This is a placeholder for now because I have not had ads on this blog for years. In case I ever start up again, this will be the policy in effect:
The FTC has some fool nonsense rules about ads on blogs or some such and presumes authority over the First Amendment to compel the unfunded mandate that we who earn ad revenues make some kind of disclosure so you don't think we're getting paid to say nice things about people or God knows what, meaning they must think you're stupid, too. I have had a few ads on this site in the past and may do so again if I think it's worth a try. Combined, I probably couldn't buy a box of good cigars each year, let alone a bottle of George T. Stagg, and that is somehow supposed to compromise my morality to force me to say nice things about products and services I don't mean simply in exchange for filthy lucre. If you believe that, leave now--you're not smart enough to be here. Bottom line, aside from welcoming a sponsor, I will do no posts related to their products or services, or reviews of what they offer.
About "The Only Ones"
The purpose of this feature has never been to bash cops. The only reason I do this is to amass a credible body of evidence to present when those who would deny our right to keep and bear arms use the argument that only government enforcers are professional and trained enough to do so safely and responsibly. And it's also used to illustrate when those of official status, rank or privilege, both in law enforcement and in some other government position, get special breaks not available to we commoners, particularly (but not exclusively) when they're involved in gun-related incidents.
Comment House Rules
Keep them on topic. No spam. No threats against anyone except me. Do not feed trolls--I'll take out the trash. Try to keep it clean. I'm the final arbiter. If you don't like the rules, start your own damn blog.
Link Policy
WarOnGuns reciprocates links with liberty-oriented sites promoting the right to keep and bear arms for all peaceable individuals. If you have linked to me and don't see your site below, it's probably just because I haven't noticed it yet. Shoot me an email via the "Contact Form" (see above in this sidebar) if you want to fix that.
As a general rule I remove links for blogs that have been inactive for over one year.
Yesterday’s “Boston Herald” newspaper has an interesting Michael Graham opinion/editorial piece regarding the latest Boston gun buyback proposal, made in response to last week’s shooting of a 9 year old by his 14 year old brother in a home that at a charitable best would be described as dysfunctional:
“On my BostonHeraldRadio.com show yesterday, GOAL’s Jim Wallace pointed out that since the draconian 1998 “gun control” laws were passed in Massachusetts, legal gun ownership has fallen 80 percent, but the rate of gun crime has soared by 200 percent even as the nation as a whole has seen gun crime fall. This is precisely the outcome one would expect when a state makes it harder for the good guys to carry guns, but refuses to do anything more serious than offer Target gift cards to the bad guys. And so Massachusetts has a much higher gun crime rate than its northern neighbors of New Hampshire, Vermont and Maine, despite the fact that it’s much harder to own a gun here. Legally own one, that is. How do Massachusetts liberals respond? With still more gun laws, and a buyback program. Why not do something that would have an impact on gun-related crime? For example, simply enforce current laws that call for mandatory jail time for anyone caught illegally in possession of a handgun. That would have an immediate impact by: • putting a bunch of gun criminals behind bars, and • making crooks less likely to carry a gun for fear of jail time. But it would also disproportionately send young, minority males to prison. So local liberals won’t insist on it. Which is why a week or month or year from now we’ll be having the same conversation about the same problem and wondering, “Gee, why hasn’t this gotten better?””
2 comments:
Caption: "We think Satan enters our dimension through this orifice right here."
Allthewayto11
Yesterday’s “Boston Herald” newspaper has an interesting Michael Graham opinion/editorial piece regarding the latest Boston gun buyback proposal, made in response to last week’s shooting of a 9 year old by his 14 year old brother in a home that at a charitable best would be described as dysfunctional:
http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/opinion/op_ed/2014/02/graham_gun_buyback_lacks_aim
“On my BostonHeraldRadio.com show yesterday, GOAL’s Jim Wallace pointed out that since the draconian 1998 “gun control” laws were passed in Massachusetts, legal gun ownership has fallen 80 percent, but the rate of gun crime has soared by 200 percent even as the nation as a whole has seen gun crime fall.
This is precisely the outcome one would expect when a state makes it harder for the good guys to carry guns, but refuses to do anything more serious than offer Target gift cards to the bad guys.
And so Massachusetts has a much higher gun crime rate than its northern neighbors of New Hampshire, Vermont and Maine, despite the fact that it’s much harder to own a gun here. Legally own one, that is.
How do Massachusetts liberals respond? With still more gun laws, and a buyback program.
Why not do something that would have an impact on gun-related crime? For example, simply enforce current laws that call for mandatory jail time for anyone caught illegally in possession of a handgun. That would have an immediate impact by:
• putting a bunch of gun criminals behind bars, and
• making crooks less likely to carry a gun for fear of jail time.
But it would also disproportionately send young, minority males to prison. So local liberals won’t insist on it.
Which is why a week or month or year from now we’ll be having the same conversation about the same problem and wondering, “Gee, why hasn’t this gotten better?””
Post a Comment