The removal of guns from this city's streets is basic to achieving a civilized level of order and a feeling of safety, which is the job of the New York Police Department and the city administration and any gathering of do-gooders focused on the lowering of the murder rate.
Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly says that Operation Gun Stop is a necessary program because it creates incentive and guarantees the protection of those citizens who want to report the sale of or possession of illegal firearms.
Stanley Crouch--kind of makes you wonder if
Mr. Adams was prescient
when he said:
Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen!
Stanley could benefit from
reading this, that is, assuming he's merely ignorant.
9 comments:
Operation Gun Stop is most certainly tyranny in action. This type of program is analogous to the British coming to confiscate the colonists arms.
There are a couple of things which make this program unconstitutional and an act of tyranny. They pretend to go after criminals, and perhaps they do take some off of the street. But, if these criminals have a criminal record so bad that preclude them from being "on the street" why did New York release them in the first place? Using this type of program to put violent criminals in jail is absurd and a copout. The violent criminals should have gotten an adequate sentence in the first place.
Stanley Crouch, the author of the article, obviously is not concerned with removing violent individuals from society, but from removing firearms from every citizen:
[Without guns, many deaths would have been avoided because the murderers are not people hypnotized by the possibility of bringing guns to equal the odds; they bring guns to have an advantage.
As neighborhood people, both young and old, begin to help law enforcement remove the instruments of degradation that dog the community, we can all breathe easier. I say that because when a gun has been confiscated we know it will not be an instrument of terror or murder.]
Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly is also an agent of tyranny who obviously cares nothing about the 2nd or 4th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution:
["The best police work frequently results from the alliance of the community and law enforcement," Kelly says, "which is why we are offering $1,000 to each person who contacts us with information that leads to an arrest and a conviction."
But why is anonymity important? "Our job is to protect the community as much as it is to bring in criminals who threaten lives in the community," says Kelly.
Kelly went on to explain something we all should know: "These are not toy criminals and they are not toy guns. If someone notifies us about a member of a drug crew who is known to possess illegal firearms, under no circumstances do we want that person's name available to the criminal. If even WE don't know who the person is, he is that much safer. Otherwise, the arrest of a suspect could lead to grim results."]
What makes this program particularly troubling is the fact that in New York city and state many gun owners need their firearms registered and need special government licenses. This means that many otherwise law abiding citizens could be "caught up" in this program and I suspect that is the whole idea. The government officials pretend they are going after violent criminals, but in fact they are going after anyone who does not submit to their unconstitutional gun registration and licensing schemes. And how do they go about confiscating these arms? They get search warrants for your home with "anonymous" tips. As the police commissioner states "even WE don't know who the person is." So, essentially they are going to a judge and saying so and so has an illegal gun (perhaps unregistered or the person doesn't have a license) give us a warrant because "someone", but we don't know who, told us so. And the judge gives them a warrant. So, essentially the police are searching the homes of whoever they want. Absolutely no oversight. Sounds alot like King George and the British troops strategy to me.
And Stanley Crouch says this program is a model for the entire nation:
"I think this is the kind of a program that should provide a national model for addressing a far from insignificant problem. It also allows those who are tired of the conditions created by the lawless to strike back at them."
Yeah, in otherwords this program is a way for those who are tired of civilians owning firearms to come and confiscate them. First they pass a registration law. Then, use a program such as this to confiscate the firearms of those who don't comply with the unconstitutional laws, and when that is accomplished they can come and confiscate the firearms of all that to comply. Come and get em King George.
Excellent commentary, Brent, and thank you for the link to the Bush letter.
An observation I've made before on anonymous snitch programs: what a convenient way for rival gangs to eliminate the competition.
The other thing it does: the cops suspect you, so they phone in their OWN "tip" that can't be traced back to them--great way to bypass 4A, ain't it? Real Yankee ingenuity.
Like I said, "Rival gangs."
"Crouch" ought to become a pejorative term.
"The violent criminals should have gotten an adequate sentence in the first place."
One of the reasons the UK is so anti gun and high crime is that the UK doesn't want to spend the money to convict and imprison criminals. It's cheaper and easier to just let the subjects pay increased insurance premiums instead of increased taxes. The UK has plenty of subjects so who cares if the criminals rob'em blind and kill off a few along the way.
TS
"what a convenient way for "rival gangs" to eliminate the competition"
Yeah, like members of opposing political parties, or perhaps pro-gunners and anti-gunners telling on each other. Or perhaps a guy telling on his old girlfriend's new boyfriend. The "great" thing about the anonymity is that you don't even have to know if the other person actually owns a firearm. Just tell the police that someone you don't like has an "illegal firearm." Even if the person doesn't possess an "illegal firearm" the police will get a search warrant, tear through the persons home and maybe find some other contraband.
Perhaps the person's son or daughter might have some drugs in their bedroom or maybe even an unregistered shotgun or whatever else the police may find.
Sounds like a great plan. Let's adopt it throughout the whole nation. I can think of alot of people I don't like.
To add to my last comment; if you really don't like someone tell the police the person has an "illegal firearm" and the person is a dangerous individual or a religious fanatic that way the authorities will bust done the door with firearms drawn and maybe even pull a WACO on em.
Think what they really meant was;
"The removal of guns from this city's streets is basic to achieving a totalitarian level of order and a feeling of superiority, which is the job of the New York Police Department and the city administration and any gathering of (fallacious) do-gooders focused on the lowering of the murder rate."
That's how I see it anyways....
"...because when a gun has been confiscated we know it will not be an instrument of terror or murder.".
And we also know it will not be an instrument of self-defense either. You conveniently forgot that part, Stan.
I just expanded on this and turned out my next "Rights Watch" column for GUNS Magazine. It should be on the stands in around 3 months.
While I'm sure they'd recognize Bloomberg's address I'm sure there are a lot of other folks who've been active in promoting these sorts of things that would wind up getting a surprise visit.
Post a Comment