Home     Writers     Op/Ed     Book Reviews     News     Bookstore     Photoshops     Submit     Search     Contact Us     Advertise  
  You are here: 

Wed

09

Jul

2008

Just A Start?
Wednesday, 09 July 2008 02:18
by Jayne Lyn Stahl

A jubiliant, and optimistic bunch, after the high court's decision to strike down D.C.'s handgun ban, the National Rifle Association used what they say was a "very encouraging" ruling to suggest, in the words of the group's lawyer,C.D. Michel, that "it was just a start."

Proving that they don't let any grass grow under their feet, on Thursday, the NRA sued the city of Chicago over its handgun ban and, on Friday, continued by legally challenging San Francisco's ban on handguns in its public housing.

If you think the California wild fires have been intense, stay tuned as the Second Amendment posse works to strike down, and undo, every piece of gun control legislation, and as many restrictions, rightful or otherwise, on handguns, and firearms, as they can, and rest assured with support from John McCain

But, not everybody is going to take the Supreme Court decision lying down. And, not everyone is going to cower in fear of the gun lobby. San Francisco's Mayor, Gavin Newsom, vows to "vigorously fight the NRA," implying that no rational person could possibly think that making possession of handguns legal again, in city housing projects, is a responsible, and sane, thing to do in a city where one can't even watch five minutes of local news without hearing about another victim of gunfire, which accounts for 80% of all homicides.

Bravo to Mayor Newsom!


San Francisco has a long, and distinguished, history as a trend-setter, dating back to the 1950's, when poet, and publisher, Lawrence Ferlinghetti stood up to censors who wanted to prevent the publishing of Allen Ginsberg's landmark poem "Howl." It would be refreshing to hear the Supreme Court defend newspapers, and media, and rule that the government 's attempts to review, and censor a "Sixty Minutes" interview with Staff Sgt. Frank D. Wuterich in which he discusses his role in the massacre at Haditha is unconstitutional insofar as it violates the First Amendment separation of press and state. Yes, the First Amendment is a force to be reckoned with, too, but I guess the newspaper, and mainstream media, lobby isn't as strong as the weapons lobby, and why should it be, after all, guns make the world a safer place than news any day, right?

Good for the mayor for reminding us that San Francisco isn't just a city that wears its liberal reputation like a faux badge, has Nader as its middle name, and is just about cable cars, gay marriage, and faux progressives, but one that will return to its dissenter roots and fight this ludicrous, and dangerous, ruling whose impact will be felt by the most disenfranchised, and least vocal, among us.

We look to Chicago's mayor to follow in Newsom's footsteps.

You may recall that, on the campaign trail for Hillary, President Clinton who, in response to the killing of an inner city sixth grader by one of her friends, expressed support for some of the most stringent gun control legislation enacted in a generation, intimated that, while he was running for the presidency, he was told that if he tried to take on the health care industry, he'd never get elected

One can only hope that Sen. Obama hasn't been presented with the same warning and that, should he become our 44th president, we're optimistic that Senator Obama will be mindful, and consistent, in his approach to legislation that will provide regulation, and much-needed limits, on the Second Amendment frights, and not bow to the NRA the way others before him have succumbed to the weight of health care lobbyists.
 

 
More from this author:
Following in the Footsteps... (6427 Hits)
by Jayne Lyn Stahl The manic warriors, in Washington, are at it again, only now they've found someone who can manage more than one syllable at...
Worldwide Open Season on the Press (9578 Hits)
by Jayne Lyn Stahl On an otherwise quiet street in Istanbul, this morning, a 53 year old Turkish citizen of Armenian descent was gunned down...
On Hillary's announcement... (5589 Hits)
by Jayne Lyn Stahl You may have read the transcript of a speech given by George McGovern in The Nation last week in which he rightly...
An Open Letter to "The Decider" (5941 Hits)
by Jayne Lyn Stahl While the odds are probably better of getting a response from Santa, there are a few things I'd like to say if you can...
"Notes from the Undergrown: State of the Oilman Address" (5921 Hits)
by Jayne Lyn Stahl The president's speech last night was more important for what it didn't say than for what it did. In an address that could...
Related Articles:
The Rumsfeld Memo: “I was just about to change everything….Really!?!” (8655 Hits)
by Mike Whitney By now, everyone has heard about Rumsfeld’s memo. It was leaked to the New York Times supposedly without Rumsfeld’s...
Rockford, Illinois: Terrorist Plot Foiled? Or Just Another Knucklehead Stung? (8841 Hits)
Surely the Washington Post had fun trying to keep the word "entrapment" out of this story: An Illinois man has been charged with two...
It’s Not Just Bush: We’re Accountable Too (5083 Hits)
by Heather Wokusch Click on arrow to listen to Heather's Podcast here: www.heatherwokusch.com/podcasts/We_Are_Accountable_Too_48KBs.mp3 ...
Just Like with Torture, Cheney's Got His Teeth Sunk into Iran (5964 Hits)
by Russ Wellen So much creative destruction, so little time. First the Republicans lost their majority status in Congress. Then the Iraq...
Baghdad Ho! Ann Coulter Discovers It Really Is Just Like LA (4392 Hits)
by R.J. Eskow Critics have called Ann Coulter's comparison of Baghdad to LA ridiculous - but they haven't read her searing "Iraqi...


Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites
Trackback(0)
Comments (13)add comment

swagcat said:

0
Go after thier wealth
http://miami.fbi.gov/statutes/...ion242.htm

Lets see how many will think of it when they find out about it, including LEO's
 
July 09, 2008
Votes: +0

swagcat said:

0
And you don't need the NRA
think of hundred's if not thousands filing law suits against the deep pockets of the city.
 
July 09, 2008
Votes: +0

CCW4ME2 said:

0
Reader
To better understand the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution it is helpful to consider how almost every reasonable person would interpret this amendment if it did not involve something which is considered controversial or politically incorrect by some and idolized by others. Arms in the possession of ordinary citizens meet both criteria. Let's, for the sake of argument, suppose that the Second Amendment dealt with books, not arms or weapons, and read like this: "A well educated electorate, being necessary to the maintenance of a free State, the right of the people to own and read books, shall not be infringed." Does anyone really believe that liberals would claim that only people who were eligible to vote should be allowed to buy and read books? Or that a person should have to have voted in the last election before the government would permit him or her to buy a book? Would the importation of books be banned if they did not meet an "educational purpose" test? Would some States limit citizens to buying "one book a month"? Would inflammatory "assault books" be banned in California?
 
July 09, 2008
Votes: +0

CCW4ME2 said:

0
Reader
To better understand the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution it is helpful to consider how almost every reasonable person would interpret this amendment if it did not involve something which is considered controversial or politically incorrect by some and idolized by others. Arms in the possession of ordinary citizens meet both criteria. Let's, for the sake of argument, suppose that the Second Amendment dealt with books, not arms or weapons, and read like this: "A well educated electorate, being necessary to the maintenance of a free State, the right of the people to own and read books, shall not be infringed." Does anyone really believe that liberals would claim that only people who were eligible to vote should be allowed to buy and read books? Or that a person should have to have voted in the last election before the government would permit him or her to buy a book? Would the importation of books be banned if they did not meet an "educational purpose" test? Would some States limit citizens to buying "one book a month"? Would inflammatory "assault books" be banned in California?
 
July 09, 2008
Votes: +0

Wendy Weinbaum said:

0
Implementation Consultant
As a Jewess in the US, I feel that if residents of "Public Housing" are so untrustworthy that they cannot own guns, then they are too untrustworthy to be be allowed to VOTE! As such, they are reduced to the status of leeches, sucking the blood of productive society. May I remind the writer that America wasn't won with a registered gun, and that criminals are stopped by FIREARMS, not by talk? That is why all REAL Americans put our 2nd Amendment FIRST!
 
July 09, 2008
Votes: +0

Jayne said:

0
"REAL Americans"
Spoken like a true Nazi, thank you, American Jewess, for telling the world who, and what, a "real American" is. Yes, that's right, for you on the continent, John Wayne was our cultural hero---we're the shoot-em-up---knock-em down, waterboard them, divest them of due process, Abu Ghraib em, good guys of the world. My dear Ms. Weinbaum, if that is, in fact, your name, America was won by doing to the Native Americans what Hitler did to the Jews, and "real Americans" like you are prepared to provide other sociopaths, closer to home, with the firearms to take the law into their own hands, and yes, maybe even commit a hate crime or two in the process.

People like you make me ashamed of my heritage, and my nation.
 
July 09, 2008
Votes: +0

Enjoying the Whining said:

0
Now this is funny........
Now this is funny....really, really funny.

For years, every single time any sort of gun control laws was passed, the liberals would yell and shout, and chant the mantra that "Law X won't really stop crime, but it's a GREAT START!"

Of course, the "great start" was the start of total gun prohibition, eventually, step by step.

First ban the guns that were too small, and then the ones that were too big, the ones that were too accurate, and the ones that weren't accurate enough, the ones that looked too scary, the ones that looked too wholesome and ordinary, step by step until they were all banned.

