|
Alphecca is a member of "the lunatic fringe of the US right" --Guardian (UK) 6/26/06 *******************
Email me at:
gunnut -at- alphecca -dot- com Check it out:
My Latest Blatherings...
Do We Need "Assault Weapons?" DC Congressional Seat Tied To Gun Rights Go Stats Installed Grass Roots & Gun Rights Ch-Ch-Ch-Changes. . . Gun Control Bills Advancing Bye-Bye SiteMeter Gun Rights in Texas KS Bill Would Overrule City Gun Laws Some Good News More on Alphecca and IE 7 More on Giuliani on Gun Control Bloomberg Pushes Pelosi on Gun Control NY: Now it's Bullet Control Trouble Reading Alphecca With IE7? Hit Job on Gun Rights Lawyer WaPo & Guns: A Good Question SCOTUS Review of DC Circuit Could Sidestep Central Issue George Will Warns Dems on Gun Control Meanwhile in Knife-Free Scotland. . . Dell Computer Support Howler of the Day Friday Bear Blogging Idiot of the Day on Gun Rights MO: Bill To Prevent Gun Confiscations Advances Proximity Laws Against Guns? No Slippery Slope? Stuck in Massachusetts Please Welcome... NY: Gov. Spitzer to Promote Hunting?
Care to comment?
Take your best shot:
Note: Comments close-down on posts after seven days.
Yes, I coined the term
"stupid-fucking-computer" Alphecca gets noticed! Check out these GLOWING REVIEWS I've just made up:
|
March 12, 2007Ludicrous Reaction to DC RulingI've always said that people who live in high-crime areas should be the first ones to take advantage of the right to keep and bear arms. In DC that wasn't possible. Now that it might (eventually) be possible, here's a strange reaction by Deborah Mathis from Black America Web:
Uh, Deborah, by your own words you've proven that a gun ban in DC doesn't work. In fact, if you were to view DC in terms of being its own state, your death by murder rate is six times higher than that of Virginia's. Of course, that's not an entirely fair comparison. Large parts of Virginia are rural but with the exception of Richmond, all the other cities in the state have far lower murder rates than Washington DC. Richmond is about equal with DC meaning that the availability of law abiding gun ownership in that city, and the ban on law abiding gun ownership in DC has not affected their respective crime rates. DC residents cannot directly purchase handguns from licensed Virginia gun dealers and Virginia limits handgun sales to one per month. So what does all of that say? It says that something else is at work causing the huge gun crime rates in these cities. Clearly there is a demographic that exists in these two cities (and also Chicago, another high murder-rate city that bans guns) that ignores gun laws and that is steeped in a culture of violence. Broken families, gangs running wild because parents aren't parenting. Perhaps a 'hip-hop' culture? Drugs? I'll leave that commentary for others. Both cities have an african-american population percentage of about 60%. Does that mean anything? Are there are other large cities with such a makeup but lower gun murder rates? I would think so but I don't know for sure. Whatever the cause of such high gun crime rates, it certainly isn't permitting, or not allowing, the law abiding to own handguns. Comments
something gives me a funny feeling that even a centuries long global ban on any object or substance capable of possibly harming a human, would fail to stop the sort of violence perpetrated by Trash/scumbags/ lowlife/ loosers. I also get the feeling that even after a thousand years of continued failure, some people /groups/comentators would still say that the problem was the laws were not written tightly enough or broadly enough. we have plenty of examples of failure of laws to stop shit. To me the failures in western europe effectively disprove the idea of gun laws affecting criminals (but then I never beleived in gun laws in the first place). When I start seeing the crooks using either home cooked or exclusively pre gun law models, then (maybe) i'd think the law was having an effect. As it is, even in the most monitored society the planet has ever had, and one that has had police licencing and seriel no recording of all rifles and pistols for about 86 years and a ban on semi auto rifles for 20 years and on pistols for 9 years... (England & Wales) has run away violent crime and increasing use of handguns AKs etc. Just to give an example of the lengths that cops in britain will go to to harras the non violent, I left this on a comment to Firehand, I don't think he'll mind too much me leaving it here as well: A friend's son had been re-newing his shotgun cert, and the cop who came to visit him asked if he had a criminal record, to which he replied "no", and the cop arrested him. Him and his dad had been prossecuted a couple of years earlier for having a dead sheep that they had not buried (now it would even be illegal to bury it). Anyway, he's been to court for "giving false information in order to obtain a shotgun certificate" £500 fine, six month prison sentance suspended for 12 months, and