tho with young children I wouldn't advise it unless it's safekept under lock & key), it's where & when they can take their guns in public that is more the sticking point, & the misbelief that 'more guns means less crime', when it's really been more guns more lies.
.. note: jazz likely got guncrime mixed up with british violent crime, which did have a 300+% increase over the past 9 or 10 years (about 30% per year linearly). But there are mitigating circumstances - they started including two 'new' crimes, common assault & harassment, as violent crimes, but neither crime incurs physical injury; common asslt & harassmt accounted for 37% of all violent crime in one recent year, so that greatly inflates british crime.
.. they also had 2 crime recording modifications circa 2000 which inflated violcrime stats by about 10% each, so instead of say a robber robbing 5 people in a car counting as one crime, it now counts as 5, see how it inflates?
.. as in the US we have 2 crime indicators, the fbi ucr (uniform crime report) end of year 'recorded crime', & the ncvs nat crime victimization SURVEY, the british have home office recorded crime & a BCS british crime SURVEY, which surveys brits across the UK & is an indicator of UNrecorded crime as well as rec'd crime, whereas rec'd crime is only what's recorded. The BCS actually shows a decrease in violent crime since the dunblane handgun ban:
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/crimeew…
brit home office: 17% were common assault (including assault on a constable) and 20% harassment, both of which involve no physical injury to the victim. In addition, many of the 'less serious woundings' (43% of violent crime) will have resulted in minor injuries, such as bruises, grazes and black eyes.
http://www.crimestatistics.org.uk/output…
AmebaTost (anonymous)
June 4, 2008 at 9:50 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force.
If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either
convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of
force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories,
without exception. Reason or force, that's it.
In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through
persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and
the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as
paradoxical as it may sound to some.
When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason
and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or
employment of force. The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a
100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old
retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gangbanger, and a single gay guy
on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun
removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a
potential attacker and a defender.
There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force
equations. These are the people who think that we'd be more civilized if all
guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a
mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger's
potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative
fiat—it has no validity when most of a mugger's potential marks are armed.
People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the
young, the strong, and the many, and that's the exact opposite of a
civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful
living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.
AmebaTost (anonymous)
June 4, 2008 at 9:51 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Then there's the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that
otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in
several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the
physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser.
People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don't constitute lethal
force watch too much TV, where people take beatings and come out of it with
a bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works
solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both
are armed, the field is level. The gun is the only weapon that's as lethal
in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weightlifter. It
simply wouldn't work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn't both lethal
and easily employable.
When I carry a gun, I don't do so because I am looking for a fight, but
because I'm looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot
be forced, only persuaded. I don't carry it because I'm afraid, but because
it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn't limit the actions of those who
would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would
do so by force. It removes force from the equation…and that's why carrying
a gun is a civilized act.
knee_dropper (anonymous)
June 4, 2008 at 2:07 p.m.
› Suggest removal
If gun ownership = safety, then it follows that a place like Iraq that is awash in guns must be one of the safest places in the world. Or maybe they just need more guns. Being surrounded by people with concealed weapons (legally or not) does not make me feel any safer, especially some grandma out there that thinks she's Dirty Harry. Hope she's got a steady hand!
cmducks (anonymous)
June 4, 2008 at 2:25 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Lets ban the guns so we can go back to killing each other with swords. They seem to rationally talk everything out in Braveheart!!!
grannyrett (anonymous)
June 4, 2008 at 3:46 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Those who would kill, will kill with whatever is available. Amebatost is right. Good post. If you take away the citizen's right to own guns, how will they protect themselves from those who would do them harm? If someone is going to kill and doesn't have a gun, will he use a knife, a bat, what? Then will the government outlaw knifes, bats? It's sad that there are people who will kill. It's would be sadder if people were not allowed to defend themselves.
spukomy (anonymous)
June 5, 2008 at 12:15 a.m.
› Suggest removal
AmebaTost, I'm pickin' up what you're layin' down.
seeuski (anonymous)
June 5, 2008 at 8:02 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Gunman from DC arrested in DC for firing a rifle in DC. I guess that there are still people in DC who don't obey the law.
Maybe the cops lied about the mans address and dragged him into the city and couldn't find the “duct tape”.
Obviously since the death penalty doesn't apply in DC more murderers are bringing their victims bodies into DC.
Maybe a good argument for the death penalty!
