Jay Bookman

By James

June 26, 2008 6:31 PM | Link to this

Mr. Bookman:

I feel like a broken record as we have been over and over this but ………….. It’s the same for any of our basic Constitutional rights. You guard them constantly. For example, the Court often issues a ruling regarding the 4th(searches), 5th (self-incrimination) or 6th (right to an attorney) Amendments which gives some criminal a new trial (minus critical evidence), sets him free or makes it even more difficult for law enforcement to catch and prosecutors to convict heinious criminals. However, we hold those Amendments SO SACRED that we are willing to pay that price to protect them and keep them as restrictive on the government as possible. What price? Additional citizens being killed, raped, assaulted, etc. Happens everyday.

The Second Amendment is no less sacred as all the others and ultimately our free form of government depends on it.

U.S. Secret Service (supervisor retired)

By Taxpayer

June 26, 2008 6:42 PM | Link to this

Does anyone really care whether another person has a cannon or RPG or whatever in their possession. After all, how can that be the real issue. Have we not been through all this before, on larger scales, with the cold war and terrorist attacks. The issue is with the destructive capacity of said possession combined with the fact that it is in the hands of a human. A HUMAN. You know, the creature capable of everything from eating its own to turning the other cheek, all in the wink of an eye. Just out of curiosity, what two components are needed to build a terrorist. Your honor, he was fine when he left for work this morning. There wasn’t any sign of a problem. I just don’t know what made him SNAP — just like that.

Then again, what if your hands are registered weapons. Some people even claim to have the ability to think someone to death. Scary, huh.

On the other hand, I believe that a good defense is the best offense. As long as I can stop you and your weapon from harming me, then I’m OK with whatever you choose to carry around. If it makes you feel like you are better equipped to deal with your day-to-day issues, go for it. If handguns are all you are allowed to carry in public just let me know so I can dress accordingly. If 10 tons of plastic explosives is to be the maximum amount allowed per individual, then I’ll calculate the maximum blast radius and I’ll know how many acres to buy. Just hurry up and decide while land is relatively cheap and crater-free.

Unfortunately, this is one issue (of several) where Bush really let me down. I remember way back when Bush was talking tough about missile defense and Star Wars instead of worrying about how many evil people were in possession of nuclear weapons. Well, I kinda preferred the “old Bush” — the one I thought I was voting for.

By the way, does anyone know where I can pick up a cheap raygun. I just need it in case my defenses don’t hold.

By Jame

June 26, 2008 6:48 PM | Link to this

To Taxpayer:

Ruger just came out with the brand new LCP .380 semi-auto. Small and light and goes in your pocket easily! 6+1 in the chamber. Use +p hydro-shocks. Get one !

That will have to do until S&W comes out with a raygun.

By Bud Wiser

June 26, 2008 6:51 PM | Link to this

Ray gun? Hell, gimme a RPG. I can sit on the roof of my girlfriend’s trailer and pick off them goats from Billy Bob’s goat farm, one or two at a time.

I hate goats.

A goat will eat almost anything. I saw one once eat the rear seat out of a buddy of mine’s ‘66 Dodge Charger. My buddy’s girl friend was passed out drunk in the front seat with a stack of Bobby Kennedy bumper stickers in her lap, and the goat left her alone.

I guess even a goat has a rational thought at least once in its lifetime, unlike a few Democrats I know.

By Abomi Nation

June 26, 2008 7:02 PM | Link to this

James you are a broken record. This is hardly the question being asked here. Blah, blah, blah sacred document. Yea we get it. Good God, the secret service/USMC/I’m writing a book routine is also getting old. Except for Jay this is an anonymous blog, nobody cares.

Jay I posted on your previous entry the results of a new poll just released by Gallup that I think confirms what you are saying, “49% favor stricter gun laws than exist now and 38% would like to see gun laws remain as they are. Just 11% advocate gun laws that are less strict.”

Americans do favor sensible gun laws. The problem is the NRA now controls the debate. Those that favor sensible gun laws are scared to death of them. Watch, that 11% that want to carry machine guns around will be here in full force advocating for concealed Raygun permits. Of course they think they represent 99.8% of the population.

Ordinary Citizen (not retired)

By GOPs got to go

June 26, 2008 7:12 PM | Link to this

Abomi,

You know James must do his “YOU CAN”T HANDLE THE TRUTH” imitation at least once a day.

Yes, by all means, let Nuts like the Virginia Tech Psycho have more access to guns. Great idea!

By James

June 26, 2008 7:30 PM | Link to this

To Abomi Nation and GOP:

LOL. You guys crack me up.

Not jealous are you of the “Few and the Proud”? Don’t worry. Not everyone could be one.

Most guys I talk with “my age” about my service in the Marines in Vietnam won’t look me in the eye. Not sure why ……….. but I digress.

Hopefully, some guy who gets off on a technicality someday regarding the 4th, 5th or 6th amendment won’t do something very evil to you or you loved ones. If they try, I hope you have “roscoe” of the 2nd Amendment handy. You may need it. If you don’t, maybe a policeman will show up to take the report.

By Rich S.

June 26, 2008 7:34 PM | Link to this

Let’s remember what this case was about: A ban on handgun ownership in the home for self-defense, and a rendering inoperable of any long arm for the same purpose. If you live in D.C., you had no right to own or use a firearm in your own home to fend off criminal attack.

Is that a “reasonable” gun law? Is that a just way to treat a free citizen? That you must be disarmed and disadvantaged if you become the target of a criminal predator in your home?

The Supreme Court today sad that such a ban is a violation of the 2nd Amendment, which confers an individual right to own and bear such weapons. The scholarly opinion written by Justice Scalia correctly referenced all manner of historical writings, precedents, and indications of the intent of the framers. They intended for the people to be able to keep and bear arms for self defense and other lawful pursuits.

If you don’t like guns, fine. Don’t own one. But don’t attempt to make this debate look like some sort of travesty of justice, when in fact, it is a restoration of justice.

By Winslo

June 26, 2008 7:40 PM | Link to this

To Rich S. :

Excellent thoughts sir but unfortunately you are dealing with a couple of neanderthal bloggers here.

