One thing you can say about our friends at the National Rifle Association is that they're intellectually consistent. Ok, so they're not.

Here's the latest crazy-making example:

If the Washington gun lobby and their allies in Congress get their way, your state will no longer be able to make its own decisions about who can legally carry a hidden, loaded gun.

Domestic abusers, drug addicts, stalkers, people with violent arrest records and even people with absolutely no training who have never held a gun before could be granted a concealed gun permit in another state, and your state would have to honor it -- no matter what.

Join Mayors Against Illegal Guns in telling Congress: When it comes to carrying guns in our communities it’s OUR LIVES, so our states should decide OUR LAWS – not Washington politicians.

The U.S. House is planning to hold a hearing to discuss the proposed concealed carry law on September 13th -- and before that happens, they need to hear from you on this crucial issue.

File this under WTF? In the full entry there's a bonus video of NRA executive vice president Wayne LaPierre being a frothing at the mouth wack job.

There's more...

 Philly.com reports

The mayhem began around 9 p.m. Police said a 22-year-old man was shot in the left thigh.

Six blocks away, a 16-year-old girl suffered a gunshot wound to her right leg.

At 12th and Carpenter streets, a 27-year-old man was shot once in the right arm, once in the buttocks and suffered a graze wound to his left arm.

In Point Breeze, a 23-year-old woman, 17-year-old boy and 6-year-old girl were all injured in a shooting outside at 18th and Tasker streets just after 9:30 p.m., police said. Both the woman and the teen were shot in the left foot and taken to Methodist Hospital in stable condition. The 6-year-old was shot twice in her left leg.

In all probability the guns used in these incidents, at least four guns, were manufactured somewhere in the United States and delivered to an authorized FFL (Federal Firearms License) gun dealer.  After that it's anyone's guess. Records are destroyed or simply lost, lawful owners sell their guns privately without ascertaining the qualifications of the buyer, guns are stolen because safe storage is not required. It's a mess.

The pro-gun crowd keep hollering for blaming the criminals, but what about when they themselves are the hidden criminals? What about when they turn a blind eye to the irresponsible behavior that aids the real criminals, the professionals?

No, I don't buy it.  Blame criminals for whatever they do wrong, yes, but let's put the responsibility where it belongs.  So-called legitimate gun owners are the source of criminal guns.  In one way or another that's where almost all the guns used in crime come from. It's called gun flow and the iron pipeline and it cannot be blamed on criminals.

What's your opinion? Don't you think it makes perfect sense that gun control laws should be aimed at the lawful gun owners since they are the source? Also, as the pro-gun crowd never tires of pointing out, criminals don't obey the laws anyway, so proper gun control needs to be focused on those who will obey.

Does that make sense?  Please leave a comment.

(cross posted at Mikeb302000)

 Philly.com reports

The mayhem began around 9 p.m. Police said a 22-year-old man was shot in the left thigh.

Six blocks away, a 16-year-old girl suffered a gunshot wound to her right leg.

At 12th and Carpenter streets, a 27-year-old man was shot once in the right arm, once in the buttocks and suffered a graze wound to his left arm.

In Point Breeze, a 23-year-old woman, 17-year-old boy and 6-year-old girl were all injured in a shooting outside at 18th and Tasker streets just after 9:30 p.m., police said. Both the woman and the teen were shot in the left foot and taken to Methodist Hospital in stable condition. The 6-year-old was shot twice in her left leg.

In all probability the guns used in these incidents, at least four guns, were manufactured somewhere in the United States and delivered to an authorized FFL (Federal Firearms License) gun dealer.  After that it's anyone's guess. Records are destroyed or simply lost, lawful owners sell their guns privately without ascertaining the qualifications of the buyer, guns are stolen because safe storage is not required. It's a mess.

The pro-gun crowd keep hollering for blaming the criminals, but what about when they themselves are the hidden criminals? What about when they turn a blind eye to the irresponsible behavior that aids the real criminals, the professionals?

