Showing posts with label criminal. Show all posts
Showing posts with label criminal. Show all posts

Friday, June 19, 2015

Firearms Friday: Here We Go Again


Another tragedy, another barbarous act, another opportunity for politicians to further their agenda. As has been the case many times over in recent years, in the wake of a murderous rampage by a deranged individual, the President took advantage of the situation and promoted his gun control agenda. And it was not a side note buried in a mountain of words, it was front and center, prominently on display… opinion inserted into the limited facts known by officials at the time.

“I’ve had to make statements like this too many times. Communities like this have had to endure tragedies like this too many times. We don’t have all the facts, but we do know that, once again, innocent people were killed in part because someone who wanted to inflict harm had no trouble getting their hands on a gun. But let’s be clear: At some point, we as a country will have to reckon with the fact that this type of mass violence does not happen in other advanced countries. It doesn’t happen in other places with this kind of frequency. And it is in our power to do something about it.”

While heinous events such as the one in Charleston are leveraged for the sake of naïve political ideology, the facts at the end of the day are quite simple. This was a mass killing by a disturbed individual who, given his previous indictment, was illegally in the possession of a firearm. While there are various theories as to how he obtained it, if he was aided in acquiring that weapon in any way, those individuals should be held responsible for their actions in assisting in the perpetration of the crime.

Criminals will always find a way to carry out their evil acts. No amount of regulation or control will ever stop this from happening. As President Reagan wrote in 1983 (after the attempted assassination by Hinkley two years prior), “It’s a nasty truth, but those who seek to inflict harm are not fazed by gun controllers. I happen to know this from personal experience.If you believe otherwise you are delusional in your utopian thoughts.

Of course, this is coming from a former President who was also an NRA member. Furthermore, he was known to have carried a revolver on at least several instances while in office as was recently noted by Brad Meltzer and previously reported by Ron Kessler in his book “In the President`s Secret Service”, However, lets look more closely at the beliefs held by those who appose the Second Amendment. While this article is nearly 40 years old now, it still holds true today. Here is an excerpt from an article published by then Governor Reagan in the September 1975 issue of Guns & Ammo:

There are those in America today who have come to depend absolutely on government for their security. And when government fails they seek to rectify that failure in the form of granting government more power. So, as government has failed to control crime and violence with the means given it by the Constitution, they seek to give it more power at the expense of the Constitution. But in doing so, in their willingness to give up their arms in the name of safety, they are really giving up their protection from what has always been the chief source of despotism--government.

The issues in this country are not in the rights that have been granted to the citizenry, the problems are in the individuals. This includes those who refuse to accept others as equals, those who don’t respect that sanctity of human life, and those who fail to fear the overindulgence of power. These issue are not the burden of law abiding citizens who believe in self-sufficiency and personal responsibility. This is not a time to strip people of their rights (especially while there are attempts to expand the rights of others). One person committed this act (potentially with the assistance of others) and that person / those people are the ones who should burn for this!

Tuesday, September 9, 2014

What Happens In Atlantic City, Stays… On The Front Page


According to the Atlantic County, New Jersey prosecutor it is better to intentionally beat your wife than to accidentally carry a firearm into the state. Something seems a little off with that logic. I don't know what but there is something that doesn't quite make sense. Oh, that's right, one is a crime and the other was an innocent mistake. But recent events have proven that delusional fact as the cases of Ray Rice and Shaneen Allen have caught the attention of the media and the public at large.

In the case of NFL running back, excuse me, former NFL running back, Ray Rice he was caught on camera knocking out his then fiancé, now wife, inside an elevator at a hotel in Atlantic City seven months ago. While most of this is fairly recent new, the case has, in fact, been going on for months. As it turns out, New Jersey Superior Court Judge Michael Donio and New Jersey District Attorney Jim McClain agreed to put him in a diversion program for 1st-time offenders to keep him out of jail. That’s right, he may not be playing in the NFL at the moment but he also isn’t sitting in a jail cell like he should be.

On the complete opposite end of the spectrum, the New Jersey judicial system hasn’t been as understanding with Shaneen Allen. From The Huffington Post (yes, the Huffington Post):

Allen, a mother of two from Philadelphia, was driving in New Jersey last fall when she was pulled over by a police officer. She informed the officer she had a handgun in her purse and a Pennsylvania license-to-carry permit, at which point the officer arrested her and charged her with a felony for unlawful possession of a weapon, because New Jersey does not recognize out-of-state gun permits.

Allen tried to avoid a trial and jail time by applying to a pre-trial intervention program in New Jersey for first-time offenders… But Atlantic County prosecutor Jim McClain, the same prosecutor who allowed Rice to avoid prosecution, denied Allen's application to the program…

Without question, she should have known the law but the dichotomy in the judicial system seems a bit out of whack. While one is a famous football player making millions of dollars and the other is a single mother trying to protect herself and her children, the same opportunity should be given to each of them. As it stands, the prosecutor and judge seem to think that gun owners, however innocent and naïve they may be, are flat out criminals who don’t deserve a second thought while a little boy (I can’t call him a man because of what he did) who knocks out his fiancé deserves a second chance.

I don’t remember reading about “life, liberty, and the pursuit of your wife into the elevator so you can beat the crap out of her”. Did I miss that passage? Was a recent amendment passed? However, I do recall the second amendment which many seem to have forgotten. Interesting how that works.