By GOPs got to go

June 26, 2008 7:54 PM | Link to this

Abomi,

Why do we always get the impression that James is trying to live out a movie somewhere? He’s Clint, No wait he’s Jack, no wait, I was wrong now he’s John Wayne…..

All type, no ink.

By Rich S.

June 26, 2008 8:18 PM | Link to this

GOP got to go, at least James is speaking as someone with experience in firearms and federal law enforcement. Perhaps there is some experience you can learn from, if you could only open your brain a bit.

He’s relaying cogent questions and statemenents in his post, worthy of consideration.

You? Insults only.

Telling.

By Hillbilly Deluxe

June 26, 2008 8:29 PM | Link to this

Call me old fashioned but in my home I make the rules.

By Abomi Nation

June 26, 2008 8:45 PM | Link to this

GOPs got to go,

Did I ever tell you I’m in law enforcement also, yea thats right, I’m Superman. I’m also writing a book. A comic book.

Hey, gosh I just thought of something. Does the constitution guarantee the right to carry kryptonite? Call me liberal but I sure hope not.

Superman (Truth, justice, and the American way)

By gadawg

June 26, 2008 9:00 PM | Link to this

Countless surveys of hardened career criminals say it all. They do not fear police, justice system, prison, or any elaborate security measures. What they fear the most when perpetrating a crime is an ARMED potential victim. The pacifists won’t acknowledge this in their fairly tale world. You bring a knife to a gunfight, and the odds are not in your or your family’s favor.

By James

June 26, 2008 9:05 PM | Link to this

To Abomi Nationa and GOP gots to go, et al:

I realize I’m getting away from the point of this blog but Mr. Bookman I “think” will allow me this.

Two points:

1) I wish blogs required full identity and an articulation of one’s expertise (or lack thereof). I think it would make for much better exchanges.

2) I have only been blogging a short while as I have not been retired that long and certainly didn’t have time at work. However, based on my profession in dealing with “certain types” of individuals I have come to realize that a substantial number of individuals who blog have some type of personality disorder at the minimum. Obviously, that makes for very poor blogging for the rest of us.

Just my opinion. If the shoe fits wear it.

By Freedom

June 26, 2008 9:09 PM | Link to this

More than 8400 murders have occurred in Wash DC since the handgun ban has been in effect—not working quite so well, huh? I could give a rat’s tail if a bunch of gangsters and thugs want to kill each other—good riddance, and hopefully it will help the gene pool. However, if this ruling that allows for the legal possession of handguns by law abiding citizens saves even one victim’s life, then it is well worth it.

By ArmedtotheTeeth

June 26, 2008 9:25 PM | Link to this

A woman in our general neighborhood was raped and beaten to a pulp during a home invasion while her husband was at work. Shook us all in the neighborhood. The armed perps are at large. My wife and I are signed up to take shooting lessons and a handgun saftey course. With their advice, we will soon be shopping for the appropriate handgun. My wife who was previously very anti gun insisted on this. She said she’d rather be dead than go thru what that poor woman went thru. This is the real world folks.

By BurningAtlanta

June 27, 2008 4:30 AM | Link to this

Get your thumbs out of your whining mouths, put on some dry pants and grow up.

All the USSC did was uphold the right of the indivual to own firearms and specified it had zip to do with being a member of a militia. I was so sick to death of hearing that mindless argument from the clueless anti-gun crowd.

Localities still have the right to impose all sorts of restrictions but they can’t restrict handguns from the home nor require a firearm be kept in an unuseable condition.

Gee, American citizens have the right to make choices instead of mommy government making the decisions for them. The sky must be falling.

By aaron humes

June 27, 2008 6:15 AM | Link to this

So here goes Bookman again, filling elitist-penned time by trying to justify why crooks have second amendment rights superior to those willing to be regultated.

He asserts possible poilitical backfire to the GOP. The GOP and NRA apparently have been right all these decades, protecting what Bookman THINKS is important rather than the biggest picture of all - The Constitution and the environs molding it.

By GOPs got to go

June 27, 2008 6:45 AM | Link to this

No everyone of you gun slinging cowboy wannabes, I am not Rambo nor do I profess to be with every click of my mouse. However, I do have a lengthy background in healthcare and am ALL to familiar with the results of all your but up dukes mentality.

I for one am sick and tired of violence as an everyday occurrence. Guns of any kind available to the masses. Just where do we draw the line?

ER personal (not retired)

By Ben

June 27, 2008 7:37 AM | Link to this

I don’t care where you draw your line, that your business. Violence is a basic part of the human experience and that is not going change.

So now, anti-gunners you can’t say that court precedent doesn’t say we can’t individually own guns anymore.

By Ret LTC

June 27, 2008 7:59 AM | Link to this

I feel strongly that a person should have the absolute right to keep a weapon in his home. I also believe strongly that a property owner has the right to keep weapons off of his. That is where the battle is shaping up to be fought. So what’s it going to be. Gun rights over property rights or vice versa. It seems to me that this could be very conflicting for true conservatives.

By GodHatesTrash

June 27, 2008 8:00 AM | Link to this

The bottom line of the SCOTUS decision is this - our society, overloaded with knuckledragging paranoid sociopaths, now will make it even easier for those knuckledragging paranoid sociopaths to get deadly weapons.

Tell me how this is a good thing.

By hillbilly ragger

June 27, 2008 8:01 AM | Link to this

I’ve seen different polling numbers, and you can’t count on people to be totally honest when they answer such questions, but from what I can tell something like 70% of Americans do not own a firearm.

As you say, Jay—the NRA really has no clue as to how far is too far when it comes to grandstanding on the next court case or legislation.

And Ben @ 7.37, you may be right when you write “you can’t say that court precedent doesn’t say we can’t individually own guns anymore.”

Problem is, “strict constructionst” Justices like Thomas are kinda likely these days to say “precedent, schmecedent.” Actually that’s what they said to justify this latest ruling, which more or less overruled a 1939 ruling establishing the 2nd amendment’s right as a collective one, not an individual one.

So don’t get too comfy. The squishy SCOTUS giveth, and the squish SCOTUS taketh away.

And before anyone starts taking potshots at me, I’m pretty much agnostic on the whole thing. I think the 2nd amendment was weasel-y written on purpose, because the Founders couldn’t come right out and say what they really wanted to about keeping a standing army.

