Defensive Carry banner
1 - 5 of 5 Posts

· Administrator
50,452 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Gun Control Plan Full Of Holes
By Eric Heyl
Friday, May 20, 2005

Gun owners, beware.
Gov. Ed Rendell's Commission to Address Gun Violence unveiled a report Tuesday recommending extensive restrictions on firearm access in Pennsylvania. The governor formed the panel presumably after becoming concerned that too many homicide victims were being shot rather than murdered in a more humane fashion.

The report already has been mocked by many as an impotent exercise that will do virtually nothing to curb firearm possession or stem gun-related violence. Untrue. If the commission had fired blanks, do you think the Rendell administration would have released the study on Primary Election Day, when it was sure to receive maximum publicity?

The commission's hardline proposals, if implemented, would make Pennsylvania resemble one of those humid countries where only El Presidente's Royal Guard and his closest cousins are armed.

The suggestions the commission either outright recommends or deems worthy of additional discussion include:

A plan by Rendell and various gun control groups to limit personal handgun buys in Pennsylvania to one a month.
That's only 12 guns a year. Think of the profound effect this restriction would have on those of us who typically buy scores of them each year to give away as holiday grab-bag gifts.

Legislation addressing the safe storage of firearms to keep them from children.
Whether to keep loaded weapons in an unlocked game room cabinet near the Xbox is a decision that should be made by parents, not the General Assembly. What the nanny state fails to realize is that children aren't out trying to buy drugs when they are safe at home playing Russian roulette or idly pointing a handgun at a sibling.

Requiring firearms training before a person can get a license to carry a gun.
The learning-impaired and chronically uncoordinated, who might not fare well in such training classes, have as much right as anyone to protect their families and homes.

Disqualifying identified terrorists from possessing firearms.
This restriction would set a terrible precedent. If violent extremists are prohibited from bearing arms, it won't be long before each and every law-abiding, tax-paying, church-going, pistol-packing person in the homeland loses his guns.

Besides, the priority should not be disqualifying identified terrorists from possessing firearms. A much more effective tack would be to disqualify identified terrorists from possessing a pulse.

Barring a person with voluntary mental health commitments from buying a firearm.
This ban would constitute blatant discrimination against anyone with multiple personalities. Just because Armando the Dispenser of Great Wrath occasionally might display violent tendencies, should the more law-abiding characters residing in someone's head be prohibited from buying a gun?

Like virtually every other recommendation in this mind-boggling report, that's just insane.

Eric Heyl is a Pittsburgh Tribune-Review staff writer. He can be reached at [email protected] or (412) 320-7857.

· Banned
693 Posts
many homicide victims were being shot rather than murdered in a more humane fashion.
This seems to mirror a tactic used in Madison by the liberals. If you can show that a product/remark/policy is offensive to a section of a society, then by its very nature it can be controlled as a "hate crime."

Halloween parties for children at school have been stopped. It scares the Hmong children.

Every news worthy arrest of a black suspect by a white cop is protested. Our Taser policy is now being reviewed.

However, this particular story is really a slippery slope. Some jurisdictions have called for 'smart guns' or guns that attach DNA or numbers to bullets as prudent or safe. Ergo, all other guns are dangerous, hence must be removed from society.

When our liberals found out that more black people were being executed for crimes than any other demographic it fueled their protests.

Now if other police weapons can be demonstrated to be used in a "more humane fashion" especially as applied to minority issues' then use of "traditional weapons" may be implications of a hate crime and illegal.

What they cannot secure by law they try to eliminate by vilification.

· Registered
869 Posts
Good one QKShooter, we are always under attack. I was reading the Orange County Register this morning about school children discussing gun control and the teacher was being monitored by the principal of the school. The principal noted that guns in the home kill people etc and made her hand in the form of a gun and pointed to the teacher. She is being canned and some parents took it to be a threat to the teacher...where in the world are we heading here.

· Administrator
50,452 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
It's A Strangely Written Article.

The Tribune Review was the same paper that wrote a really TOTALLY STUPID opinion article predicting all of these terrible things that would happen when the big gun convention was held in downtown Pittsburgh.
Of course, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING happened.

I REALLY CALLED THEM UP AND BLASTED THEM WAY BACK AFTER THEY RAN THAT ONE. I talked to their editor for over an hour on the phone.

He is a sneaky assed [email protected]$tard that is trying to play games with our PA State Constitution.
I trust him less than than I would trust a lion while cleaning out the lion cage with a raw steak stuffed in my back pocket. That is how much I trust Ed Rendell.
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.