Gee, criminals must care.
http://www.nbc4.com/news/16506313/detail…
seeuski (anonymous)
June 5, 2008 at 8:04 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Oh, and I don't own any guns, just would like the right to as the Constitution guarantees us.
seeuski (anonymous)
June 5, 2008 at 8:13 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Ofcourse if there was no gun violence in DC then this article would be a lie.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con…
seeuski (anonymous)
June 5, 2008 at 8:15 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Up to date death toll in DC.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con…
Jimmy_the_One (anonymous)
June 5, 2008 at 9:01 a.m.
› Suggest removal
seeuski: Obviously since the death penalty doesn't apply in DC more murderers are bringing their victims bodies into DC. .. Maybe a good argument for the death penalty!
.. since, as I've said, DC appears to be the only major jurisdiction which fits this predicament - a major city without the DP surrounded completely by two states which do have the DP - it appears a singular case.
.. even so it would likely not lessen area homicides were DC to adopt the DP, killers would have no 'incentive' to bring or dump victims in DC, & would just do the killings in Md or Va instead.
.. is there any point to your posting blurbs on gun violence in DC? we don't need another newscaster; gun violence occurs daily in houston dallas las vegas nashville memphis & all the pro gun cities as well.
.. actually arresting the 23 yr old rifle shooter in rock creek park (national zoo) was a non incident, violent crime wise; gunfire at night to maybe 3am in the district is likely a continuous stream of shootings by the minute, if you could consolidate the noise.
.. that DC has high violent crime rate is not really the issue, it's whether repealing the handgun ban would make the situation better, & since there is no conclusive evidence that this would occur, the choice of action should be to allow DC residents to continue their 'home rule' policy of self governance;
.. gunnuts have no right to impose their interpretation of 2ndA upon others, & if the supreme court alters historical interpretation of 2ndA as being a collective right, it opens a pandoras box of new problems, such as a dictatorship would enjoy in denying democratic principles.
seeuski (anonymous)
June 5, 2008 at 9:17 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Facts just the facts.
No anecdotes.
Please provide the archival news reports of the duct taped victims that were dumped.
Aint none.
housepoor (anonymous)
June 5, 2008 at 9:44 a.m.
› Suggest removal
I am a supporter of the right to bear arms but as in any “right” or privilege comes a responsibility. I feel if you commit any crime with a firearm or while in possession of a firearm (other than traffic) you should lose that privilege for life along with any other associated penalty. That goes for anything from armed robbery to firing a handgun for fun in a residential area at 3am or brandishing a gun while intoxicated. You should only get one chance; a mistake with a firearm is lethal. As I read your comments I feel that most are obviously responsible gun owners. It would wise for the gun supporters & NRA to support tougher penalties for gun related crimes as I feel it would go a long way in eyes of public opinion.
seeuski (anonymous)
June 5, 2008 at 12:14 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Housepoor,
I agree totally. I am not sure of the requirements for legal gun ownership, but I expect that criminality while armed or being convicted of a felony excludes the person from legal ownership.
I would also like to see the justice system properly punish criminals that commit violent crimes and protect society. There are so many lenient sentences handed out. All one needs to do is look at the criminal records of most violent criminals that are commiting repeat crimes. I especially feel that some judges don't take sriously enough offenses against women or children that include acts like stalking, sexual abuse, rape and other aggravated crimes.
There have been too many high profile cases recently that fall into this category.
As far as legal owners being responsable, It seems rare that any crimes are commited by this category.
And weapons,like drugs, will be obtained by the bad guys no matter what the laws are whether DC or any other state.
cmducks (anonymous)
June 5, 2008 at 12:40 p.m.
› Suggest removal
It's odd that many of the same individuals who would argue that banning hand guns to “control” them are the same ones who would vote to legalize pot so that it could be controled better, because as we all know that prohibition in ANY form, doesn't work as well as it should in candy land.
Jimmy_the_One (anonymous)
June 5, 2008 at 4:44 p.m.
› Suggest removal
seeuski: .. I expect that criminality while armed or being convicted of a felony excludes the person from legal ownership.
.. sometimes, but you can thank YOUR nra for working hard to restore firearm rights to certain ex felons in fopa, firearm owners protection act (1986)… I think it involved a wait period of a few years, & then voila! guns back!.. so disabuse yourself from the idea that convicted felons are always excluded from gun ownership!