By Peaches

June 27, 2008 8:16 AM | Link to this

Jay Bookman thinks its a good idea for our soldiers to read terrorists their Miranda rights, extending constitutional protections to non Americans fighting us outside the US. But he is reliably snarky about preserving the right of firearm ownership for US citizens. One idea is pretty easy to find the constitution as it takes up an entire article in the Bill of Rights. The other idea has only been recently discovered by America hating liberals. Whose rights does he care care about? See the DNC spin from Jay? They want to attack the second amendment but learned their lesson about openly opposing gun ownership. Jay got that right off the fax from the DNC. Cushy job when a 23 year old DNC staffer faxes you your point of view every morning. Jay is a shill.

By GodHatesTrash

June 27, 2008 8:22 AM | Link to this

It is interesting to see how many people organize their entire lives around their paranoias - we have posters here who won’t go into the city without a glovebox piece, people who have planned in great elaborate detail for the highly unlikely exigency of a serial killer coming through their window and waking them up long enough for them to reach under their bed or pillow to find their pistolero (never mind the fact that guns in the home are 73 times more likely to to kill or injure family members than intruders), people who talk about how in their ‘general neighborhood’ (wherever the h-ell that is) that ‘some women’ was raped during a home invasion…

These fantasies are the products of weak and fevered minds, and yet, our highest court in the land yesterday indulged this sickness, this fear, this stupidity.

How sad for our country.

By Observer

June 27, 2008 8:23 AM | Link to this

I find it comical that some street thug can commit a violent crime with a handgun and the left (with the help of the ACLU) will scream about the defendant’s 4th amendment rights and seek to have the gun removed from evidence due to an illegal search. They never argue that the defendant didn’t commit the crime mind you, they just scream about the sanctity of the constitution and his 4th amendment rights.

Where has the ACLU been when it comes to protecting the 2nd amendment? It’s a part of that same sacred document and - like it or not - just as important as every other amendment.

Ah, nothing like the smell of hypocrisy in the morning.

By Ret LTC

June 27, 2008 8:25 AM | Link to this

hillbilly ragger is dead on target. The court left alot of wiggle room and like it or not, the next administration will shape SCOTUS for years to come. No matter who the president may be, the congress and senate are going to be heavily democratic. Any appointee has to get by them and they will have the numbers to influence even a President McCain to appoint justices that can be confirmed. There is no way SCOTUS doesn’t move to the left. I foresee future laws being upheld that confine weapons to one’s home, or bolster a property or business owner’s right to keep weapons off their property. Also be aware that insurance companies are not crazy about laws that allow weapons to be carried anywhere. They bear the liability when some “law abiding” citizen snaps and kills his coworkers, or a “good samaritan” with little or no firearms training decides to shoot it out with a bad guy and kills innocent bystanders in a restaurant, bank, wherever.

By Observer

June 27, 2008 8:38 AM | Link to this

For all of you strict gun control advocates – go check the statistics on violent crime in England immediately following their gun ban. More recently, check the statistics on violent crime in Australia since they instituted a gun ban. The use of firearms in the commission of a crime went up almost 40%!

I know it’s a worn out cliché, but when guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns.

There are reams of data documenting felonious use of firearms by criminals who owned and possessed those firearms illegally. The statistics on firearm-related crimes committed by those who owned legally registered weapons and had a valid permit to carry them is infinitesimal.

I can’t understand why some would argue against a person’s right to adequately (and legally) arm and defend himself.

By Don

June 27, 2008 8:41 AM | Link to this

So armedtotheteeth, I guess your wife is going to have this gun readily accessable 24/7? On the kitchen counter, the coffee table, the waistband of her panties, beside the toilet when she has to %$&^? This gun is going to be within arms reach when the bad guy comes through the door? She is going to be so aware of this percieved danger that her gun is at her side at all times even when that cell phone rings and she rushes to the next room to answer it? My guess is that if this threat ever comes through your door that you will have contributed to your wifes misfortune. You sir are an idiot. The theory and the reality of grabbing that gun is radically different than your wannabe gunslinger fantasies. Your wife would be safer with the alarm set and 911 on her cell phone speed dial. Morons like you will get your wife killed. I think they call it the law of unintended consequences. Same goes for you. I bet the night an intruder hits your house you are the one that gets messed up. Grow a set of cojones…or put 911 on your speed dial as well. You’ll live longer Wild Bill.

By Ray

June 27, 2008 8:42 AM | Link to this

Wait until you have been an intended victim of a car jacking and the only thing that saved your life was the Glock 40 on the seat next to you. Happened in Eufaula, AL about 11:00 PM at a stop sign. Three of our finest citizens were carrying ball bats but no guns. Rolled down the window, leveled the Glock at the first one and almost dropped a dime on this animal. They saw the Glock and yelled, “He got a gun”, and couldn’t get out there any faster. I carry one in my car at all times and have a concealed permit. I am a law abiding citizen, not a gun nut whacko, and have the right to protect myself and my family from animals who do not have the respect for life and property that civilized people do. It’s a shame that it has come to this but as soon as there are no animals like this out there, I will put the Glock away. Until then, don’t hold your breath.

By ron

June 27, 2008 8:43 AM | Link to this

Good Morning,I applaud the Supreme Court decision that it is not illegal for a law abiding citizen to own a gun in Washington D.C. Other arcane gun laws will be challenged across the country shortly.A federal lawsuit has already been filed against Chicago’s gun ban.Others will follow.Everything now will be decided on a case by case basis.Lawyers will be very happy.

American people are not stupid.They all realize that sensible guns laws have to be upheld.The argument now and for the immediate future will focus on what is sensible.Clearly a blanket ban is notsensible in way,shape ,nor form.

By Tommy

June 27, 2008 8:49 AM | Link to this

WOW Ray! Brilliant! Now tell us about that guy that just killed 5 of his co-workers with that Glock on the seat. You Dumbazz. Go shoot yourself in the foot.

By GodHatesTrash

June 27, 2008 8:51 AM | Link to this

If I were trolling around Eufaula AL in the middle of the night looking for street hookers or methamphetamine, i’d want to carry a gun in my glovebox, too.

