Article

2003-05-01 Home Front

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Dar 2003-05-01 09:31 am|| || Front Page|| [11138 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Damn Chaunra Levy!

Posted by Chuck 2003-05-01 09:52:32|| [blog.simmins.org] 2003-05-01 09:52:32|| Front Page Top

#2 I think the difference between DC and Honolulu might be cultural. I suppose it could be all that pineapple, but I think the more time you spend listening to Don Ho clones, the less you feel like being a gangsta.

Posted by Fred 2003-05-01 10:40:48|| 2003-05-01 10:40:48|| Front Page Top

#3 I hate to admit it, but DC is my home town at the moment. 262 murders in one year?! That's nothing. In 1989, when the crack epidemic hit and everyone was fighting to control markets, we reached 500. Those were the days, I tell you.

I wonder if there's such a thing as Don Ho-rap fusion. No, I don't want to think about it.

Posted by Joe 2003-05-01 11:33:15|| 2003-05-01 11:33:15|| Front Page Top

#4 "D.C.: Where only the criminals have guns... "

DC - where all the criminals' guns come from Virginia.

Posted by liberalhawk 2003-05-01 11:45:57|| 2003-05-01 11:45:57|| Front Page Top

#5 What happened to glorious Camden, New Jersey?

Posted by someone 2003-05-01 12:02:26|| 2003-05-01 12:02:26|| Front Page Top

#6 I guess my last comment was redundant because, by definition, having a gun makes you a criminal in D.C.

LH--Yeah, I imagine all the criminals' guns come from VA. They buy them and take them to D.C. because if they use them in VA they might run into a CCL holder who'll put a quick end to their aspiring criminal career.

Posted by Dar 2003-05-01 12:11:13|| 2003-05-01 12:11:13|| Front Page Top

#7 Camden doesnt meet the study's criterion for "major city" ie pop. greater than 500,000. A lower pop cut would have brought in some high crime smaller cities and would have made DC look better.

Posted by liberalhawk 2003-05-01 12:12:05|| 2003-05-01 12:12:05|| Front Page Top

#8 Dar - theres also crime in Virginia.

They buy them in virginia cause its easeir to buy a gun in Virginia. And its easy to bring them into DC. Im not saying gun control works, but you sure cant show that it doesnt from the case of DC.

Posted by liberalhawk 2003-05-01 12:14:35|| 2003-05-01 12:14:35|| Front Page Top

#9 LiberalHawk -" Im not saying gun control works, but you sure cant show that it doesnt from the case of DC. "

You are not saying gun control works becase it is flat not true.

Posted by Hodadenon 2003-05-01 12:31:56|| 2003-05-01 12:31:56|| Front Page Top

#10 Hod - Im not saying it because its a large, complex issue, Im not interested in going into it now, and i dont think this is the place for it.

I stand by my statement that DC with its tiny geogrphic area and close proximity to states with looser gun laws is no laboratory for the effectiveness of gun control.

Posted by liberalhawk 2003-05-01 12:40:32|| 2003-05-01 12:40:32|| Front Page Top

#11 if the population limit is lowered, Gary IN and New Orleans noth have higher murder rates than DC (funny, I dont seem to have heard about tough gun laws in Lousiana) Camden still comes in below DC. The highest in Virginia is Newport News, which is lower than DC or Camden but still comes in higher than cities such as Boston or Minneapolis, both of which i believe have tougher gun laws than Virginia.

Posted by liberalhawk 2003-05-01 12:46:22|| 2003-05-01 12:46:22|| Front Page Top

#12 LH -- I agree to a point. Gun ownership does not end crime, but it puts a dent in it.

Hand in hand with allowing private gun ownership (I shouldn't even say "allowing", because it's a Constitutional right), however, is strict enforcement of reasonable gun laws and punishment for those who violate them. Too many violent criminals are repeat offenders who have been slapped on the wrist and let go to terrorize the public again, and instead of blaming guns or crediting gun control we need to see these perpetrators put away.

Posted by Dar 2003-05-01 12:52:52|| 2003-05-01 12:52:52|| Front Page Top

#13 correction the highest murder rate in Virginia is Richmond - its lower than DC, but not by much.

So much for the budding criminal careers cut down by CCL holders in Virginia - evidently without much effect on the murder rate in the Commonwealth's lovely capital.

Posted by liberalhawk 2003-05-01 12:53:15|| 2003-05-01 12:53:15|| Front Page Top

#14 gun ownership may put a dent in crime - gun control may put a dent in crime. Theres no support for either proposition in the city murder rates we've been discussing.

Posted by liberalhawk 2003-05-01 12:54:52|| 2003-05-01 12:54:52|| Front Page Top

#15 "I shouldn't even say "allowing", because it's a Constitutional right"

A well regulated militia being necessary to the liberty of a free state ....the right of the people to keep and bear arms ...

Its a collective right, not an individual right. Otherwise it would say "no person shall be deprived of the right" or more neutrally "the right to keep and bear arms shall not be abridged" It adhers in the people, in the community, acting together through the militia as in colonial and federal times - in fact right up through the civil war.