I'm unsure whether it was to help his case along, but he has also surrendered his shotgun certificate. Effects on violent gun misuse??? but it sends a mesage to the likes of us.... Posted by: Keith at March 12, 2007 08:00 AMIt amazes me how so many cannot understand the simplest of concepts. Bad people are going to do bad things. Passing a million laws will never change that. Duh. I think anyone who can't spell Adrian Fenty's name right, much less calling him "wonderful & brilliant," should be disregarded for the stellar performer she obviously is. Posted by: k-romulus at March 12, 2007 09:35 AMJeff, if the guns really caused the crime then it doesn't matter if a state is mostly rural or not. The best way to determine whether the guns cause crime as the gun grabbing crowd contends is to look at the crimes per capita. The fact is crime is more prevalent in cities but you don't hear for anyone calling for a ban on them. In fact, those who propose gun control are largely the ones who want to do away with private property rights and force people into an urban lifestyle so as to preserve the wilderness from us nasty humans. Posted by: Ron at March 12, 2007 11:21 AMHi Ron, We're back to the correlations, most gun owners are White, male, middle class or above, middle aged or older and Rural. (let's call them "knights") Most armed criminals are black or latino / hispanic, urban, young male and poor. ("kaves") Correlations, guns (pretty obvious, as its guns we're talking about)and male. I don't buy the differences being the causes (race / colour, poor, urban) where I would want a closer look is a set up that allows people to think that they can get away with "knave" like behaviour. Answers on the back of a postcard to.... Keith You hit it on the head--where they think they can get away with it. By virtue of the numbers, the congestion the blending in with the crowd and lack of a "community", crimials thrive in the urban areas, and probably actually congregate there as in a perverted capitalist way. Posted by: ron at March 12, 2007 01:33 PMA 12 year old can buy a long-gun in Virginia? Funny, last I checked you had to be 18 to buy one, under Federal law - though I suppose it's possible, if very unlikely, that Virginia law allows Virginia resident 12 year olds to buy one with parental presence and consent. It's not unlikely that Virginia law allows minors to possess such a firearm, again with parental consent... but that doesn't affect DC at all. Posted by: Sigivald at March 12, 2007 03:49 PMSeem to recall reading that many of the early anti-gun laws were to take guns away from African-Americans.[Friend who's "A-A" hates that term; he says call him Black - or an American!] Could someone provide some details? Posted by: OldeForce at March 14, 2007 12:59 AMHi Oldeforce, You've given me an interesting idea, which is to have a look to see what laws britain put on the Irish, who were treated as almost sub human, and distrusted for their religion and frequent rebellions. DC gun ban advocates love to carp about criminals crossing the bridge over the Potomac to obtain guns in Virginia. What they don't talk about quite so often is how criminals cross the several bridges over Rock Creek within DC that separates the dangerous (East) neighborhoods to prey on citizens in the stable (West) neighborhoods. That's exactly what happened last summer when three thugs crossed the Q Street bridge, slashed the throat of a young man and sexually assaulted his date at gunpoint. They fled using the exact same route. Police, of course, could patrol or simply station officers at those few bridges to nab fleeing suspects -- but they won't. At the community meeting after that murder, the police captain explained that would amount to racial profiling. When I asked him what West side citizens could do to defend themselves in situations like that, he advised never to resist and that wearing a whistle around one's neck at nighttime was the best idea. Days later, a jewelry store was robbed on the main West side street at noon on a Saturday. Guess which way the robbers fled? Type 1339 27th Street, NW, Washington, DC into Google maps and you'll can see the obvious answer. Posted by: Jim McCarthy at March 15, 2007 01:55 AMthe comment input form disappears. Your comments are welcome. You don't need to enter a URL and you don't need a "valid" email address, either. Note though that MT Blacklist is installed to flag suspiciously spam-like strings. Unfortunately, because of the bastard spammers, the strings "google.com" and "yahoo.com" (even in your email address) are currently banned as well. So are strings such as "cialis" (a common spam) which rules out words such as "socialism". Try putting a hyphan in a word like that. By Golly, you're reading an archived post. Click Here to head to the main page and read current stuff...Into science fiction? Check out my group blog novel, Colony: Alchibah. See the reader's guide there for first-timer tips. |