But I’m not so I don’t.

By Cindy

June 27, 2008 8:58 AM | Link to this

For every story like Ray’s “Throw Down in Eufaula” story there are hundreds, maybe thousands where kids were killed in their home with a parents gun, where a perp killed a citizen with his own gun, or the gunowner killed himself or a family member with his surrogate manhood. Get a grip all you fantacizing cowards. This ain’t Dodge City and you ain’t Wyatt Earp.

By Ray

June 27, 2008 8:59 AM | Link to this

Tommy

Who is the dumba** here? Would you have rolled down the window and handed them the keys to your car and pleaded with them not to bash your skull in with a ball bat? Wait until it happens to you and you will not be so smug and judgmental about protecting yourself. Wonder what they would have done with my girlfriend when they finished with me? Gun bans will not stop that guy who wants to kill his co-workers anymore than it will stop thugs that want to steal your car. Wake up, your ignorance is showing.

By Earl

June 27, 2008 9:00 AM | Link to this

Gee, I wonder if a few weeks ago when the 26 young men were killed in one single week-end in Chicago, if the thugs who did the killings knew that the people of Chicago couldn’t self protect by owning a LEGAL handgun. I suppose it’s alright that all the gang banger thugs own illegal guns but no one can own a legal one. That’s justice? Face it, in cities such as Atlanta where the crime is always out of control; when Atlanta witnessed a double digit increase in homicides, robberies and personal attacks in the same year many cities saw a decrease in the same type crimes….you’d be a fool not to carry a gun here. Why should only the products of a single mom in the projects with a name no one can pronounce have guns? The Supreme Court just protected law abidding citizens and gave us the means to protect against thugs, hoodrats and criminals that are too sorry and stupid to work but they want to take away what you worked for. You liberals should be lucky it’s people like us that deter crime by having these thugs think twice before assaulting us now that the score is even. The NRA will now fight and win against gun restrictions in Chicago and San Fransisco, successfully. Why not ban matches because of arsonist or take away the fork and spoons of fat people.

By Carl Smith

June 27, 2008 9:05 AM | Link to this

Freedom did anybody bother to tell you that most inner city “murders” are bad guys killing bad guys? Some of you cretins want the streets of your cities to be like Tijuana or Juarez. Let the bad guys, and the cops do the killing. You impotent wannabes will only add to the body count. You’ll be the ones being counted you morons.

By Jimbo, THE FIRST

June 27, 2008 9:06 AM | Link to this

Oh Dear Abomination you quote a gallup poll without mentioning all of it.

yes, 49% are for expanding gun control.

But it’s how you phrase the question.

When asked “should we focus on enforcing existing laws?” it swings to 58%

and when asked “should be ban handguns?” 68% are against it.

You people with your “reasonable gun control legislation” (code word for ban) are pretty much as bad as the NRA. You overstepped yourselves in places like DC and Chicago and now the pendulum is swinging the other way.

By GodHatesTrash

June 27, 2008 9:08 AM | Link to this

As long as you have men with braids and baggy pants you need to own a handgun. Perhaps two of them if you take MARTA.

By Ray

June 27, 2008 9:09 AM | Link to this

GodHatesTrash,

Just taking my girlfriend home after dinner out and a movie. What a trashy statement. Your taste is in your mouth and you need to develop some manners.

By Jimbo, THE FIRST

June 27, 2008 9:10 AM | Link to this

Tommy, sure five people were killed at that plastic plant but tell me about how many lives Joel Myrick (using a gun from his car) saved in Pearl, Mississippi, when he stopped Luke Woodham on his way to the elementary school after he was done shooting up his own school.

By Jimbo, THE FIRST

June 27, 2008 9:15 AM | Link to this

I know more than a few black guys who have permits and carry legally. I don’t know if you racist fools are trolls building a strawman to point to, or if you’re serious.

If you’re serious then you need to examine the events in your life that helped you shape this opinion because when you start eliminating whole groups of possible threats insensibly you’re putting yourself in danger.

By EarthtoEarl

June 27, 2008 9:16 AM | Link to this

Earth to Earl! Those 26 were killed as the result of being criminals killed by other criminals. Tell the whole story Earl. Most of them were gang related. If you go into those areas you are either looking for something illegal, looking for trouble, or just plain stupid. Some of the examples here have absolutely nothing to do with law abiding, everyday joes being massacred in mass by roving predators. You guys are nothing but a bunch of sky is falling chicken littles. To bad you overjealous cowards can’t put this misplaced fascination with lengthening your manhood with a gun into something more beneficial as opposed to idiotic. As someone above said, you cowards don’t need guns you need to grow a set of balz.

By Lois

June 27, 2008 9:19 AM | Link to this

Ray,

Just clarifying. You were in a car correct? The “Thugs” had bats, correct? You were only at a stop sign, correct?

Ok, so forgive me, I may be slow, but why couldn’t you have just stepped on the gas and high-tailed it out of there?

Also, the way you describe the story, you kind of seem familiar. Wait, are you Vanilla Ice??

By Tommy

June 27, 2008 9:22 AM | Link to this

Ray did you ever think of just putting your foot on the gas and getting out of there. Probably not. You are the very guy that makes the lefts case. You just leave everybody goes home unharmed. Ray you are the exact kind of guy that gets someone hurt or killed. You are a danger to those around you just like the thugs are.

By Zeke

June 27, 2008 9:26 AM | Link to this

Folks, the Rays of the world have probably never been in that situation in their lives. But who are we to interrupt his wet dream.

By James

June 27, 2008 9:28 AM | Link to this

To GOP’s got to go:

My, my, my. So you’ve seen some blood in your profession. That’s nice. I’ve carried a few men from the field of battle myself.

If I could have a wish some day I think I might just be that for one week (probably just one day) except for me and my loved ones to have every police officer disappear and every gun in the nation disappear. Then I would watch while the brutal masses out there attacked and knifed and clubbed you folks bloddy. That’s all it would take and everyone of you would be out looking for your own gun at the end of my fantasy.

USMC (served proudly)

By Jimbo, THE FIRST

June 27, 2008 9:30 AM | Link to this

OH good lord, the more I read these short sighted comments the more I dislike my fellow Atlantans.

