Return of the Booth Babes: The 2007 SHOT Show
This page has been moved to http://www.fieldandstream.com/blogs/gun-nut
If your browser doesn’t redirect you to the new location, please visit The Gun Nut at its new location: www.fieldandstream.com/blogs/gun-nut.
My Deal with the Anti-Gun Mayors
At the behest of New York City’s Mayor Bloomberg, 15 mayors gathered recently to point out the need for yet more gun control. The mayors, it seems, are distressed that Congress has not taken the lead in this most pressing of problems.
The reasons why Congress is avoiding the subject are several:
- In general, Congress is so gutless that it would not declare war on Japan if that country bombed Pearl Harbor again.
- The people—you remember the people, ladies and gentlemen of Congress?—have said they don’t want gun control. Just ask Al Gore or John Kerry.
- The people (them again) who are not fools, are aware that the government can’t protect them.
But I don’t want to be unreasonable here, so I’ll make a deal with the 15 mayors on behalf of my fellow gun owners.
- When 12 months pass and no paroled felons from any of your 15 cities kill, rape, or rob again…
- When you mayors give up your taxpayer-financed police bodyguards and live like the rest of us…
I will go out and campaign for your cause.
Bravo!!!
Posted by: Eric | May 05, 2006 at 11:46 AM
Here Here!
Posted by: Davd | May 05, 2006 at 12:23 PM
That sounds like a good compromise to me. And they say that we gun owners unreasonable. Ha!
Posted by: JC Blauvelt | May 05, 2006 at 12:43 PM
Mr. Petzal,
Don't give those boogerheads a loophole. Don't let them have any kind of bodyguards!!! Those losers won't ever take you up on your offer.
Posted by: Kevin | May 05, 2006 at 01:45 PM
boogerheads? you tell 'em.
Posted by: Matt in MN | May 05, 2006 at 02:11 PM
I agree that most of the rational behind gun control laws amounts to knee jerk reactionary political band aid solutions to complex social problems. But as a resident of the greater Chicago area, I am also aware of the horrific price of gun violence on a nearly daily basis. In the past few weeks, two 14 year old girls were shot dead in their homes by random gang gunfire. Not aimed at them of course, but victims of stray bullets. As a responsible gun owner I don’t want to have my rights curbed by these terrible events. But as a Father, I don’t want some random round to hit my child.
Posted by: Bill | May 06, 2006 at 01:27 AM
I have grown up in an area that the majority of residents have the ability to point a gun out there window and shoot a deer. Our county in Norther Idaho has about 65000 folks in it, and very little criminal acts are committed with a firearm. The gun to person ratio here is higher than most places I am sure, yet the owners of the weapons are not using the with ill content. It is not the weapons, or the gun control that prevents crime. It is justice, punishement, and the morales of the community. People are to blame, and do not ruin it for 90% of the people because 10% do not have their heads on straight.
Posted by: Cameron | May 07, 2006 at 01:48 AM
Bill, what exactly is "gun violence"? Is that where the pistol jumps out of the gun safe and goes off to hunt some bystanders? The media never says knife violence, baseball bat violence, etc. It is only a verbal ploy by the lefties to try and demonize an inanimate object as evil, nevermind the thug who actually pulled the trigger. I spent most of my life in Virginia and still do but (through no fault of my own) had to live for a couple years in New York City. I can attest firsthand to the difference. Here in Virginia, I can walk through parks and go to the movies alone at night without having to wear a bullet-proof vest. In New York, the crime really is as bad as everyone thinks. When I was up there the politicians were celebrating because the murder rate reached a new low: one per day. Virginia has very few gun laws. New York has many. 'Nuff said.
Posted by: Matt | May 08, 2006 at 08:21 PM
Philadelphia (and its local media) are starting up the anti-gun rant again, with a cop killed the other night...and philly mayor Street is part of the criminal element anyway...look for unconstitutional gun bans in the coming months...
Posted by: KJ | May 10, 2006 at 03:16 PM
Who are the mayors and their cities that would conspire to make us safe from all these evil tools of doom. What is their plan to protect me from the bad people that would hijack my car or take my money from me at the ATM. A COP on the cell phone in one hand and a 1911 in the other says to me which one will help me first the best. I can not afford a personal armed body guard to follow me all day.
Posted by: Jim | May 11, 2006 at 07:38 AM
I am from Kansas, but am currently living in upstate NY. I am on temporary military duty here. My father told me a few months ago that Kansas had passed conceiled carry. There is an application process and a security backgroud check, but for a reasonable fee you get a license for 2-4years. I have been wanting to buy a pistol, but due to NY law I would have to submit an application that could take as long as 1 year to process. I think the idea of buying a pistol in the same manner as a long gun is a good idea, especially in conjunction with the conceiled carry licensing. It allows those who wish to shoot recreation a reasonable way to obtain a pistol. It also allows those who may live or travel in a "bad neighborhood" a chance to protect themselves.
Posted by: Collin | May 11, 2006 at 06:34 PM
To Matt: I sure can sympathize with your feelings, but am afraid no amount of laws will protect your children from urban violence. This is a purely social problem and has little to do with guns. As far as New Yorks mayor goes, he's just another loathsome demagogue. History shows that we will never be free of people like him. Washington is obviously full of them right new - from the top down. Don't believe for a moment, that for all their 2nd amendment public support this administration would turn on us in a fraction of a second if it suddenly looked as though it would gain them some advantage. The US Constitution was written expressly to protect us from the government and scum like Bloomberg.
Posted by: tom | May 17, 2006 at 03:25 PM
Bill-Your post is lucid, rational and well thought out. I will say this however, you, as we, giving up our Second Amendment rights, in no way makes any of us safer. Quite the contrary and the Founders of this nation understood that while writing the blueprint for America.
Of course, none of us wants our children or grandchildren injured or killed, but the horrible truth is, that is the world today. And the world today is evil, not BECAUCE of firearms, but in spite of firearms. You`re correct that the real issues facing this country today are very complex, and very social. The thing you have to face and accept, is that, even if you were to give up your Second Amendment rights as an American, the evil wouldn`t stop, it in fact would thrive and prosper.
Being a parent comes at a price, and you understand full well, that the price is vigilance. Just as Jefferson stated, the cost of freedom is eternal vigilance.
Love your children Bill, hold them, cherish them, enjoy them and do them justice, and then put them back in the Father’s hands, which is where they’ve always been anyway. You`ll do everything in your power to protect them and keep them secure, and even if you don`t know this, exercising your Second Amendment rights keeps them safer than abandoning them. No matter what the punks, thugs, gang bangers do, no matter how reckless they are, no matter how little regard they have for life, you are in NO WAY putting your children in harms way by exercising and supporting your Second Amendment rights. They, those who have no regard for law or life, they, are putting our children, all of us at risk, and that risk only deepens when and if, we will concede the right to defend our families to gain a little supposed safety.
Posted by: Greg Russell | May 21, 2006 at 01:36 AM