Decision or Collision

It yet another example of the non-existant leftwing bias in the media, the Washington Post puts out this turd of an editorial.
Found @ Ravenwood's Universe

"In yet another offensive encroachment on the ability of District residents to make their own decisions, a key member of Congress is pushing to strip away gun and ammunition control protections that have been on the city books for 27 years."

Exactly what choice that is being offered to the 'residents' now will be 'stripped away? Whatever you think they are, they sure aren't protecting them now, bubba. Sounds to me like they will actually be given the choice of something more than just a pointy stick.

"Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah) is ready to let the city become an armed camp in the name of self-defense -- an idea that chills law enforcement officers on the front lines and surely heartens criminals, who now take to the streets to find guns to steal or buy and who would leap at the prospect of finding ready supplies in homes, stores and the coat pockets and purses of citizens."

I notice that you finally called the people 'citizens'. And I'm sure you have quotes from law enforcement ready to prove your 'chilled to the bone' remark, right? While you're looking those up, you can get me the stats on how many criminals are in favor of people walking around armed.

"This isn't the first time that semiautomatic mouthpieces of the National Rifle Association and other firearms lobbyists have attempted to scrap the gun safety law enacted by the locally elected government."

Oh, you mean those 'gun safety laws' that have caused the city to become 'The Murder Capitol of America'

"But the leadership of Mr. Hatch and a growth in the ranks of arm-the-citizens lawmakers could mean open season on District residents who have no self-defense against the summary judgments of Congress."

I really doubt the citizens would mind being armed, seeing as how they are now in open season to cretins who are even lower than polticians.

"Mr. Hatch, whose bill had 18 co-sponsors at last count, says congressional repeal of the District laws -- including a loosening of the city's definition of a machine gun, which would free up a whole flow of semiautomatic weapons now banned -- is needed to underscore constitutional gun rights."

I'm sure your definition of 'machine gun' is pretty close to your definition of 'assault weapon' and relies on looks, not function. And I'm also pretty sure that the correct word in that last sentance should have been 'restore' not 'underscore'.

"In 1999, when the House of Representatives failed to enact national gun control legislation that included repeal of the District protections, pro-repeal lawmakers made similar arguments."

You ain't seen nuthin' yet.

"At that time, nearly half the guns used in District crimes turned out to have been purchased in neighboring states -- 23 percent in Virginia and 20 percent in Maryland. The best way to dry up this supply of guns would be for Congress to enact a federal law extending the District protections to Maryland, Virginia and all other states."

Federal law extending District protection? Hmm. Sounds like 'Gun Control' to me. All other states, huh? That sounds like it includes my state and the person who is reading this' state. All that just so the crime rate in D.C. will go down? Haven't you ever heard of the term 'Act Locally'? Clean up your own back yard before you start looking at mine.

"Metropolitan Police Chief Charles H. Ramsey's gun recovery programs continue to yield arsenals of high-powered weapons -- more than 1,000 so far this year."

High-powered according to whom?

"As he said in 1999, "Anytime you get guns off the street, several people's lives have been saved." The people of the District have chosen not to load up their city with firepower; Congress ought not overturn this sensible local decision.

I like how you tied your statement to the end of the Chief Ramsey quote. Makes the reader have to watch the quotation marks. That was very clever. You made it seem as if the chief thinks that the citizens actually have a chioce for protection and are just not taking it, when it was actually your statement.

If I am ever harmed or robbed in a location where I cannot take a firearm, I plan on sueing every person and group that was involved in making it illegal to take my gun there. I will be relentless. You all think you are having a good time while doing a good deed? Wait until I drag your asses to court for conspiring to deny me my civil rights.

Would I win a case such as that? Probably not.

But I might.

Your first amendment right does not allow you to run roughshod over my second. And I will make you spend as much money as I am able until you realize that you are killing innocent men, women and children.

Think, if I were able to find 20 people who had been affected by the Brady Foundation. I am not speaking of a 'class action' suit. I'm speaking about 20 different cases in 20 different states. All of them costing the Brady Bunch $100 an hour in lawyers fees. What fun that would be. And all I would need is for one of them to make it past the first court.

I think we'd see how they liked it.

Posted by AnalogKid at July 26, 2003 05:19 AM | TrackBack