Todays national guard is not a community organization the way the old militias were - we have no equivalent of the militis described in the 2nd amendment. The Supreme Court has wisely interpreted the 2nd amendment as placing no limits on the right of states to regulate the private ownership of firearms.

Posted by liberalhawk 2003-05-01 13:02:08|| 2003-05-01 13:02:08|| Front Page Top

#16 And Democrats want to make this the 51st state? Given that felonies forfeit their franchise rights, who would be left to vote?

Posted by ColoradoConservative 2003-05-01 13:20:02|| 2003-05-01 13:20:02|| Front Page Top

#17 OTOH, if someone were to propose armed, part-time, community based law enforcement and civil defense - more of a true militia - id think this a VERY interesting idea, which appealed strongly to the communitarian neo-liberal in me. The WOT seems like an excellent time to at least examine such an idea.

Posted by liberalhawk 2003-05-01 13:21:37|| 2003-05-01 13:21:37|| Front Page Top

#18 ColoradoCon:

Ever been to DC? Theres a huge section of the city "west of Rock Creek Park" where i would wager the murder rate was close to zero. The difference between West of the park and east of the park is not gun laws, but the breakdown of families and communities familiar in many large cities.

Posted by liberalhawk 2003-05-01 13:25:09|| 2003-05-01 13:25:09|| Front Page Top

#19 LH--As you said, this is a complex issue and not the place for it. I won't get into it too much more here to save Fred's bandwidth (for which I've been severely editing my article posts as well). We can take this off-line beyond this if you wish.

The RKBA is a right of the people and is an individual right, as ruled by the Fifth Circuit in Oct. 2001 (affirming what what many citizens knew all along, but nice to have it official).

Secondly, the idea of forming a citizen's militia is to prevent the government from running roughshod over an unarmed populace. Giving only the government the right to form an armed militia then expecting it to protect us from itself is self-defeating.

Thirdly, you're right. I can't just point at D.C. and gun control, and you can't just point at Richmond and gun ownership. There are more factors, social and economic, perhaps even geographic, that contribute to that.

All that being said, the RKBA is, quite plainly, a Constitutional right, and it as important to me as the First Amendment. For the life of me, I can never understand why the Hollywood-types, Micheal Moore chief among them, scream bloody murder about being censored when anyone criticizes their work and claim their First Amendment rights are being violated, then they make it their life's work to tear the heart out of the Second Amendment? Are they aware there's more than one amendment?

In further encouraging news Minnesota is the 35th state to suspend its suppression of that right, and Missouri's Senate is also looking at RTC (right to carry) legislation and will hopefully become the 36th state soon.

Slowly but surely we're getting back the rights that were originally ours to begin with. I can only hope that we're not so irresponsible to let them slip away again.

Posted by Dar 2003-05-01 13:53:08|| 2003-05-01 13:53:08|| Front Page Top

#20 Guys, I have to jump in here....all the talk of gun rights and amendments are overlooking the real issue here. The facts are, where the majority of the population is black, there will be more murders...and there is no denying that or changing that. Look at that part of DC west of Rock Creek...almost all white--no murders. The SE section of DC almost all black, most of the murders. I say, let them kill each other, ignore the problem, just keep them in their sections of town and like they say--No harm, no foul.

Posted by Realist 2003-05-01 14:55:14|| 2003-05-01 14:55:14|| Front Page Top

#21 Liberalhawk - The constitution gives Congress the power to define the militia. Congress uses Title 10 USC to do so. Sec. 311. Militia: composition and classes

(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.

(b) The classes of the militia are -
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

Posted by Don 2003-05-01 16:25:22|| 2003-05-01 16:25:22|| Front Page Top

#22 LH "individuals with guns can easliy turn into of the tyranny" May I suggest a correction? Thank you. "criminals with guns can easily turn into tools of the tyranny."
Of course, criminals that wish to make guns into tools of tyranny need not, and indeed-do not, worry themselves with not having a concealed carry permit. Only the opponents to tyranny worry about having a concealed carry permit. Mabe that's an over-simplification. It makes it sound as if your a propponent of tyranny or an opponent of tyranny, leaving no room for the majority of the population that is in the middle. Like LH, for example.

Posted by Mike N. 2003-05-01 16:52:30|| 2003-05-01 16:52:30|| Front Page Top

07:40 Sunnie
09:31 Raj
07:34 raptor
00:44 tbn
00:27 R. McLeod
00:24 R. McLeod
23:34 tu3031
23:01 tu3031
22:45 Cyber Sarge
22:37 Cyber Sarge
21:51 Alaska Paul
21:41 david
21:35 RW
21:32 Alaska Paul
21:31 Becky
20:56 Frank G
20:51 Frank G
19:36 Larry
19:08 Alaska Paul
17:51 Just John
17:46 Jonesy
17:42 Da_Gunny_Retired
17:25 Anonymous
17:19 Yank