.. The bar on possession by felons would be narrowed to those convicted of certain “disabling crimes” defined as violations of 23 chapters of [US Code] “or any similar crime.” Persons under indictment were not included within the proscription, nor were persons with convictions “set aside or expunged.” Criminal prosecution would require proof of a willful violation. Forfeiture would require conviction; any verdict other than guilty, or failure to prosecute within 120 days of seizure, would require return of the seized property. Only firearms named and “individually identified” as involved in or used in (not “intended” to be used in) a willful violation would be subject to forfeiture. License revocation would be barred if criminal charges were filed and the licensee was not convicted.
.. Many of these [fopa] changes bear the appearance of a quid pro quo.. most grew out of the early stages of negotiation between the (NRA), the main private supporter of the bill, and Treasury.. http://www.guncite.com/journals/hardfopa…
seeuski (anonymous)
June 5, 2008 at 5:30 p.m.
› Suggest removal
jimmy 2 shoes,
I am not, as you like to call it, a gunnut. You can google search all day long looking for the archived stories of duct taped people killed in VA an MD then dumped in DC and this is what you bring? A parroting 2 hour recital of the gun law ammendments from 1968?
Please!
I am not willing, even though I don't own one, to give up my rights to ownership of a gun if and when I feel threatened.
I wish people like you would spend more energy going after the bad guys that commit crimes rather than blaming the problems on those that follow the rules.
Jimmy_the_One (anonymous)
June 6, 2008 at 6:24 a.m.
› Suggest removal
seeuski: A parroting 2 hour recital of the gun law ammendments from 1968?
.. took you 2 hours to read that brief post? whew, add plain remedial reading to reading comp.
.. fopa was enacted 1986. NRA helped it's passage & fopa restored (alleged) gun rights to certain ex felons (of course they still barred ex violent convicted crims, robbers, murderers, aggravated assaulters).
.. but this is all you can do in reply? aren't you even going to try to weasel your way out of another misconception of yours? in your delusionary gunworld?
seeuski: I wish people like you would spend more energy going after the bad guys that commit crimes rather than blaming the problems on those that follow the rules.
.. specious silliness, it's not surprising you would rather not hear disputing voices which run contrary to your own, you'd rather live in a delusionary world where guns are great guns are good thank you god for your guns amen.
.. since I'm just about the only 'contra-voice' you hear on here, a remark like that suggests you prefer to tapdance around the facts & truth rather than confront them - albeit typical of the gun crowd. I suppose everything I say is lies eh? like st louis? metro areas? montana violent crime tripling? some logical pro gun explanation which nra will fabricate to extricate? eh?
.. oh I know, bring up washington DC, then strut.
StbtWatchmen (anonymous)
June 6, 2008 at 8:46 a.m.
› Suggest removal
MtnWarlock,
There is an eerie reality to what you speak of killing and guns and you speak as though you have experiences. I totally agree with you when you say lets get rid of the idiot first! How do we do that, shoot em! (Joking)! I believe your view. I used guns in my old occupation.
seeuski (anonymous)
June 6, 2008 at 8:52 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Jimmy jimmy jimmy,
Touched a cord did I?
Wheres the duct tape?
As you stated:”.. since I'm just about the only 'contra-voice' you hear on here, a remark like that suggests you prefer to tapdance around the facts & truth rather than confront them - albeit typical of the gun crowd.”
Jimmy you are in the minority and the constitution is against you.
One last time, i do not own a gun.
Just because I believe in our constitutional right to bare arms does not make me your friendly gunnut.
I know it sucks having been called out by another DC native with your cute duct tape stories, so who is bending the truth here?
seeuski (anonymous)
June 6, 2008 at 9:18 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Hey Jimmy,
We made the paper today. They posted the DC crime story on page 24.
Good blogging does work.
Thanks.
JazzSlave (anonymous)
June 6, 2008 at 10:15 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Since Jimmy appears to believe ancecotes=evidence, here are a couple - famous family story:
Some months after I was born, my dad packed mom & me into the family Chevy for a day trip to the mountains.
We stopped at one of their favorite mountain parks. At some point during our stay, a couple of bikers rolled in. Dad could tell they were trouble, so he packed wife & issue into the car. During the load up, one of the bikers encouraged him to hand over “summa that g00k tail” (mom was Asian). The loudmouth biker walked to the car and leaned into the driver’s side window. He found himself looking down the barrel of dad's .357. Loudmouth slowly backed away, and returned to his bike. He and his compadre saddled up and rode off.