Don, you’re obviously not very good at risk management or mitigation. Keep your day job.

Carl, most is not all. Please show me statistics. There are plenty of good people who get victimized every year (out of the 1.2 million crimes that occur every year). While it’s uncommon to need the gun I carry (I’ve never needed it before) I’ve also never needed my life insurance, my renter’s insurance, my fire extinguisher, or even my spare tire.. sooo.. what would be your point? I still have that crap anyway, just. in. case.

Earl, remember that more guns don’t mean less crime.. unless you’re the Chicago PD deploying SWAT guys to patrol neighborhoods with assault rifles.. then more guns DO equal less crime for some reason.

Cindy, only about 1,000 people per year are killed accidentally with guns. Only 30,000 total die from guns each year. The total number of people who die in this country every year exceeds 2 million. If you want to save the children stop feeding them crap that makes them fat. Over half a million people die of heart disease every year. Get some context, or at least some fact before you start hitting me with your pointless emotional plea because the flu will kill more children (more people actually) than gun accidents will.

Observer, gun crime in England has risen something like 18% since the dunblane massacre. In a joint report between the crown and the DoJ rapes, theft, and robberies were rising in england while they were falling in the US. In the UK crime is higher than ever before, meanwhile here in the US crime is near a four decade low.

GodHatesTrash, You don’t know what god hate so don’t presume to know his will. Also you’re a sanctimonious jerk.

GOP’s got to go, Please read the ruling. It states that this shouldn’t be an alarm bell to roll back reasonable gun control. The guy from VT shouldn’t have ever been able to buy those guns, that loophole has since been closed. More should follow. If you people could wipe the froth from your mouth for a second and stop pursuing your idiot agenda for a second perhaps we could work together to actually create enforceable laws that benefit everyone. Until people stop being completely irrational about guns ON BOTH SIDES OF THE ARGUMENT then no meaningful compromise can be made.

By Pierce Randall

June 27, 2008 9:31 AM | Link to this

I would like to think that electoral dividends would come with opposition to gun control. I think, in a straight-up poll, you would find that in the country. But the polling would be heavily regional; people in cities and suburbs generally want tough gun control, and people in rural areas do not. I think there are few issues affected more by disproportionate representation in the Senate and electoral college.

By Ray

June 27, 2008 9:32 AM | Link to this

Lois,

Three cars, one on my left, one in front and one behind with a high wall on my right. No way out. This particular intersection had been the scene of two car jackings in that past month. Eufaula is not the most law abiding paradise, especially after 10:00 PM. I am not Vanilla Ice and the “thugs” did have bats that can make a decided dent in your skull. Picture yourself in the seat next to me where my girlfriend was sitting. She was pretty happy that we were armed. How would you have felt about the prospect of these not so friendly animals making your life pretty unforgettable on that night? Maybe you could have charmed them into leaving you alone. If you want to take chances like that, OK, but I prefer not to.

By Danny Douglas

June 27, 2008 9:32 AM | Link to this

Ray do you realize how stupid you are? What if one of those guys walking home from his softball game got your tag number and called the cops? You cretin. In the words of Denzel Washington in Training Day, “Do you wanna go home, or do you wanna go to jail.” Go home Ray. You can get 10 years for pointing a gun at a bunch of softball players.

By Kung Fu Wolf B*tch

June 27, 2008 9:37 AM | Link to this

I take offense to some people’s posts. Man, how come no Blacks have been on here to protest. You guys are making it sound like only black men do the henious crimes. That is very wrong! Maybe they get the most publicity, but they do not commit ALL the bad crimes.

Also, for “Cindy’s” scenrio… you forgot to add where he overpowered her and took her gun away and then committed the act holding her at gunpoint.

By George Washington

June 27, 2008 9:40 AM | Link to this

Well Jay, just imagine this: you are quietly sitting at the breakfast table, reading your penthouse magazine, and your wife suddenly comes at you with 38 snub nose revolver….Don’t ya want to be in a position to return the fire????

By AL

June 27, 2008 9:41 AM | Link to this

How do I know you’re Liberal? You’re afraid of everything. Guns, personal responsibilty, free enterprise, God, traditional families, convictions. Anything that requires personal and independant thought or responsibilty scares liberals to death. I will never understand??

By Ray

June 27, 2008 9:42 AM | Link to this

Danny Douglas,

Why do you have to twist this thing into something it wasn’t and admit that carrying a gun probably saved mine and my girlfriends life that night? Softball players don’t pin you into a situation like that. Would you have preferred not be armed in that situation? You somehow regret that law abiding citizens have a right to protect themselves from these animals. Who is the stupid one here?

By CommunistAJC

June 27, 2008 9:43 AM | Link to this

Jay, Again, you’re a moron.

This Supreme Court ruling is a HUGE win for individual rights. Democrats want to take away individual rights. Just a few years ago, Ted Kennedy tried to get a law passed that said if a criminal breaks in to your house, the home owner has to get out the house and then call the police. Liberals are the DUMBEST people on the planet. Criminals should just find out where liberals live and rob them. It’s not like liberals are going to do anything because liberals love criminals.

By Cindy

June 27, 2008 9:46 AM | Link to this

Keeping it Real…keep it real. Usually at these “events” there are large crowds of people right. And smart people go in groups, right? Furthermore, in the unlikely case that I am stupid enough to put myself in that situation, and in your scenario the guy has already grabbed me from the back fumbling for my gun is not likely to do me one bit of good. Keeping it really real jackazz, I would have used my remote to unlock my car so I am not fumbling for keys dumbazz style. You can come up with all the “possibilities” you want to, but it’s probabilities that matter moron. Responsible people take precautions to keep themselves out of your “possible” situations don’t they imbecile? It is possible that a bear will rush you from the treeline in your backyard too, but not very probable. Common sense is a person’s best defense and from reading the posts of some of you legend in your own mind gunslingers, you are the most likely to be a candidate for a body bag or the ER at Grady, not me.

By CommunistAJC

June 27, 2008 9:51 AM | Link to this

James, Couldn’t have said it better myself. Liberals don’t understand common sense. They see things through a fantasy spectrum. They think that islamic terrorist countries will just “be nice” if we leave them alone. They hate God and mock everyone who disagrees with them. I just read an article on Marx and I can not tell you the difference between a liberal and a Marxist. They are the same people. What a sad life.