And every single gun control law passed was always yet another "GREAT START" at least according to the editorial writers on both coasts.

But now, for the first time, the Supreme Court says that the Second Amendment actually does mean what it says when it proclaims that the "right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

And now, it's the liberals whining and cringing and crying about the NRA's "GREAT START!"

Hey lefties.....get used to it, okay?

You're right, this is only the "GREAT START" and we're not going to stop for a long, long time.

We've been on the other side of all the past great starts, but now it's time to begin pushing back.

And I'm loving all the crying and whining and hand-wringing.

It sounds like victory!
 
July 09, 2008
Votes: +0

RealAmerican said:

0
RealAmericans
Dear Jane -

Spoken like a true communist! For the record, it was the AMERICAN GOVERNMENT that treated the Native Americans as Hitler treated the Jews, not the AMERICAN PEOPLE. It is the AMERICAN GOVERNMENT that "waterboards them, divests them of due process, and Abu Ghraib's 'um" . . . NOT the AMERICAN PEOPLE. This is the SAME AMERICAN GOVERNMENT that, with constant agitation from "useful idiots" like yourself, wants to strip the AMERICAN PEOPLE of their ability to defend themselves from the real hate crimes coming from people like you who want a totalitarian government to disarm us all at the point of a gun! Isn't it "ironic" that people who really fear hate crimes, such as the pro-gay "Pink Pistols," fully support our second amendment right to armed self-defense by the AMERICAN PEOPLE against hate crimes?
 
July 09, 2008
Votes: +0

RealAmerican said:

0
The Real Shame
Oh yeah . . . and Jane, if you are "ashamed of your heritage, and your nation," then please, by all means, feel free to leave! China, perhaps, would be much more to your likes and dislikes I think . . .
 
July 09, 2008
Votes: +0

Geno said:

0
Patriot
Isn't this Newsom the same guy who claimed San Fransico was a sanctuary city?
At least until eight illegals were caught selling drugs,stealing, etc.; sent to a group home; escaped and are back on the street selling drugs, stealing, and etc. Now Newsom has had a change of mind and will cooperate with the Fed. Maybe
he ought to rethink his gun position as well. Fact is, when people own guns crime drops. Of course, that is not the main reason the founders wanted an armed
citizenry. The main reason was to resist out of hand government officials who ignore our constitution. People like Newsom!
 
July 09, 2008
Votes: +0

Mark said:

0
Molon Labe
To get my guns, my 4th amendment rights will have to be violated. Let's just say that nobody will be violating the 4th at my house. They may try, but they won't. Anybody encouraging that violation will be treated as those that do. Be careful what you post.
 
July 10, 2008
Votes: +0

Lysander said:

0
Jayne, be careful what you wish for
"Foolish liberals who are trying to read the 2nd Amendment out of the Constitution by claiming it's not an individual right or that it's too much of a public safety hazard don't see the danger in the big picture. They're courting disaster by encouraging others to use the same means to eliminate portions of the Constitution they don't like." - Alan Dershowitz (no right-wing gun nut)
Jayne, it does no good to berate those who legalize torture and a nullification of Habeus Corpus when you are all too willing to invalidate "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". By "courting disaster", you fit quite readily into Mr. Dershowitz's quote.
 
July 10, 2008
Votes: +0

The Woim said:

0
It's time to abolish ALL gun laws!
First, let me say that I'm in love with Wendy Weinbaum! She's the kind of Jewish woman the Jewish people have always relied on throughout their long history - a strong and smart Jewish woman who knows how to take care of herself, and also give aid and comfort to her friends.

Secondly, it's high time we ended the bigotry of hoplophobia and abolish all gun laws. Yes, all. Ownership of a machine gun doesn't turn a person into a psychopath - actually machine guns are very expensive to operate because, people, bullets ain't cheap!

Since even the gun banners know that gun laws have never stopped a single murderer or rapist, then the purpose for gun laws must be for the abolishion of individual thought. A single person alone becomes fearful of intruders and, consequently, calls on the government to provide the security for them. This is a promise no government agency in the history of humanity has ever successfully provided. However, once that single person picks up a Sig 226 - well, they no longer need rely on strangers to provide protection for them. And you know what? When you realize that you can provide your own protection, all the glitter and glory of big government falls to the carpet like all the other false confetti.

And just like the confetti is cleaned up witha vacuum cleaner, so do all those ridiculous and useless gun laws need to be sucked out of the public domain.

If you don't like guns, don't buy one! That's the only solution to you gun haters!

Yours truly,
The Woim
 
July 11, 2008
Votes: +0

Write comment
smaller | bigger

busy
 

adsense

Top