Local Article on "Reasonable" Gun Laws

This is a discussion on Local Article on "Reasonable" Gun Laws within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Here's a link to an article I read in our Sunday paper. I had to wait to post this because I was upset and thought ...

Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Local Article on "Reasonable" Gun Laws

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Array MP45Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    State of Guns and Religion
    Posts
    937

    Local Article on "Reasonable" Gun Laws

    Here's a link to an article I read in our Sunday paper. I had to wait to post this because I was upset and thought it was one sided. Anybody agree with me?
    http://www.pennlive.com/editorials/i...in_reason.html

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    VIP Member Array Guantes's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    5,272
    I would say it is one-sided though it is carefully worded. IMO anyone who agrees with what Chicago does is one-sided.

  4. #3
    Member
    Array Coder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    446
    So many things wrong in this article, but this one is especially nice:
    "...allows state residents to sidestep law enforcement and obtain permits from Florida to carry concealed guns, even if their applications were denied in Pennsylvania. This loophole lets people with criminal backgrounds get out-of-state permits to carry guns in the commonwealth, even after state authorities determine they shouldn’t be allowed to do so."

    Somehow that doesn't jive with the real requirements: http://licgweb.doacs.state.fl.us/weapons/eligible.html
    We're all in favor of reducing violent crime. It's just that pro-gunners have a method that is proven effective. Anti-gunners don't.
    ---
    John Moses Browning day is January 24th, 2011

  5. #4
    Moderator
    Array gasmitty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Gilbert, AZ
    Posts
    10,371
    Quote Originally Posted by MP45Man View Post
    Here's a link to an article I read in our Sunday paper. I had to wait to post this because I was upset and thought it was one sided. Anybody agree with me?
    http://www.pennlive.com/editorials/i...in_reason.html
    Holy cats... this one got my blood boiling. I tried to find a means by which to respond, but was unsuccessful. If MP45Man or any other contributor can find a way to reply to this pollyanna-ish whine, feel free to use any or all of my words:

    by Joe Grace and Phil Goldsmith
    Opponents of commonsense laws to prevent gun violence…

    Already, the author attempts to frame the debate by nonchalantly referring to “commonsense [sic] laws” in an appeal to emotion. The creation of laws calls for intellect and reason, but rarely emotion. We’ve heard “There oughtta be a law…!” so many times Jimmy Hatlo created a comic by that name! But one man’s “common sense” is another man’s anarchy. Let us not be deterred by vague labels.


    However, the court also said clearly reasonable regulations of firearms are permitted under our Constitution. They always have been, and they always will be.
    “Always have been?” Exactly which part of the Constitution describes “reasonable regulations” of firearms? The “well-regulated” term in the Second Amendment refers to “the militia”, and in the language of the time means “well-disciplined.”

    CeaseFirePA believes that reasonable regulations on firearms are necessary to help police get illegal guns out of criminal hands and better protect Pennsylvanians.

    There’s that term “commonsense” [sic] again.
    OK, let’s talk about getting illegal guns out of criminal hands. First, let’s tighten up the language. What exactly is an “illegal gun?” One may legally purchase in Pennsylvania handguns, rifles, shotguns, and even – gasp – machine guns. All subject to state and federal laws, of course, but the only guns which are by themselves “illegal” are those from which the serial numbers have been removed (a Federal offense) and certain shotguns and rifles which, if not properly licensed at time of sale, don’t meet barrel length rules (think “sawed-off shotgun”). Beyond those fairly straightforward rules, there are no commercially-available guns in Pennsylvania which are actually “illegal.”

    So let’s assume that what the authors mean by “illegal guns” are those guns which are obtained or possessed illegally. Stop right there. If a gun is obtained illegally, or possessed illegally, doesn’t that already suggest an illegal activity? Which means that there is already a law in place which has been violated, correct? So do the authors want to make new laws which will make illegal the acts which are already illegal? How does one go about outlawing that which is already prohibited by law? This is the right time to invoke the term “common sense.”

    One reasonable step is a reporting requirement for lost or stolen handguns.

    So some localities have laws mandating reporting the theft of a firearm. How does this after-the-fact action in any way prevent illegal possession and use of firearms? In nearly every jurisdiction in the United States, it is required by law to report a motor vehicle accident. Is this somehow a traffic safety law that prevents accidents?

    While support for the reporting of lost or stolen handguns grows, hundreds of Pennsylvania police chiefs have come out in favor of another reasonable reform to close a loophole in state law that allows state residents to sidestep law enforcement and obtain permits from Florida to carry concealed guns, even if their applications were denied in Pennsylvania.
    This loophole lets people with criminal backgrounds get out-of-state permits to carry guns in the commonwealth, even after state authorities determine they shouldn’t be allowed to do so.

    Ah, the “loophole” problem. If you find that a law of your liking doesn’t exist, quick – label it a “loophole.” Oh, there’s no three-day waiting period to print an Op-Ed article full of mistruths in your local newspaper? Shouldn’t we call that the “First Amendment loophole?”