No shots fired, no physical altercation, nobody hurt. Just a big stick on display, without comment or bluster.
Less famous family story: when I was in my 20s, I hauled my 1965 Barracuda to a friend's vacant building for storage. The building was a little off the beaten path, in a semi wooded area.
As I pulled in, I saw a couple guys about my age passing a crack pipe back & forth.
I said “hey guys, I hate to tell you - this is private property.”
“F*&* You!” one of them replied, and picked up a piece of rebar.
The other guy was more cautious, and tried to restrain his buddy. Rebar Man wasn't having any. He shook off his buddy and started walking towards me. I pointed my pistol at him (Makarov 9m semi auto). Rebar Man's sidekick was able to talk some sense into him, and off they went.
Once my heart rate & blood pressure had returned to normal, I drove off & found a cop to report it to.
No shots fired, no physical altercation, nobody hurt. Just a big stick on display, without comment or bluster. And no duct tape.
Jimmy_the_One (anonymous)
June 6, 2008 at 10:15 a.m.
› Suggest removal
seeuski: .. called out by another DC native with your cute duct tape stories, so who is bending the truth here?
.. I'm not bending the truth, you're just blind to it, the obvious… “Prof Robt Blecker recorded his interview with a convicted murderer. The murderer robbed and killed drug dealers in Was DC., where he was conscious that there was no death penalty. He specifically did not murder a drug dealer in Virginia because, and only because, he envisioned himself strapped in the electric chair, which he had personally seen many times while imprisoned in Virginia.” http://www.dpinfo.com/ … about half way down this long link. No it does not contend killer brought victims into DC but call up first precinct in DC & ask to speak to a cop, or knowledgeable person, & ask them about my premise.
seeuski: you are in the minority and the constitution is against you.
.. huh? a majority of americans still favor stricter gun control rather than looser.
.. do you contend a complete disconnect between the 'well regulated militia' (clause) and the 'rkba' clause? a complete disconnect, is that what you say?
seeuski (anonymous)
June 6, 2008 at 10:43 a.m.
› Suggest removal
OK Jimmy,
I agree, the death penalty is a deterent.
But……..Where's the duct taped victims you claimed were dragged into the city.
The gun control most Americans like myself favor is to control the criminals who commit crimes with real justice(time should fit the crime and death when capital crimes are involved like child killers).
Although I am in favor of stricter laws on fully automatic weapons like uzis and ak47's.
But I understand the laws will be broken by bad guys through black market purchases so that leaves us with proper justice being meted out from the start and keeping these perps out of society.
justathought (anonymous)
June 6, 2008 at 10:55 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Sorry to interrupt you two but I think it's a lot more like a very loud mouthed minority and a bunch of liberal judges that want to rewrite the constitution to fit their interpretation of what they think it should be. I own guns, I have never shot anyone or used them committing any crime, to be exact I am a law abiding citizen that does not commit crimes (with or without a gun). Should I choose to conceal carry, I will do it legally and get a permit. NONE of you have any damn business trying to take MY rights away! You don't like what criminals are doing with guns, go after them and mind your own business when it comes to law abiding citizens. This crap of making laws for everyone because of the actions of a few has got to stop. Too many of you have your noses in everyone else's business trying to protect us from ourselves, WHY is your way any better than mine other than the fact you think it is? In stead of stricter control over my ownership, try stricter enforcement of the laws you already have or is it just easier for you to feel like your doing something when you put more restrictions on the good guy than it is to prosecute and punish the bad guy?
Jimmy_the_One (anonymous)
June 6, 2008 at 11:08 a.m.
› Suggest removal
.. (to seeuski), what was that about being in the minority, hotshot?: “Over 70% of DC residents .. support the city's strict gun laws and oppose H.R. 3193.”
… “Congressional action to remove effective protection from gun violence ignores the will of the 572,000 DC residents who in large part support the gun ban. … Over 70% of DC residents, the entire DC City Council .. support the city's strict gun laws and oppose H.R. 3193. While we recognize that the Constitution gives Congress a special role in governing [DC], we decry the House action that ignored these facts and was not responsive to the will of the people of the District and its leaders.”
… “H.R. 3193 [lifting DC handgun ban] would end firearm registration requirements, lift safe storage requirements for legally owned firearms, and allow handguns and assault weapons in DC's homes and workplaces. Most guns used in crimes in DC come from other states — almost 60% of traceable guns come from Maryland or Virgin