Licensing of guns has proven to be a boondogle in many locales especially NYC. The process can take many months and has a very low aproval rate unless one's last name is Trump. There are plenty of gun crimes in NYC yet the number of crimes involving licensed guns is minimal. Criminals do not apply for gun permits and attend safety classes. Thus the procedures only apply to the law abiding who need the guns to protect themselves from the urban predator. Blacks are more likely to be crime victims then whites so there is a racial element as well.
There are plenty of other examples of unsafe activities we do not license. There are plenty of deaths in the USA attributable to sex. Pehaps we should require a saftey
course and licensing of sex. This is an insane idea but when one adds up victims and the cost of veneral disease this starts to make sense. However the reason we as a society do not do this is that this would restrict a fundamental Liberty. The notion of going to a singles bar and seeing two potential partners exchange sex licenses is comedic. However in many countries prostitutes are licensed and regularly tested, for disease not vocational knowledge.
There are several cases of religious cults causing death. The more famous are the Branch Davidians and Heavens Gate. We also have a rash of Muslim terror in the USA .
Should we license religion and regulate its expression. Of course not as this also would restrict liberty. There are plenty of examples of far left types being prone to terrorism . Should Ducky have to report to his local police station as a menace to society ? In a sane country Communists like the Duck would be required to report to the local authorities. However, the notion of reasonable scrutiny should place the Duck under watch as a safety hazzard. Similarly, people who communicate with terrorists or advocate Jihad should also be placed under watch.
The argument might turn on ( psycho leftist speech impediment ) "W-ww--ell Beakerkin
those are human activities and not an object. Any object used incorrectly can cause death or bodily harm. People get electrocuted from small apliances but we do not license toasters. People die by the score in biking, boating and cooking accidents but we do not license those activities.
Licensing itself is not a terrible idea if the process does not turn out to be thinly disguised elitism as in NYC or absurd as the locales who only grant a license
to one gun that one took a safety class with. Poe correctly points out there are some people who passed their road tests in a Dodge Dart. Following this absurd logic
one should only be allowed to drive the same Dodge Dart for the next fourty years.
Beamish in 08, Ducky to good use at the Chinese resturant and 167 back in the coffin.
On Deck the Last Poe Gun Myth Reasonable laws do not restrict the rights of Gun owners. Then on Friday to be followed by Poe's conclusions.
Personal note I have decided against the creation of seperate posts for a larger site. The reason I blog is that I am having fun and I enjoy the small community of posters that are like family. I prefer to do book reviews with breaks into current events and an occasional comedy bit. We have not done a comedy post in quite a while and with Mr Beamish inactive we may have to pick up the slack. I have a few drafts Joooodoooo beats Voodoo and a couple of potential classics on the back burner.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
13 comments:
Sam
Guns are a part of life in many parts of America. Not even insane Dr Deanmento tried it in Vermont.
In NY State there is little support outside NYC.
In a National emergency I would be handed a gun as a DHS officer. Oh wait I can't leave the office because I haven't got SEEENSSSSITIVITYYYYY training. Yes
unless one takes an absurd course
one is restricted to office work , leftist lawyers at work.
In a genuine National emergency my coworkers are sent to aid in the recovery and assist FEMA. Confiscation of guns is not even on the agenda.
Beak,
The following is a recent editorial in the WaPo. You might want to make use of it--or not. Anyway, I'm providing it here, although I'm not sure it pertains to this particular blog article:
Boy Shoots Girl
Wednesday, January 25, 2006; A18
AT A DAY-CARE center in Germantown, an 8-year-old boy shot a 7-year-old girl with a handgun yesterday, hitting her in the arm but not killing her. The boy, whose father is a convicted felon with a long rap sheet, had bragged that he had access to guns. But why is it that after years of similar incidents and anguish and debate, the country has yet to enact laws to prevent such tragedies?
In the late 1990s, then-Gov. Parris N. Glendening's task force on gun violence in Maryland pushed for tougher rules mandating safety devices on handguns. In the following years, the state adopted a number of laws -- stronger than most in the nation -- including a requirement that handguns sold in Maryland be equipped with a childproof locking device, and another forbidding people from leaving loaded firearms within reach of unsupervised children. But other regulations -- potentially more effective ones in preventing accidents such as yesterday's -- went nowhere. Most notable was a proposal that guns be "personalized" by incorporating technology restricting a gun's use to its owner, for instance by using fingerprint recognition. In a study published in 2003, researchers led by Jon S. Vernick of the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health examined 117 unintentional homicide deaths in Maryland from 1991 to 1998, four-fifths of them involving handguns. The conclusion: 37 percent of the deaths could have been prevented by a "personalized" gun.
A third or more U.S. households keep a gun at home, often a loaded one, in the belief that it will protect them from intruders who would do them harm. These guns may furnish some people with a sense of personal security, and at times they do safeguard the lives of innocent homeowners. But the pervasive presence of guns in homes comes with a cost; a substantial body of research suggests that households with guns are more likely to be the scenes of suicides and homicides than those without.
More gun safety laws will prevent many incidents, but they won't protect everyone from lawbreakers such as the father of the Germantown boy. Without stricter federal laws on access to handguns, more of these tragedies will occur.
Samwich,
This may come as a shock to some inbred moron too stupid to keep from giving 10% of his income to a cult founded by a racist con artist, but a road is not a pipeline.
Samwitch
There is no plan in DHS to confiscate guns in an emergency. The agency does deal with disaster relief . However the agency did not disarm people in NO.
Believe it or not I can never be sent into the field as I have not taken sensitivity training.
Samwich lives in a bunker made out of old paint buckets waiting for the feddle gubmint to come take his Daisy Red Rider BB gun from his cold, dead hands.
Sam was a sniper in Nam . He is many things but not a couch verteran. We need him to take out as many of the Communo Ducks as possible.
I thought everyone on the internet was a sniper in Nam.
The worst mass murder in Australian history (by Bryant Nartin in 1996 - 36 killed) was commited with a stolen weapon (semi automatic carbine).
The murderer was a retarded (pardon me - intellectually challenged) gentleman who visited his elderly neighbours, killed them and took their weapon to Port Arthur for further fun.
As far as I remember we always had licencing of short firearms in Australia.
Most crimes here are commited with short firearms (semi-auto pistols and revolvers) even though it is virtually impossible to own them.
Licensing and registration of guns are always the first step toward confiscation.
You might want to take a look at This and see who is behind the UN effort to eliminate guns from all civilians.
the UN is worthless.
"He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty, he establishes a precedent which will reach to himself."
--Thomas Paine (1737-1809), conclusion, _Dissertation on First Principles of Government,_1795
GIVE SOMEONE A GUN IF THEY DON'T HAVE ONE!
Storm,
BINGO!
A little know how and simple shopping trips to Radio Shack, Home Depot, Sam's Club, and Walgreens can turn any garage in America into a fucking bomb factory and Samwich is worried someone's gonna yank his slingshot.
Samwich, you dull tool. Anybody's car can take out a city block with a full tank of gas, a few select household chemicals, some creative wiring, and about 2 hours of work.
Any real attempt to physically disarm Americans would end in hellfire.
If your combat experience and historical knowledge exceeded wacking off to Rambo movies, you'd know that.
Post a Comment