Alphecca

It makes you wonder when you hear all the police against such laws. Do they forget what the streets are like once they become desk jockeys?

Here's a comment from the Kansas City Star from one of the police chiefs against the bill. "For me, I don’t think guns have ever solved anything," Grover said Thursday. "They create more issues than are ever solved. … I worry about safety of my officers and safety of the general public."

Tell the chief next time his troops get an emergency or domestic dispute call to respond without weapons. Let's see what they can solve without them then.

Funny, but I don't think they will, do you?

ScottG

Scott- most police chiefs are selected politically: not on the basis of 'street cred', but on how well they please the city council or the mayor's office. If the mayor or the city council are Brady Campaign contributors, the chief will be... as ignorant as the one you quote, in fact.

Of course Brady opposes it, she's a criminal herself. Maybe not legally, but morally, for refusing the right of self defense to law abiding citizens.

I have 2 problems with Delaware's legislation.

1) *5* character references? That's a real stiff requirement.
2) Mandatory training classes? These have, historically, been used to *deny* gun rights, by making the classes very expensive, making them available only on undesirable times and places, by having them very infrequently, by having many fewer seats than demand warrants, or by simply not having them at all. The last is a favorite of local police chiefs who want to obstruct the law as long as possible by keeping it in litigation (which they don't personally pay for) and bleeding applicants dry for the legal fees.

Does Washington state have this law? It could have helped this morning in Seattle where at least 6 people have died: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002889577_webshootingside25.html

Read the last story that shows the Mayor and Seattle Police chief were given an award just the day before from "Washington CeaseFire, a gun-safety, advocacy organization for efforts to end gun violence in Washington state".

This is the same police chief who had his gun stolen in 2004: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002141041_chiefgun05m.html

Well sara brady can always move to New Jersey...

K

Bob:

Duly noted. But if you demand a "perfect" bill -- Vermont-style concealed-carry -- guess what: Delaware will never pass it.

Baby steps.

Can the Seattle police chief be held to account for the shootings then? Well, or course not, they don't hold themselves accountable for anything that happens because of their policies. They pass laws against prosecuting themselves.

One armed citizen could have stopped this. Feinstein, Boxer, Schumer et al won't listen. It's the gun itself guilty of the crime.

i've been thinking about the whole "character references" thing, and it's bothering me more and more.

one problem is that the _number_ of references needed can always be cranked up, higher and higher. (where did the number 5 come from, for example? almost everywhere else i've seen this requirement, the number has been 3.) the effect of this is to limit CCW to people with more and stronger social connections -- which, once you crank the number up high enough, seamlessly fades into political connections. that is inherently undemocratic.

another is, what kind of person do you ask for this sort of references in the first place? that's right, a gunny. certainly if you want to keep the friendship, you don't ask anyone who's anti, or to be on the safe side, anyone whose opinion you're not sure of. (would Sarah Brady act as such a reference for any living person anywhere, one wonders? if that person were her own blood kin, would she still consider them as such after the question was asked?) this has the effect of corralling in CCW to the existing social group of gun owners, and by extension, of limiting the expansion of that group by degrees.

put the two factors together, and who have you effectively limited gunnery to? a strongly socially and/or politically connected in-group of people who don't mind guns, at least not in their own hands... sounds like a good-ol'-boy network to me.

and speaking as a political lefty, that's exactly the sort of social in-group i *don't* want to hand a monopoly on guns. no offense intended to anybody.