By George Washington

June 27, 2008 9:52 AM | Link to this

I have a policy for people who come at me fast from behind on a dark city street: Shoot first, shoot accurate, and shoot alot……

By Danny Douglas

June 27, 2008 9:55 AM | Link to this

Ray! The obvious solution was to just leave. You were in a car that has an accelerator were you not? What you lacked in that situation was judgement. What happens if you did shoot someone with a bat. Guess who goes to jail Ray? Common sense was your best weapon in that situation. You were encased in a mass of steel capable of moving out of that situation. What did you do? Rolled the window down, pointed a gun, and created a scenario that could have gotten terminal. You show a total lack of common sense Ray. You make the left’s case with a story like that. You were the menace in that incident. To everyone. So next time you tell that story at least say that your car had broken down. LMAO!

By Earl

June 27, 2008 9:58 AM | Link to this

Ciny, go cook and clean and clip your man’s toesnails and stop trying to act like God gave you a brain. Also Cindy…firm up some, you type fat.

By Ray

June 27, 2008 9:59 AM | Link to this

Danny Douglas,

See post to Lois above.

By Danny Douglas

June 27, 2008 10:06 AM | Link to this

Thank you Ken for your astute post. But sorry, I am black and I play softball. While I doubt very much that they were softball players, the point I was making was that if Ray had offed one of these guys he would have been facing no less than a manslaughter charge when his case went to trial. And by the way, his tell got taller as people questioned his judgement. That cannot be denied. Cars to the left of him, cars to the rear of him, cars to the front of him, big wall to his right and with all of these other cars and people around, him in the middle, the bat wielders picked him out to menace. Ray’s story just got more unbelievable as it grew. He fabricated an incident to reinforce his argument. Come on! All Ray had to do was say dark empty street, car broke down, yada yada yada. Ray’s an idiot.

By RW

June 27, 2008 10:07 AM | Link to this

Cindy, calm down and relax. If a person is sitting at home minding their won business and all of a sudden a home invader comes through the front door, how is this the fault of the homeowner and as you said placing yourself in danger. Cindy, you are the reason women cannot be taken serious in a serious discusion and why women are paid less than men. Thank-you Cindy for your ill thought out post, which made men laugh at women a little harder. I think you should go do what Earl told you to do and I will add one more chore. Service your man to completion if he’ll allow you to.

By CommunistAJC

June 27, 2008 10:09 AM | Link to this

This sums up liberals.

To begin with, the liberal agenda is, in many respects, the same as it was in the thirties. Whether you call it communism, fascism, socialism, liberalism, or progressivism, the only real difference is how much they believe they can get away with, the way they sell it to people, and the latest trendy name for what they believe.

So, once the liberals pick a policy from their stale program to push, the next step is to get it implemented. This is where liberals have problems because whether a policy makes sense, is practical, or actually improves people’s lives is of secondary importance to them. What is important to liberals is whether supporting or opposing that policy makes them feel good about themselves.

This is why liberals continue to support dysfunctional policies that have been failing miserably for decades and why they often oppose common sense programs that have been proven to work time and time again — because it isn’t about whether it works or not, it’s about how it makes them feel.

In other words, a liberal will almost always prefer a policy that’s extremely expensive, is difficult to implement, helps almost no one, but seems “nice” — to a policy that is cheap, simple to implement, extremely effective, and seems “mean.”

By Clever Shrew

June 27, 2008 10:10 AM | Link to this

Sharon,

Nice. Obviously your mama taught you not to hate men, but bred a lot of Lesbian hating.

And have you ever heard any news reports that say, “so and so, a repressed Lesbian, gunned down several people in the park today…”

No, didn’t think so.

By CommunistAJC

June 27, 2008 10:13 AM | Link to this

More disturbing is the Left’s ever-increasing reliance on what are commonly thought of as fascist tactics. Liberals at college campuses attempt to disrupt conservative speeches and the Democrats want to try to drive conservative talk radio hosts off the air with the Fairness Doctrine. Conservatives like Tom DeLay, Rush Limbaugh, and Ann Coulter have been targeted criminally for political reasons and there’s even talk of trying to jail members of the Bush Administration over policy differences after they’re out of office. Ideological soulmates of modern liberals — like Stalin, Lenin, and Mao — would certainly approve of those tactics.

Still, even though this is a center-right country, we do have political cycles and there are times when those cycles favor the Left. When that happens and the Lefties start to get a bit more confident, usually a few liberals at the edges will start talking about what they want to do. At that early point, most other liberals will still vehemently deny their ideological goals to the public out of fear that it will prevent them from getting into power.

However, when the Left gains enough strength to be capable of getting one of the policies they favor implemented, all the liberals who previously denied that they supported it will unapologetically shift on a dime and vote for it en masse — while they rely on their ideological allies in the media and the fact that many Americans are ill informed about politics to cover their tracks.

So, if you want to know what liberals want to do, their words mean absolutely nothing because lying about their agenda has become as natural to them as chasing a cat is to a dog.

Instead, what you have to do is watch what other liberals have done when they have come into power. Look at Canada, where conservatives are being put on trial for hate crimes because they’ve dared to criticize Muslims. Look at European countries, where they have socialistic economies, sky high tax rates, rigid speech codes, and overweening nannystates. You can even look at liberal enclaves in the United States like Berkeley and San Francisco, where members of the military are treated like pariahs and they boo the national anthem.

If you believe the liberals in Berkeley, France, Canada or for that matter in the bowels of the Daily Kos or Huffington Post, are significantly different than, say Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton, you are kidding yourself. The only differences are in what they think they can get away with and how honest they are willing to be about their agenda.

By JAY BOOKMAN

June 27, 2008 10:15 AM | Link to this

To Trash:

You are banned from posting for the rest of the day on this blog.

