Blame the Gun

Ξ August 14th, 2007 | → 0 Comments | ∇ Guns |

Published Monday August 13, 2007

Tougher gun laws go before council



The Omaha City Council is being asked to support Mayor Mike Fahey’s push for stiffer local gun regulation. (Once again, blame the gun not the criminal.)

The council is expected to consider an ordinance today that makes three changes to existing gun rules. If approved later this month, those changes could take effect as soon as mid-September.

Under the proposal, the city code would be altered to allow any person of any age to be prosecuted for giving a gun to a minor. Currently, only adults can be punished for providing weapons to minors. (I’m sure this will stop gang members from stealing guns and using them in committing a crime.)

Another change would mandate that all guns used in crimes be destroyed. The city code now calls for those weapons to be confiscated but not destroyed. (Let me get this straight, if my gun is stolen by a criminal and he robs someone, the evil gun must now be destroyed so it—the gun—- can never rob again. What if my car is stolen and used to rob a bank, should it be destroyed as well so it—the car—will never rob again?)

City Prosecutor Marty Conboy said people now may ask for guns to be returned to them if another person uses their weapon in a crime. The case has to have made its way through court for the gun to be given back, he said.

Additionally, the city code would be changed to increase the penalty for second-offense minor in possession of a weapon to six months in jail. The current maximum penalty is 30 days.

Fahey announced Friday that he would ask the council to make those changes. They are part of his larger plan to stop gun violence. In addition to the city code changes, Fahey has said he wants more police in problem areas and surveillance cameras in places where violence is recurring.

The city has experienced a wave of shootings since July. Thirty-one people were shot in July; one of them, an 18-year-old, was killed. This month, an additional seven people have been wounded and one man killed in shootings. (…and not one of these additional laws would have prevented these killings.)

The changes to the gun ordinance are expected to come up for a public hearing at the council meeting Aug. 21, and they could be approved Aug. 28. If that happens, the changes would go into effect Sept. 12.

The proposed changes were drafted by City Attorney Paul Kratz at Fahey’s request.

“We wanted to get this on the agenda as soon as possible,” said Fahey’s chief of staff, Paul Landow. “I can’t imagine there would be any members on the council who won’t support it.”

Councilman Franklin Thompson said Friday that he had some questions about the changes Fahey called for. Thompson said Monday he wanted to further investigate the planned changes, but said he would probably support them.

“I’m leaning toward supporting the mayor on this,” Thompson said.

Councilman Chuck Sigerson said he generally supports Fahey’s proposals to help stop the shootings but said he will closely scrutinize the city code changes to ensure they don’t encroach on the rights of legal gun owners.

“I want to make sure we are going after the guns and the people that need to be gone after,” Sigerson said. (Hey Chuck,

Councilman Jim Vokal said he will support the changes, while Councilman Garry Gernandt says he is leaning in that direction. 

(Bottom line with stupid politicians, “we’ve got to do something” even if their “solution” is totally ludicrous and doesn’t address the problem of unbridled crime and gangs running the streets.)

“We’ve got to do something,” Gernandt said. “If there are loopholes that need to be closed, then we should close them.” (Why don’t you ride a unicycle and juggle bowling pins, that’ll do  just as much good!)


To Believe in Gun Control, One has to Believe….

Ξ May 2nd, 2007 | → 0 Comments | ∇ Guns |

It’s amazing what one has to believe
to believe in gun control

by Michael Z. Williamson

That incidents where people shoot criminals in self defense are very rare, and shouldn’t be used as excuses to own guns, just as incidents where presidential press secretaries are shot are very rare, and shouldn’t be used as excuses to ban guns.

That guns are the real cause of crime, but we will blame and jail the owner of said gun for the crime, even if the owner wasn’t the person involved.

That a mugger will kill you in the half-second it takes to draw from the holster, but won’t harm you while you dial 911 on your cell phone, talk to the dispatcher and wait half an hour for the cops to arrive. (more…)


Gun Control: A Historical Perspective

Ξ April 20th, 2007 | → 0 Comments | ∇ Guns |

Gun Control: A Historical Perspective

by Benedict D. LaRosa, June 1994

Gun control is an issue which never stands on its own. By this I mean that the motives behind it are rarely those expressed by its advocates. There is almost always a hidden agenda.

On rare occasion, those proposing the confiscation of weapons are candid about their motives. Such was the case in Japan in 1588 when the Shogun Hideyoshi disarmed the populace during what came to be called the Great Sword Hunt. He decreed: “The possession of unnecessary implements [of war] makes difficult the collection of taxes and dues, and tends to foment uprisings.”

The motivation behind gun control is much the same today; it’s just that our politicians are not as candid as Hideyoshi.

The Japanese populace has been disarmed ever since.

The Anglo-American tradition is much different. But before I discuss our own heritage, I’d like to tell you a little-known but tragic story of a people who disarmed for the sake of peace. (more…)