    Right now, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania recognizes concealed carry permits from not just Florida, but fully twenty-four states in total. Nearly half the United States. This was neither an accident nor did this provision occur in a vacuum. Nearly every state in the Union which issues a concealed carry license requires fingerprinting and a criminal background check including, but not limited to, the FBI. You seem to be focused on Florida, which is fine. So if a Florida resident meets training requirements, submits fingerprints and passes an FBI background check, why on earth should Pennsylvania repeat the same process to allow this US citizen to carry a concealed firearm in PA? Given the statistically insignificant number of violent offenses committed by duly licensed civilians carrying concealed weapons, this is an expensive waste of Commonwealth resources. Pray tell, exactly how widespread is this so-called problem of ineligible Pennsylvanians carrying concealed weapons on a permit from another state? Is there some violent crime prohibited in Pennsylvania that the good ol’ boys in Florida think is maybe just “boys being boys”? Please… be serious.
    Going one step further, how is a concealed carry license from Florida any less valid in Pennsylvania than a Florida driver’s license? Far more people are killed and maimed in the US each year by motor vehicles, which by any scientific measure are far deadlier than guns. But every state in the nation recognizes the driver’s license privilege granted by every other state. How can this be allowed? There is no FBI check on drivers’ licenses, no fingerprinting… isn’t this the “drivers’ license loophole”?


    Gun violence is a serious public health problem in Pennsylvania and across the nation. In Pennsylvania, 1,200 people die every year from gun-related incidents (homicides, suicides and accidental shootings).

    But about 1600 people are killed each year from motor vehicle accidents in PA, which includes vehicular manslaughter, accidents and suicides as well. Where is your concern for “commonsense” [sic] laws about driving?


    In the last decade, 22 police officers have been shot and killed in the line of duty in our state — seven since 2009.
    Nationally, the statistics are just as alarming: 530 police officers killed in the line of duty in the last decade and more than 90 percent of them with guns Accidental shootings take a terrible toll on our children.

    You are absolutely correct in your bounding of the problem with criminal misuse of firearms. But if you look under a better microscope, you will find that the majority of these cases are caused by repeat offenders who have abused the second (and third and fourth) chances they have received from the “catch-and-release” criminal justice system. The violators are not the responsible citizen who exercises his Second Amendment rights.
    (Oh, by the way, 5-gallon buckets are responsible for more accidental deaths of infants than are guns.)


    The City Council immediately drafted a new package of reforms, including a reporting system for lost or stolen handguns.
    Chicago Mayor Richard Daley explained why the city moved so swiftly after the court’s ruling: “Either we enact new and reasonable handgun laws in Chicago to protect our residents — as the council has done — or we do nothing and risk greater gun violence on our streets and in our homes.”

    How ironic that Chicago should be held up as a model for “reasonable handgun laws.” Chicago has one of the highest murder rates of any city in our nation, primarily because it is nearly impossible for a responsible citizen to legally arm himself for protection against criminals. Young or old, rich or poor, black or white, if you obey the law you are unable to legally defend yourself with deadly force if you are attacked with deadly force. Please tell me how this is “common sense.”

    The risk of doing nothing is unacceptable…

    “The risk of doing nothing…”

    This is just rhetoric, ranking right up there with “if it saves just one child…” But if you need action, then direct your focus and attention on the prosecutors who plea-bargain guns offenses down and make them disappear (“oh, they’re so hard to prove”). Hold judges accountable for the social costs caused by releasing violent criminals into the general population with simple probation or early parole. Demand that all the existing gun laws are prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. If you’ve covered those bases thoroughly, then and only then will your cries for more feel-good laws deserve any logical consideration.


    Joe Grace is the executive director of CeaseFirePA. Phil Goldsmith is the board president of CeaseFirePA.
    Smitty
    NRA Endowment Member

  6. #5
    VIP Member Array Eagleks's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    7,724
    I can't comment.... I guess I'm with the "Yawn" comment.... another one who doesn't get it.... and uses dumb comments to argue their point.

    Seven officers killed, and how many of them were killed by law-abiding CCH citizens.... not a friggin one, so they need to use their brain some.
    I don't make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts. --- Will Rogers ---
    Chief Justice John Roberts : "I don't see how you can read Heller and not take away from it the notion that the Second Amendment...was extremely important to the framers in their view of what liberty meant."

  7. #6
    VIP Member
    Array DaveH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    SW Virginia
    Posts
    5,036
    As I have posted many times the antis use the terms "reasonable regulations/laws and "common sense regulations/law" to mean to mean every restrictive anti gun regulations/law that they can get enacted that will stand Constitutional muster. They would see all guns baned, if they could figure out how to do it.

    Remember, one of the key barriers to their success is your involvement in the political fight -- not just elections, not just an occasional letter or phone call on w specific 2A related bill, but also constant monitoring of what is being done, drumming up support for or against bills, appointment, conformations, etc.

    I've spent enough time lobbying and debating these anti-gun folk to know there is no intent to compromise on their part, unless it is to take all that they can get for now and go after more next round.

    The Pro 2A forces have been pulling ahead for a few years now.

    But this is not a sprint.

    This is not even just a marathon.

    It is a relay of marathons -- over generations. A never ending one, in which we need to keep going ourselves and be preparing the next generation to pass the baton to.

