August 18, 2006
Gun Control Idiocy
The Seattle PI reported on the press conference of one of the survivors of the Jewish Federation shooting. PI Article.
"A pregnant woman who survived last month's deadly shooting at the Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle said that she trusts authorities to decide whether accused gunman Naveed Haq lives or dies.
"I'm really happy not to make that decision," Dayna Klein said Thursday at a press conference held in Seattle's Hotel Monaco."
Not apparently wanting to appear judgmental, she did go on to mention that, "...and to push for a renewed interest in gun control. She also said she believes local businesses need to provide emergency response training for their employees. Klein said that the training she received while volunteering for the American Red Cross saved her life."
If she or any of the other women that were victims of this islamist terrorist had a firearm they may have been able to protect themselves. Terrorists prefer unarmed victims, Ms. Klein apparently is more interested in enabling terrorists than being willing stand up to them.
She did a remarkable thing when she was in the situation, but she and her co-workers were at the mercy of a man that hated Jews and had a gun, he could have just as well had a bomb, or even a 2x4 to kill these Jews he hated.
Perhaps in addition to getting training in emergency handling, some of these people could get training in firearms. Then rather than having to wait for emergency responders they could take responsibility for their own safety.
Posted by SCarnahan at August 18, 2006
12:26 AM | Email This
I saw snippets of that interview, too, on Channel 13- the Tacoma station.
Gun Control? Where did that lady grow up? It wasn't guns that targetd the Jewish center by a person studying to be a Christian but reverted back and went on a rampage in the name of Allah.
Even with gun control, this person would have had an easy time carrying out his act.
And so the beat goes on, the War on Terrorism can be won by --- yep, Gun Control.
I empathize with this poor woman, as most people in Seattle do. We have always thought things like this happen in other cities, not ours.
With that said, gun control would not have stopped this from happening, as the earlier writer said; he could have used anything as a weapon. People seem to forget that the first thing Hitler did was disarm the German citizenry, before he exterminated the Jews. My prayers go out to all those people, and I would be more then happy to help pay for them to receive proper gun training.
3. It's like I always say, a criminal is not going to to say, "Darn they made my 9mm illegal today. I guess I cant go rob the bank now."
Everyone always complains about infringements on various Constitutional Amendments, except for gun ownwership.
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.
State of Washington Constitution, Article 1, SECTION 24 RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS.
The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself, or the state, shall not be impaired, but nothing in this Section shall be construed as authorizing individuals or corporations to organize, maintain or employ an armed body of men.
It would seem to me that laws designed to make it very difficult for legal citizens to lawfully own a gun fall into the "infringe" and "impair" categories.
(I read or saw this somewhere) - Set a gun on the table and then sit down and watch it. No matter how long you sit there, that gun will not get up and shoot anyone.
With rights come responsibility. If you misuse the rights you have and harm or threaten to harm others, you can and should be punished pursuant to the law.
On a satirical note, why does it seem that the fire poker is the most common murder weapon in TV shows? Why don't we have a ten day waiting period to buy a fire poker? Why isn't there a fire poker registry? Why don't fire pokers need to be locked up?
We already outlaw murder and there are people that ignore those laws. Why do we think that inferior laws will make more of an impression on these people than the murder laws?
5. Also, look at what happened in Britain during their little no gun even for the police experiment. Crime didn't go away it increased. Instead of criminals fleeing from the seen of the crime they could casualy walk away, because the police were disarmed by the laws yet not the criminals.
People need to be educated that they do not have to allow themselves to be victims of rabid humans. Self protection means just what it says, SELF protection. All too often people try to blame other things as a reason for violence instead of the violence itself. We live in a violent society, lets face reality and start educating people to be a bit more self reliant especially for their own personal protection.
I cannot understand why not one person was armed in a building that housed an organization who is a high profile and obvious target for rabid human terrorists. These people represented an entity that is at war with a terorist organization, I mean what are they thinking? Didn't a bell go off somewhere telling someone that they may be a target? They went to the extent to have a password protected door lock system but nobody had the forethought to take their personal protection seriously?
It seems to me that Ms. Klein should be more concerned why her supervisors did not warn her about the dangers involved working for an organization who's faith/country was at war with terrorists and why she was not given the opportunity to obtain training to protect herself or at the minimum have someone on the premise trained and armed.
She has a renewed interest in gun control but I wonder what her story would be if it was a baseball bat or an axe. An unarmed person against someone weilding a baseball bat or an axe would not be pretty either and could have had the same results as a person with a firearm. Would she still be blaming the bat?
Violence is the issue...not the tool used.
A well regulated Militia comma being necessary to the security of
a free State comma the right of the people to keep and bear Arms
shall not be infringed period
1) A well regulated Militia
2) being necessary to the security of
a free State
3) the right of the people to keep and bear Arms
shall not be infringed
Note clause three is not inclusive in clause one. In other words the right to keep and bear is not dependent on the militia. They are independent.
Also the bill of rights is replete with "the right of the people" i.e. an individual right.
The right to keep and bear is an individual right, any other interpretation is grammatically ignorant, historically incomprehensible, and antiethical to this Republic.