Catches .22 and .45

Much ado was recently made over the Supreme Court decision to lift Washington D.C.'s ban on handguns- perhaps it was all for naught...the new law went into effect this morning and almost nobody cared...three hours into the new era of legalized guns, only one person had bothered to show up to register their gun- the aptly-named Dick A. Heller, the same man who sued the District for the right to pack heat in the first place. He was turned away because he failed to bring his guns with him, apparently he was under the impression that he would be arrested for possessing an unregistered handgun. A D.C. police spokesperson assured him and others that this wasn't the case, but there is another catch, one that would put a smile on the face of Dick's namesake, Joseph Heller.

D.C. residents can only legally register guns that are purchased in their home District- and there are currently no licensed gun vendors in DC, so there can't be any legal sidearms. The police have granted a six-month amnesty period so that owners of formerly illegal weapons can register them, but said owners will have to submit their weapons for ballistic tests to determine if they have been used in unsolved crimes and , in addition, they will have to take a written gun-proficiency test (in my opinion, they should also have to pass a shooting test) and face the possibility that their handgun gets confiscated if it violates DC's still-intact ban on automatic weapons.

Not surprisingly, DC residents have overwhelmingly opted to keep their guns cocked, locked and illegal rather than submit to the labyrinthine registration requirements and somewhat counter-productive regulations.

The new law includes strict storage requirements that opponents of the handgun ban say violate the Supreme Court ruling.Gun owners must keep their pistols at home,unloaded and either disassembled or equipped with trigger locks.Weapons can only be loaded and used if the owner reasonably believes he or she is in imminent danger from an attacker in the home.

I understand the reasoning: it's not safe to leave loaded guns where kids can get to them. Duh.
But those regulations render the guns useless for self-defense purposes. Last night I saw what I thought was one of my cats on the windowsill- it turned out to be a stranger peeking into my living room! I (stupidly) rushed to the front door and tried to catch the peeper- who fled- and it wasn't until a minute later that it occurred to me that I was unarmed and could have been leaping into danger. The voyeur saw me coming, so it's very unlikely that he would have stood still long enough for me to unlock and load my pistol and shoot him through the open window-as it was, I didn't even have time to grab a sledgehammer. Luckily for me, peepers are not very brave and I didn't need a gun but if it had been a home invader, I wouldn't have had time for assembly and loading, I'd have been better off with a baseball bat- a good choice of weapon for a poor shot such as myself.



I don't scoff at the idea of having to kill someone inside my home. A couple of years ago, a business friend of mine -along with her husband and children- were tortured and murdered by home invaders inside their quiet suburban house in broad daylight - that murder changed something inside me. If I see someone I don't recognize in my house I will hurt them as badly as I can and ask questions later because there are situations in which you don't get a second chance...knowing my friend and her husband, I imagine that they tried to reason and plea with their killers and that, obviously, didn't work. I hate guns and I loathe violence, but I'm not a pacifist, so stay the fuck off of my porch unless I know you.



If you kill someone I know, don't expect me to hold a candle during your execution.



**************************************



MORE BAD NEWS



My Twin lives in Chicago and I sometimes entertain the idea of moving there- but it's getting very dangerous. Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich has just offered to bring the National Guard into urban Chicago to halt the epidemic of violent crime brewing there- one recent Chicago weekend saw 36 shootings, including nine murders, and Chicago Public Schools officials say that over two dozen students have been killed by guns since last September. Over two dozen kids...why hasn't that gotten any significant national coverage? I'm guessing that none of the victims were white and/or wealthy. Just a guess...

Melt The Guns

From the Virginia Declaration of Independence, drafted by George Mason in 1776:

That a well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms,is the proper, natural,and safe defense of a free state;that standing armies,in time of peace,should be avoided as dangerous to liberty;and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to,and governed by,the civil power.

It is a bleeding shame that this exact wording was not used in the United States Constitution, especially the part about avoiding standing armies during peacetime. This caveat against standing peacetime armies was echoed in Dwight D. Eisenhower's famous White House farewell speech, in which Ike outlined the rise of the "Military-Industrial Complex". He, like Mason, warned of the dangers inherent in maintaining a large, standing military force during times of peace. President Eisenhower feared that such a force would inevitably lead to endless wars, war being neccesary for the care and feeding of the MI Complex and the well-being of the war-profiteers. One need look no further than Iraq to see the consequences of ignoring Mason and Eisenhower.

The United States Constitution is worded thusly, (emphasis added):


A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,
the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Five radical Supreme Court Justices recently interpreted the phrase "well regulated Militia" to mean: "people who live in Washington D.C." Sadly, this sets precedent for the overturning of long-established local and regional anti-gun laws currently on the books, such as those in Chicago, San Francisco, New York and even here in Virginia. All of those gun-control laws were passed in response to alarming rises in the incidence of gun-related violence and crime, including an assassination attempt on Ronald Reagan.


A number of factors play important roles in the data shown in this chart, courtesy of the FBI:

1) The passage of local, municipal and state-wide measures to limit the availability of handguns.

2) The national Brady Bill, requiring a waiting period and a background check when an individual purchases a handgun.

3) The soaring peacetime prosperity of the Clinton era. As our economy sinks, people are becoming increasingly desperate and are turning to crime- robberies in paricular- in a last-ditch, hopeless effort to make ends meet.

Below is a chart of America's budget deficits and surpluses. Note that the annual number of gun crimes rises and falls in tandem with the national budget- during prosperity, the incidence of gun crimes falls...as the deficits grows larger, so do the number of gun-related crimes. It's what an expert would refer to as a "no-brainer".

As of this writing, America is in dire financial straits. For many citizens, jobs are scarce, gas is a luxury and healthcare is non-existant. Violent crime- especially robberies- is on the rise. The Supreme Court believes that throwing guns at the problem will solve it, if every citizen is packing heat, everyone will be afraid of everyone else and our shared fear of death by shoot-out will magically protect us all. There is nothing in the statistical or historical record tos support that assertion- but the link to poverty and violence is well-documented. Offhand, I'd say that the best way to protect ourselves from gun-weilding maniacs and thieves is to eliminate the causes of crime- raising the national standard of living would be a good start.



Have you ever been cut-off in traffic by a careless driver who neglects to use their turn signal? Has anyone ever pulled out in front of you without looking both ways?
This is where the Virginian wording comes into play- "trained to arms". The Supreme ruling allows untrained laypersons to keep guns lying around their home. If you don't know how to use a weapon, it can't protect you, it can only harm you. I'd wager that by this time next year, we will see a marked increase in people who are killed by their own guns, either by accident or after said gun is taken away by a thief and used against the owner. And, of course, there are children. Children shouldn't play with guns, but they will if they can.

Why not just issue a snub-nosed .38 with every Social Security Number, retroactive to at least 1966 ?
(I want my free gun. It will help me with my road rage issues.)


What could possibly go wrong ?