    Make no mistake about it. We are in a fight for the survival of 2A. A fight that is far from won. So, don't let down your guard. Join and work with one or more national Pro-RKBA groups, of your choice, and more importantly join and get active with your local grassroots RKBA group.

    Note what he says at the end:

    ...we’re working every day with legislators, mayors, police, faith leaders and citizens to see reasonable [sic] laws enacted....
    There you have it.

    Are you working every day with legislators, mayors, police, faith leaders and citizens to see that unreasonable laws are not enacted or are repealed?
    Μολὼν λαβέ

    I'm just one root in a grassroots organization. No one should assume that I speak for the VCDL.

    I am neither an attorney-at-law nor I do play one on television or on the internet. No one should assumes my opinion is legal advice.

    Veni, Vidi, Velcro

  8. #7
    Senior Moderator
    Array MattInFla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    4,857
    Of course it is one-sided and biased. It is an opinion piece submitted by an anti-gun group........
    Battle Plan (n) - a list of things that aren't going to happen if you are attacked.
    Blame it on Sixto - now that is a viable plan.

  9. #8
    Distinguished Member Array SpringerXD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Southeast
    Posts
    1,996
    Quote Originally Posted by Coder View Post
    So many things wrong in this article, but this one is especially nice:
    "...allows state residents to sidestep law enforcement and obtain permits from Florida to carry concealed guns, even if their applications were denied in Pennsylvania. This loophole lets people with criminal backgrounds get out-of-state permits to carry guns in the commonwealth, even after state authorities determine they shouldn’t be allowed to do so."
    Wow. So Florida doesn't require a background check before issuing a concealed carry permit? Learn something new every day.
    [/sarcasm]

    By the way, "reasonable gun control" is an oxymoron.
    "I practice the ancient art of Klik Pao."

    -miklcolt45

  10. #9
    VIP Member Array obxned's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    OBX, NC
    Posts
    2,655
    It is always interesting to see the ideas of bliss-ninny idiots. They never want to do the simple things to stop gun crimes, like lock up the bad guys and loose the key.
    "If we loose Freedom here, there's no place to escape to. This is the Last Place on Earth!" Ronald Reagan

  11. #10
    VIP Member
    Array DaveH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    SW Virginia
    Posts
    5,036
    Quote Originally Posted by obxned View Post
    It is always interesting to see the ideas of bliss-ninny idiots. They never want to do the simple things to stop gun crimes, like lock up the bad guys and loose the key.
    ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑

    BINGO!

    That and:

    "Someone else is responsible for keeping me safe."

    "Nanny, nanny help me."

    Μολὼν λαβέ

    I'm just one root in a grassroots organization. No one should assume that I speak for the VCDL.

    I am neither an attorney-at-law nor I do play one on television or on the internet. No one should assumes my opinion is legal advice.

    Veni, Vidi, Velcro

  12. #11
    Member
    Array Coder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    446
    Quote Originally Posted by obxned View Post
    It is always interesting to see the ideas of bliss-ninny idiots. They never want to do the simple things to stop gun crimes, like lock up the bad guys and loose the key.
    This is statistically one of the best ways to deal with the problem. But who is looking at facts and statistics?
    We're all in favor of reducing violent crime. It's just that pro-gunners have a method that is proven effective. Anti-gunners don't.
    ---
    John Moses Browning day is January 24th, 2011

  13. #12
    Member Array vietnamvet66's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    329
    I have a question, If you have a 300 to 1500 dollar hwndgun stolen, don't you reportit to LEO so you can get a report for your insurance company? I know I would. It seems to me that the only reason not to report it is selling it and not reporting the sale (already a crime). But thats just me, your mileage may varrry.
    Othher tan that, the rest was slanted at about 85 degrees........
    US ARMY Veteran 1965-1967 Vietnam 1966-1967
    WELCOME HOME TO ALL WHO SERVED, AND FOR THOSE STILL SERVING,
    A BIG THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE. FOR THOSE OF YOU DOWN RANGE
    WATCH YOUR 6, AND KEEP YOUR HEAD DOWN.
    A PATRIOT BELIEVES IN IT....A VETERAN LIVED IT

  14. #13
    GM
    GM is offline
    VIP Member Array GM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    6,866
    Considering the information source, what else did you expect?
    "The Second Amendment: America's Original Homeland Security"

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. "Reasonable Force"
    By Arkatect in forum Carry & Defensive Scenarios
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: April 1st, 2009, 08:33 AM
  2. Some Thoughts on"Reasonable" Restrictions
    By OPFOR in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: March 19th, 2008, 02:20 PM
  3. National Gun Ban "Reasonable"
    By ronwill in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: January 25th, 2008, 04:17 AM
  4. Local NM article on SASS "End of the Trail"
    By Erich in forum General Firearm Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: June 21st, 2007, 02:56 PM
  5. If you're in need of a good laugh, stop by your local mall's "gun store"
    By Bob The Great in forum General Firearm Discussion
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: March 1st, 2007, 06:51 AM

Search tags for this page

denied cch in nc

,

reasonable local gun laws

Click on a term to search for related topics.