Gun control's time coming: Ed Rendell

And Rendell's final term is up in 2010 ... just next year.

No wonder he can stick his neck out for unpopular and ineffective policy just because he personally favors it.

In the current climate, anti-gun rights Democrats would be wise to know they will be stomped should they push more laws that infringe an enumerated right of the people ... one that the Supreme Court just reaffirmed last year.

Only in the past few days, a suburban family was brutally slaughtered with a butcher knife. If only one member of that family had had a gun to defend themselves, they would all be alive and the alleged perp would be dead. The gun control fanatics will not rest until no one can have an "equalizer." Reasonable control of submachine guns, yes. Halting people from self defense, no. And I have never owned a gun...but with people like Rendell around, I'm certainly considering it.

That's right Gov' I'm all for it, criminals should not have guns, that is the only gun control that will fix the problem. Of course if the governors and mayors of all the major cities had done something about the gang problems that have been out of control all these many years, we would not have this problem now.

The NRA and the gun manufacturers play the wingnuts like a drum. Anytime they need an uptick in sales they just tell the little Wingnut minions that someone is going to take away their guns and ammo.

Guns are outlawed in England, knifings are at an all time high in the country.

Everytime there is a shooting, it receives frontline publicity. A game plan.

Don't own a gun, but do see that if outlawed, only criminals would have guns.

Respect the freedom to own a gun.

Vote, people, vote. Vote in 2010 and 2012.

Other freedoms will be impinged.

* * * * *
Posted by: Dekalb | April 20, 2009 2:33 PM
.
I guess it never dawned on a “lug-nut” like you that the NRA and gun manufacturers exist because law abiding citizens are still interested in being able to enjoy the value of firearm possession. It is not the other way around, as you suggest. I guess you didn’t get that because “lug-nuts” are thicker than “wing-nuts.” (Psst. Are we tired of the silly names yet?)

We can see that all the Gun laws have worked so well in Chicago

The NRA and wacko followers lack any real power.

If they had any, you can bet Obama would not be President today. That's why they're freaking out in full paranoid mode & hoarding their bullets.

Basically, they are cowards. They feed on hatred and bigotry.

Re; Jimmys post. I'll bet you would change your tune, if you found yourself or a loved one in dire straights. Whether it's rape,or robbery or a home invasion and even a car jacking you would be a sacrificial lamb. Wise up with your mentality only the criminal element will have weapons.

Guns are the cigarettes of our time.

They have been sold to us as some romantic, cool thing but they are really spawning an epidemic in America. The NRA is trying to mimic the successful poisoning by the tobacco companies. The devil never had better partners in death than guns and tobacco.

Its time to tax guns, not take them away - maybe better yet tax bullets, tax the hell out of them.

******************
Posted by: Dekalb | April 20, 2009 2:33 PM
.

Well spoken, Dekalb.

The NRA, just like Rush, plays the low IQ wingnut base for fools.

If the NRA needs some support for something or an uptick in gun sales, they play the "Dems are gonna take your guns" card. If Rush wants to sell something, he'll rail about it on his AM hate radio show and then he'll sell the wingnuts coffee cups and t-shirts etc sporting whatever his latest anti-Dem rant is.

I have some Dem friends who sell anti-Dem stuff on the internet and they make a ton of extra cash off of the deadender meatheads. There's a ton of money to be made off of the gullible wingers.

Posted by: Derrick | April 20, 2009 1:49 PM

Do you know if this family owned a gun or not? Perhaps they did, but it was not in an easily accessible area.

And if they didn't, so what? Maybe they never considered owning a gun. Or if they did, they didn't want a weapon in their home. I don't see any laws that stood in the way of this family owning a gun.

In a breif web-search, Hoffman Estates appears to have laws that are very favorable to legal gun ownership.

One Gun control policy leads to another... I'm 17 years old and I understand that. And that is tyranny. Obama is a tyrant for infringing on the 2nd amendment. Hitler was the first to register all weapons, which made it easy for Allied forces to find registered gun owners and confinscate their weapons to prevent guerilla warfare. We need to protect citizen's rights that are in the Constitution.

Guns are the cigarettes of our time.
* * * * *
Posted by: PJ | April 20, 2009 11:19 PM
.
Another historically challenged lug-nut.
.
Firearms can be possessed and used safely for their intended purposes. That immediately distinguishes them from Cigarettes. Cigarettes will always degrade the health of those who use them, and that of those around them, even when used as intended.
.
Furthermore, the phenomenon of firearm possession, contrary to what you have written, has not been the product of some recent advertising or media blitz. People in America have been using and possessing firearms safely and lawfully for more than 370 years. Some jurisdictions in colonial America actually handed out fines if a man didn’t bring his musket to church. In colonial Connecticut, every household was required to keep at least one musket and a prescribed amount of powder and musket balls. Thus, you are way out to lunch in stating that firearms are a phenomenon of “our time.”
.
If you are suggesting that firearms are more dangerous than before, that is simply not correct either. A firearm, like any other tool or piece of machinery, is only as dangerous as its user. People may be more dangerous than before, because they are less stable, more criminally inclined and less likely to exert personally responsible for their own actions. But that is not true of everyone, or even the vast majority of people.

See what California did here to a Nevada citize! Gun Controllers Among Us, Marin County California Courts

Most liberal Marin County Ca has repeatedly thumbed their nose at the US Constitution, then imposed their illegal actions onto a Nevada citizen. What's next?

http://reno.broowaha.com/article.php?id=3749

So many people ask the question "should we, the American people, have the right to bear arms?"

That is the wrong question to ask.

You see, the U.S. Constitution's second amendment clearly says that "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed".

So the proper question to ask is "Why should we not have the right to keep and bear arms?"

This biggest problem with this whole discussion is that when you grant to must authority to the supposed "Voice of the Public" which don't actually act on the wishes of the people whom elected them and trust that they will act based upon their wishes. Why is it that when gun control issues always come up, it's always placed in the political arena and not put up for a vote by the entire group of people that will be affected by said new law. The law makers want to dictate to the rest of the country what they think is best for us, without asking us. Just because a small group of conservatist want something and they are rich and have the money to bribe their friendly politician to get them to do what they want, is the real violation of civial rights. I thought all politicians are suppose to be servants of the people they represent, not the leader. So the bottom line is simple, get the corruption out of our goverment and get goverment officials that will actually listen to the PEOPLE of the UNITED STATES. Then we can deals with the real issue that face this country. Our fore fathers had the right idea, so I dare politicians who think they know whats best for us. This country was founded on some very basic freedoms ---- LEAVE THEM ALONE!!!

To Robert:
PLEASE have this issue put to a popular vote! Believe me, you DON'T want that!! There are guns in better than half of the households in this country--and more than one gun per every person in the US.

And the funny thing is--the higher the gun ownership rates in an area, the lower the crime rates. Which, of course, is even more pronounced when there is a "shall issue" concealed carry law.

It's not a "small group of conservatives", Robert. It's at least half the voters in this country.

And defense of self, family, and property is a human right, possessed by all humans, and guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

To all those anti-self defense types who posted, are you willing to put a sign up on your door that says "My house is a gun free zone"? I'll bet not. Criminals interviewed in prison say that their biggest fear when committing crimes is getting shot--and you all just hope the criminals don't know you're not armed. The other crime that has gone through the roof in Britain since they banned guns is burglary while the victims are home. Why? The criminals have nothing to fear.

Owning a gun doesn't mean you support the wild west shootist attitude that has given way to the gun violence epidemic in the US.

Taxing and licensing guns and bullets are not a hang-up for responsible gun owners.

We are not talking about muskets, which I think everyone should own too, but the moderns firearms that are creating the cycle of multitudes of gun deaths that are "a phenomenon of our time". Cartridge bullets like the cigarette are modern developments of war that provide for the ease of deliver of death and destruction. Guns like smokes don't hurt anyone if they hang on the wall.

Let folks pay for their vices.

To RJ: The Revolutionary War was not won with and you cannot protect your home and person with cigarellos.