No, I don't buy it.  Blame criminals for whatever they do wrong, yes, but let's put the responsibility where it belongs.  So-called legitimate gun owners are the source of criminal guns.  In one way or another that's where almost all the guns used in crime come from. It's called gun flow and the iron pipeline and it cannot be blamed on criminals.

What's your opinion? Don't you think it makes perfect sense that gun control laws should be aimed at the lawful gun owners since they are the source? Also, as the pro-gun crowd never tires of pointing out, criminals don't obey the laws anyway, so proper gun control needs to be focused on those who will obey.

Does that make sense?  Please leave a comment.

(cross posted at Mikeb302000)

L.A. Now reports on an incredible crime committed by Joseph Hyungmin Son, seven years before the 1997 movie "Austin Powers: International Man of Mystery."

The fact is I don't blame the gun and I find it extremely tedious to be continually accused of that by the pro-gun folks.  In this brutal crime, for example, I actually feel the gun was superfluous.

What the story made me wonder was, would the victim have been able to save herself had she been armed too? I think not.

When sudden, random violence strikes, like in this case, a concealed weapon will rarely help. In spite of all the claims to the contrary, true DGUs are extremely rare.

The problem is the pro-gun folks use stories like this to push their agenda.  Convincing people that they need to protect themselves is a disservice to those they want to help and to society at large.

The proliferation of guns for personal protection is a bad deal because the chances of your gun being used to save your life are extremely low while the possibility of it being MISused in some way is greater. It's a bad decision, a fear-driven mistake, that's all.

The solution to the problem of violence is to take sensible precautions and not give into the fear.

What's your opinion?  Please leave a comment.

(cross posted at Mikeb302000)

Tip sent in by Bruce

The dispute was this: Did a local lawmaker intentionally point her loaded .380 Ruger at a newspaper reporter during an interview, or was it all just a silly misunderstanding?
The reporter, Richard Ruelas, who writes for The Arizona Republic, said it was deliberate. Not hostile, mind you, but purposeful: State Senator Lori Klein was proudly showing off her piece. He told this story first in an article published Sunday in The Republic, repeated it in subsequent public comments and went through it one more time on the telephone with me. He sounded incredulous still.
He said that as he sat with Klein just outside the Senate chamber to discuss her gun-toting ways, “I looked down and saw a red dot on my chest.” He looked up and realized the dot was the laser sight of the Ruger, which she carries in her pocketbook. Although he wasn’t sure just then whether it had bullets in it, she informed him — after she’d lowered the pistol — that it always does.
The Republic article caused a public outcry that she had been reckless. Even Arizonans have their limits. She then disputed Ruelas’s account, saying that he had strayed into the gun’s sight as she demonstrated how it worked. After that she went silent.

The author goes on to bemoan the fact that "a cavalier attitude about guns persists and even flourishes" in spite of the recent high profile shooting in Arizona. He states that the Senator's pink gun is not cute and cannot be compared to Häagen-Dazs ice cream. But what in the world does Lori Klein and all the other lawful gun owners have to do with the criminal use of guns? Aren't they two completely separate things? That's what our gun-rights friends keep trying to say.

In my opinion they're all part of the same problem. There's much more in common between criminal gun owners and lawful gun owners than there is between either of them and the gun control folks. Let me explain.

All the guns that are used in crime start out legally owned by someone. In the case of Jared Loughner, he himself was the legitimate and legal owner of the gun, as sad a fact as that is, given the terrible and tragic lack of mental health screening that exists. He bought the gun, and then used it in a crime.

But, the same is true for the inner city hoodlum who shoots a rival drug dealer in Newark. He may have bought the gun from another criminal, in fact his particular gun may have had several illegal owners before it was used in a murder. But if you could trace it back far enough, you would find a point at which it passed from the hand of its legitimate owner to that of a criminal.

This is why we need strong gun control laws at the national level AIMED AT THE LAW ABIDING. No one disputes the fact that criminals won't obey our silly laws. That's exactly the reason, along with the fact that the legitimate gun owners of America seem to have such a hard time holding on to their guns, that we need proper gun control laws.

Of course, if I were writing those laws, Lori Klein would have to relinquish her guns immediately.

How does that sound? Please leave a comment.