By Cindy

June 27, 2008 10:15 AM | Link to this

Sharon, i’ve been on this earth for 67 years and common sense always trumps false bravado. And by the way Sharon, how does my post make me a lesbian. Are you not allowed out of the house because only lesbians go somewhere alone. Hate men? In what way did my post have anything to do with men? Where did you get that one? Me thinks you are trying to villify me in Rovian fashion because it is extremely hard to argue with common sense. What your mother should have taught you was to use common sense in all situations and you might be able to have a little independence in your life and not have to have a man, a dog, or a gun just to go to the local Kroger store. Sharon, sorry, but your post makes you look really stupid.

By Bosch

June 27, 2008 10:15 AM | Link to this

How funny. Al says liberals are scared of everything - and yet reading these posts, it seems the gun-toting cowboy wingnuts are scared of the “what if” criminal.

Uh, huh. Yeah, Al, that makes sense (as I roll my eyes).

Boo! Look! It’s a criminal coming up behind you! It’s an Islamofascist terrorist coming to cut your head off!

Boo!

By CommunistAJC

June 27, 2008 10:18 AM | Link to this

JAY BOOKMAN, Thanks for illustrating Marx style control. Hello Nanny Bookman.

By Ray

June 27, 2008 10:18 AM | Link to this

Danny Douglas,

I first of all do not care what you think! This whole story is very true, rather unforgettable and has been the main reason why I am an advocate for gun rights to protect myself and my family. Just put yourself in that scenario one time and your mind will change too. I would venture to say that you are some arm chair liberal who has no clue what the real world is like and wants to shove your spin down the throats of people who think and act for themselves. Who is the idiot here?

By APD Officer

June 27, 2008 10:18 AM | Link to this

Sharon, Cindy just gave you a blueprint for what a woman should do to keep herself safe. Listen to her. She is a much less likely victim than you.

By Bosch

June 27, 2008 10:20 AM | Link to this

Communist AJC -

Why do you wingnuts not cite the nonsense material you post and try to pass it off as your own ideas?

[Give the author of the ridiculous article his due](http://www.omegaletter.com/blogs/index.php/2008/06/27/why-liberals-lie-about-what-they-believe/

By common sense

June 27, 2008 10:23 AM | Link to this

A gun by itself will not kill. It takes a stupid person or a criminal to do so.

Gun bans will not stop criminals from getting guns. If you think otherwise, you are naive. It will just help keep out of the law-abiding masses.

If you are of legal age, have full mental capacity, and not a former resident of our penitentiaries, then you should be able to own guns, period!!! And those restrictions are already in place.

Some argue numbers, then we should ban automobiles. They kill more than idiots do with firearms. Probably should ban hospitals, because they put thousands in the ground due to the few incompentents that make their way into the field.

We should be very afraid of politicians that want to remove existing rights. What rights will they pick and choose to remove and regulate to fit their agenda?

We should be very afraid of politicians that stand on the fence. They are either wishy-washy or hiding their true position. Why would they hide their true position? Could it be they have hidden agendas!!!

By T

June 27, 2008 10:23 AM | Link to this

Crime will be on the rise. Basic things cost more. So, when the home invaders or the white meth heads, or whom ever decide they need to kick in my door, Ill be there.

One shot one kill!

I love my rifle. Think Ill get a nice 45 and a permit next.

By Bosch

June 27, 2008 10:25 AM | Link to this

Let’s try that again:

Communist AJC -

Why do you wingnuts not cite the nonsense material you post and try to pass it off as your own ideas?

Give the author of the ridiculous article his due

By CommunistAJC

June 27, 2008 10:26 AM | Link to this

Bosch, My bad. Yeah I got it off of Townhall.com. Never tried to pass it off as my own. Just wrote: This sums up liberals. By the way, it makes more sense and calls out liberals for what they really are. Liars, communist, God haters and baby killers.

By GaLiberal

June 27, 2008 10:27 AM | Link to this

This wrongheaded and convoluted decision by the Supreme Court gives lie to the right-wing mantra of ‘strict constitutional interpretation.’ Clearly, this right is tied to membership in a militia or other armed forces and IS NOT an individual right. But the SC gave into populist hysteria over ‘self-protection’ and other lies the NRA and gun nuts push as truths. This will make the US a more dangerous place to live. Gun-related deaths will skyrocket. People will bring guns into work and you will catch hell if you try to stop them. This is the fallout from putting Rethuglicons in control. This is what happens when people don’t think about the consequences of their actions. This is what happens when people believe in lies and deceit - which is all the Rethuglicons have. I’ll remember in November. Will you?

When you vote Rethuglicon, you vote against your own best interests. And this decision is living proof.

By Danny Douglas

June 27, 2008 10:27 AM | Link to this

Getting mad enough to pull your heater and shoot me now Ray? Keep going. Make everyone’s case that fools and hotheads don’t need guns outside of their homes. But giving you the benefit of the doubt, why was it that they targeted you and you were in the middle of all these other people and cars? Can you tell us just what it was that made them pick you out?

By CommunistAJC

June 27, 2008 10:28 AM | Link to this

Botch, Your link didnt work. So I will post where I found the liberal liars article.

http://townhall.com/columnists/JohnHawkins/2008/06/27/whyliberalslieaboutwhattheybelieve

By h

June 27, 2008 10:28 AM | Link to this

Jay,

first time on your blog. Have been on Wooten’s a lot. Have never seen anyone get banned.

I give you props though for keeping control of your blog before it gets too crazy!

By Jimbo, THE FIRST

June 27, 2008 10:30 AM | Link to this

False bravado? Common sense?

I’m first and foremost a coward. I rely on avoiding trouble to ensure my safety. I’m in the security business so I maintain a pretty keen situational awareness. For what it’s worth Cindy I agree that the first keystone of safety is being aware of where you are and making wise decisions. I’m not a gun slinger, I’m good with a gun, but I’m not a gun slinger.. the weapon I carry is so small and unassuming and useless as anything but a last ditch line of defense that you’d never be able to call me a gunslinger with false bravado with a straight face.

I’ve already spoken about why I carry. I carry for the same reasons I have insurance policies and a spare tire in the trunk, because no matter how unlikely a thing is, it’s better to be prepared for it than not. Now admittedly, there’s some risk management involved because you can’t be prepared for EVERYTHING, but a gun in the pocket is something that’s relatively easy to handle. So.. That’s my thing.

