Saturday, March 22

Attempted Murder ="first- and second-degree robbery"

Democrat controlled Administrations are all big on keeping guns out of the hands of law-abiding citizens. Their excuse is that more guns will equal more crime. This excuse continues to be used (and accepted by Democrats) even though statistics show that more legally registered guns actually reduce crime.

But why is it that Democrat-hate for guns stop when it comes time to punishing those caught with illegal firearms? Last month I wrote about Cynthia Nixon who went into the building that houses Washington DC's Police Headquarters and tried to shoot a guard in an attempt to steal his gun. The only reason the guard is still alive is because her gun did not fire when she pulled the trigger. So far, she has only been charged with assault. Considered what she intended to do, that's a gift for her and an insult to the victim and the rest of us. No charge of attempted murder. No gun charges either even though she was in violation of DC's gun ban the moment she drove into the city from Virginia.

Now I find another similar story, this time in New York City, which has almost as draconian gun laws as Washington, DC. Again, the victim is able to tell the story only because the criminal's gun failed to fire.
March 21, 2008 -- A thug trying to steal a religious necklace off a man's neck in the East Village shoved a gun into the petrified victim's cheek and repeatedly pulled the trigger - but the gun kept jamming. - NY Post
So, what are the charges this time?
"I didn't hear any shots, and a burst of energy came in me," Nuñez said. "I started running. I looked back, and I saw him still trying to shoot, and the gun didn't go off."

The alleged gunman, Ashford Pyle, 18, was arrested on Wednesday and charged with first- and second-degree robbery for the March 7 stickup. Pyle was being held at Rikers Island on $20,000 bail. - NY Post
Again, no attempted murder charge. Again, no gun charges have been filed. Since he is 18, there is no way that the gun was legally in his possession. Look at what a person faces if they want to buy a gun legally in New York City. He is simply too young to have completed the process.
I DIDN'T want to be Bernie Goetz. I just wanted a handgun. Legally. Something to keep at home. A move within Manhattan had taken me away from the comforts of doorman security (you know how it is). A little extra protection seemed prudent, 911 calls can take a while to answer, and Rudy isn't going to be mayor forever. Should be pretty straightforward, I thought. In my native Britain it would be impossible. But this is the United States, home of the Second Amendment, land of liberty.

Government knows its place. They do things differently in America.

But then there's New York City, a place where the old constitutional certainties have been replaced by the rules of the NYPD, License Division. If you believe that this is a local problem, a Big Apple nightmare that could never apply to you, think again. A dozen states already insist on handgun permits. Citing as always "the children," it is clear that Candidates Gore and Bradley want to expand on this at the federal level. The Brady Act was not enough. There's earnest talk of licensing, registration, additional checks to which, allegedly, only the unreasonable could object.

But the unreasonable have a point. New York City's licensing system has turned a right into a privilege. Like all privileges, it's enjoyed only by the few. There may be more than 7 million people in the five boroughs, but only 40,000 have valid handgun permits. Licensing isn't the thin end. It is the wedge. If you want to find out what that modest-sounding licensing requirement can mean in the hands of a bureaucracy that doesn't want you to have a handgun, come here, to the City. - National Review - Commented at FFI 24 Aug 07
Go read the whole story. The process is punishment for those who have committed no crime other than a desire to take advantage of one of their rights supposedly protected by the Constitution. There is no reason why a person needs to spend more time going through the process to obtain his handgun legally than people get time in jail for having an illegal handgun. You might wonder why Democrats are so willing to go soft on these people. I think it is because these criminals do the most havoc in poor neighborhoods, which are the Democrat's voter base, which help keep the neighborhoods poor. If the criminal elements are removed, than these people might have an opportunity for better lives and as a result might leave the Democrat Party. So it makes you wonder what is a more dangerous weapon. A gun or a politician.

The Supreme Court is now looking at DC's Gun ban. Hopefully when they rule, the ruling will require DC, New York City and other oppressive gun jurisdictions to loosen their regulations to permit law-abiding citizens a chance at gun-ownership.


No comments: