Alphecca

I responded to Mr. Ferrick's piece as follows:

Mr. Ferrick,

I believe I’ve e-mailed you before on this topic after one of your columns.

Again, I share your desire to reduce the bloodshed and mayhem in areas like Kensington and the South West.

However, you do not seem to grasp the fundamentally flawed nature of your proposed course of action.

I understand the strong desire to ‘do something’. However, when that something – A) will not work and B) infringes on the rights and liberties of the people - it must be rejected.

There is, regrettably, much wrong with your argument. Time permits me only to discuss two of those things.

First, when Rudy Giuliani became mayor, New York City had a horrific crime problem - worse perhaps than we’re currently experiencing. However, as far back as the 1970’s, NYC had draconian gun control laws.
These laws did not change appreciably during Giuliani’s tenure. Thus, it was NOT gun control that brought New York City to #140 on the list of most violent cities for 2004 (1). It was the innovative law enforcement strategies that Giuliani and his police chief William Bratton initiated and stuck to - in the face of opposition - that got NYC’s violent crime rate down. Oddly enough, we had one of Bratton’s protégés, John Timoney, here in Philadelphia, but John Street wasn’t able or willing to keep him and implement his ideas.

Second, it’s not about guns. You know that. That’s what makes your polemics so irritating. There are over 30,000 holders of permits to carry concealed weapons in Philadelphia. With the political bent of the Mayor, Police Commissioner and your employer, it is literally inconceivable that if these permit holders were committing gun-related crimes we wouldn’t see it splashed all over the front page of both the Inquirer and Daily News. Thus, it is likely the case that these people walking around with guns all over the city have a gun-crime rate that is just about ZERO. So if it’s not about guns, what’s it about? It’s about gun running – currently a felony in Pennsylvania. How will another law affect those who don’t obey the laws already on the books? How is this going to fix the problem? When asked, you respond, “It’s a start.” A start to what? Where’s the end point? Questions like this are what have pushed NRA membership up over 4 million.

You seem keen to implement 'one-gun-a-month'. Let us consider Washington, D.C. Surely, here is a utopia. For all intents and purposes, handguns are banned in our nation’s capital. But, the violence continues. How can this be? Ah, it must be Virginia’s fault. So, in a situation closely analogous to ours, Virginia passed, in 1993, a 'one-gun-a-month' law to help D.C.’s crime problem. Still, in 2004, D.C. was #8 on the list of most violent cities in the U.S. (1) – with a BAN ON HANDGUNS!!! Interestingly, Virginia has exempted gun collectors and those who have a concealed carry permit from the 'one-gun-a-month' law – a tacit admission that guns aren’t the problem. More interestingly, due to a quirk in VA law, the OPEN CARRY of handguns is permissible in VA. Thus, we have on one side of the Potomac people able to walk around with guns on their hips and on the other side a ban on the possession of handguns. Ask yourself which side is safer. Another enlightened state, Maryland, passed 'one-gun-a-month' in 1998. After six years, Baltimore was the #5 most violent city in the U.S. (1). South Carolina recently repealed their 'one-gun-a-month' law because they realized it hadn’t worked as advertised.

We both know that the real problem cannot be discussed because it is politically incorrect to do so. If we ask, out loud, why the people in our neighborhoods act like savages, there will be an avalanche of accusations of racism. But, we both know, also, that race has nothing to do with it: the U.S. has vibrant and growing black middle and upper classes. And it’s not about socio-economic status, either: the VAST majority of the residents of the afflicted neighborhoods, though poor, never shot anybody. It is about the culture that has been allowed to permeate these neighborhoods; a culture that glorifies violence, reinforces stereotypes and makes guns into fashion accessories. Unless and until the people in these neighborhoods decide to repudiate this culture and rejoin the rest of the city in the 21st century, nothing will change. N-O-T-H-I-N-G. Most appalling is that you, your editors and the political leadership of this city know this and refuse to tell these people the truth. To continue to tell them that the government is going to fix their problems is nothing short of criminally negligent.

I and people like me will not permit you and the cowards who run this city to abrogate our rights so that you can vacuously claim that you’re doing ‘something’ about the problem of violence in Philadelphia. It’s not much, but Harrisburg’s is the only adult supervision this city gets – and if your column is any indication, it seems they’ll be stuck providing that supervision for years to come.

Most sincerely,

John F. Wolfington