The general lack of civility is frustrating to me when it comes to this subject. I get frustrated and hostile myself and I think if people could see the other side of the argument or live and let live.. well.. being nosy, judgmental, and involved in other peoples’ business is the zeitgeist. Probably the greatest disappointment this country has to offer.

By JAY BOOKMAN

June 27, 2008 10:31 AM | Link to this

Keeping it Real and all your other pseudonyms: You too. Out of the pool for the rest of the day.

By Bosch

June 27, 2008 10:34 AM | Link to this

Thank you Communist AJC -

Now, that wasn’t so hard now was it?

I hate plagarism. Don’t you?

By ed from ga

June 27, 2008 10:36 AM | Link to this

I’m a lifelong liberal Democrat who doesn’t fit the idiot stereotypes from the crackpot conservatives writing here.

As in any serious debate, there are no simple resolutions.

I read Justice Scalia’s decision and found it well reasoned, well researched and logically and legally sound. I support all of the Constitution, and I support legal, responsible gun ownership.

If you don’t want to own a gun, then don’t; that’s as much a personal choice as having an abortion, or not. But the constant disparagement of people who disagree with another’s personal view serves none of us well.

And to those who seem to believe black folks are the sole or major perpetrators of violent crime, and thus have the starring roles in your lurid descriptions, are you sure you’re not better off spending your time spinning these fantasies as a cuckold site? They do exist. This is the internet, you know.

By Don

June 27, 2008 10:36 AM | Link to this

Jeeeze folks. Banning guns is the agenda of a very few people. The issue is WHERE a person should be able to carry a gun. There are logical arguments on each side. I tend to agree with Ret LTC. Property owners should have the right to dictate whether or not guns are allowed on their property. Very few people go to the mat over guns in your home or in your car. Get a grip people.

By Bosch

June 27, 2008 10:37 AM | Link to this

Communist AJC,

Copying and pasting an article and posting it under your name without giving credit to the original author, is trying to pass it off as your own idea.

Just saying.

By Gumbykelly

June 27, 2008 10:38 AM | Link to this

More gun laws make no difference at all except to keep honest people from having needed defense. The definition of a criminal is one who does not obey the laws. This country needs to wake up and realize that almost anything can be a weapon. It all depends on the person who is using it. Guns, in and of themselves, are not any more dangerous than a paperweight. It is the person in control of the gun that is the danger. There should be mandatory classes for new handgun owners so that they can be safely used and stored.

By Davo

June 27, 2008 10:42 AM | Link to this

Hooray for the the people of D.C.! The idea that the govt could put you in jail for defending your life and property is unconstitutional to the extreme.

I have to add that I find many of the comments here very disturbing. Threats and insults only reinforce the ‘liberal’ opinion that some people shouldn’t have guns. Stop the bluster and act like adults please.

By Ray

June 27, 2008 10:43 AM | Link to this

Danny Douglas,

Driving a 93 Nissan Z car, the second most hijacked car in 1997. Car had a manual trans, came up the hill, coasted to a red light in neutral. Before the light, one car sped up and ended up ahead of me, one car on the left, very close and one behind. A high wall on the right. They had done this before. Late at night, only car on the street. Probably parked out of sight on the approach road, waiting for the right target. No, I don’t want to shoot you or any other law abiding citizen. That WOULD be pretty stupid. You have the right to possess or to not possess a hand gun to protect yourself from a similar incident as you wish. So do I.

By Lois

June 27, 2008 10:51 AM | Link to this

Danny douglas, I think you’re right. The story has changed.

Thought it was a stop sign Ray. Now a red light?

I quote you at 8:42 Happened in Eufaula, AL about 11:00 PM at a stop sign.

Hmmmmm…..

By Gumbykelly

June 27, 2008 10:52 AM | Link to this

I rest my case on this note from todays copy of this website. Michigan man accused of fork, chicken attacks JACKSON, Mich. — A man was accused of stabbing his mother with a fork and assaulting a second woman with 10 pounds of frozen chicken.

Frederick Duane McKaney, 40, of Ypsilanti, was arraigned Wednesday in 12th District Court in Jackson. He faces two felony assault charges as well as one count of assault and battery and one count of resisting an officer.

Prosecutors said McKaney stabbed his mother in the back of the neck with a fork Monday night.

About an hour later, he hit a woman in the head with a plastic bag of frozen chicken. They had exchanged rude words while he rode his bicycle. She needed five surgical staples to close her wound.

McKaney has no attorney on record with the court.

A pre-exam conference is scheduled for July 2.

By James

June 27, 2008 10:55 AM | Link to this

By James

June 27, 2008 9:28 AM | Link to this

To GOP’s got to go:

My, my, my. So you’ve seen some blood in your profession. That’s nice. I’ve carried a few men from the field of battle myself.

If I could have a wish some day I think I might just be that for one week (probably just one day) except for me and my loved ones to have every police officer disappear and every gun in the nation disappear. Then I would watch while the brutal masses out there attacked and knifed and clubbed you folks bloddy. That’s all it would take and everyone of you would be out looking for your own gun at the end of my fantasy.

USMC (served proudly)

By Clever Shrew

June 27, 2008 10:56 AM | Link to this

Lois,

you forgot:

he also said he rolled doen the window and leveled the glock at them.

I assume, Ray that you were driving? I also assume, that since it was a Nissan, the steering wheel was on the left side of the car?

So my question now is, if these men came up to you, it would have been between you and this other car on your left, and how would you have rolled down the window and leveled your glock at them?

For that matter, how did they run off? Also, if there were three other cars, where were these supposed car-jackers going to go?

Now, would you like to tell us all the truth about how you felt like showing off for your girlfriend and scaring the cr*p out of some guys walking home after baseball?

By Bosch

June 27, 2008 10:56 AM | Link to this

Okay Ray,

Yawn. We get it. You’re one tough guy.

Can everyone just agree that Ray is tough and a bad a* and thank God he saved his family and all that so his ego can be saved and let’s just move on?

By Danny Douglas

June 27, 2008 10:57 AM | Link to this

So Ray. Now these batboys are going to jack a car trapped on all sides by other citizens. Come on Ray! You get more far out with every post. If this happened at all my suspision is that your paranoia overruled your common sense and you pulled a gun. Exactly the reason that guys like you shouldn’t have easy access to a gun.