An interesting editorial

[armedandsafe]

Investor's Business Daily
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnal...?id=536098&p=2

A Gun For Grandpa

Posted 06/02/2010 06:37 PM ET


Second Amendment: Chicago is deciding whether to prosecute a great-grandfather and Korean War veteran under its handgun ban. He refused to be a victim, and now there's one less armed thug roaming the streets. What's the problem?

If the 80-year-old vet living on the city's West Side didn't have the gun the city said he shouldn't have, he and his 83-year-old wife and 12-year-old great-grandson might have joined those victims of gun violence about whom gun-control advocates constantly chirp.

The vet obtained the gun in violation of the city's handgun ban after a prior incident in which the couple was robbed at gunpoint by three armed intruders. So when Anthony Nelson — a parolee with a record of drug and gun arrests — tried breaking into their East Garfield Park home, they were ready.

Nelson fired twice at the as-yet-unnamed homeowner, who walks with a cane but retained enough of his military marksmanship to drop the intruder with a single gunshot to the chest. Yet in some quarters, instead of being hailed as a hero, it's the homeowner who's being considered a threat and the armed predator a victim of gun violence.

When asked if the 80-year-old would be charged for violating the city's gun ban, Mayor Richard Daley, who recently threatened to put a gun up the posterior of a reporter questioning the ban's effectiveness, said: "I don't know. Thank you very much." Of course, if the homeowner didn't have the gun, he might not be alive to be charged.

Pressed further on the incident, Daley, who goes nowhere in the city without armed protection, cautioned that "guns is not the answer to the problems that we see in a home, in the streets of America. It's as simple as that." Sorry, mayor, but in this incident calling 911 was not an option and armed intruders do not obey gun bans.

Guns is the answer. It's as simple as that.

Here is yet another example of guns saving lives — the side of the equation that never makes the headlines. In many instances, merely brandishing a firearm has been sufficient to thwart off an assault or home invasion, but instances of the successful defensive use of firearms never seem to make the headlines or the statistics.

Chicago Tribune columnist John Kass wrote in 2008 that in his city only two classes of people can possess firearms — criminals and politicians. Chicago politicians, he noted, either used their influence to "become deputized peace officers so they can carry" or "often go around surrounded by armed bodyguards on the city payroll."

That may soon change if the U.S. Supreme Court decides that the 2nd Amendment applies to all Americans and not just to residents of the District of Columbia. In a 5-4 decision in 2008, Heller v. District of Columbia, written by Justice Anton Scalia, the high court overturned D.C.'s draconian gun ban and ruled that Americans did indeed have an individual right to keep and bear arms.

A three-judge panel of the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, led by Judge Frank Easterbrook, subsequently rejected suits brought by the National Rifle Association against the city of Chicago and its suburb of Oak Park using Heller as a precedent. It ruled, essentially, that the 2nd Amendment applied only to the federal enclave. We are not making this up.

Otis McDonald, a 76-year-old Army veteran who lives in a high crime area of Chicago thinks the 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution he fought to protect gives him the right to bear arms to protect himself and his wife as he once protected his country. He sued and the Supreme Court will soon rule on his case and Chicago's gun ban.

We trust that the court will rule that the right of American veterans and just plain homeowners to be able to defend themselves and their families against armed predators shall not be infringed.

Pops

[Marlin T]

I find it disturbing and disgusting that Daley didn't come right out and say, "No he will not be prosecuted."

The war on our rights has been a long one, with little victories won at a time till we are were we are now. A little victory here for the Anti Constitutionals and a little one there finally add up to HUGE victories and then even more oppressive laws being passed because the so called president has been set.

This is why the history of the USA needs to be taught to our children. It is important to know why the Bill of Rights are there and how they came to be.

Compromising on the laws of nature only leads to repressive situations, as seen in this article.

[300 H&H]

Don't forget, we also need to teach shooting skills to our youth. The are the future.

Regards, Kirk

[Terry_P]

Chicago Tribune columnist John Kass wrote in 2008 that in his city only two classes of people can possess firearms — criminals and politicians. Chicago politicians, he noted, either used their influence to "become deputized peace officers so they can carry" or "often go around surrounded by armed bodyguards on the city payroll."

Key quote. What he didn't say as there are two classes of people in Chicago: the oppressed class and the ruling class. There will always be criminals meaning to hurt someone but what is critical in a society is the relationship between the people and their government. In Chicago it's more like a monarchy with one Dailey taking over from his father. In short it is unamerican. Firearms are the founders way of turning the tables and I truly believe the Supreme Court will reverse Chicago's gun ban. Leaving an 80 year old twisting in the wind is how a monarchy operates when one of it's subjects has upset the king.

[armedandsafe]

Actually, his statement had an error in it. Criminals and politicians are not two classes in Chicago. They are one, single class.

Pops

[Jim K]

"I find it disturbing and disgusting that Daley didn't come right out and say, 'No he will not be prosecuted.' "

Not likely. Daley is a thug, like most Chicago politicos, and his goal is to keep the gangsters and illegal drug dealers happy and voting for him, and sharing their loot with the political machine.

Jim

[Old Grump]

When specifically asked about the use of a gun for self defense but the old vet Daley's terse answer was "Guns are not the answer." Then he was out of there. He knows he is wrong, some of his old long time supporters know he is wrong but he will not concede the point. It does not mesh with his ideal Utopian Green Chicago.

Last day of May there were 22 people shot, one of them killed. On the first day of June there were 3 more people wounded. From what I could tell most of them were under 30 but the ages ranged from 17 to 56 including a pregnant 18 year old. So tell me Mr. Daley, how is this gun free Utopia working out for you?

[NRA_guy]

"It's better to be tried by 12 than carried by 6."

[petesusn]

"Yet in some quarters, instead of being hailed as a hero, it's the homeowner who's being considered a threat and the armed predator a victim of gun violence."

Pretty much the way it goes nowadays.

[Rocketman1]

Originally Posted by Old Grump

Last day of May there were 22 people shot, one of them killed. On the first day of June there were 3 more people wounded. From what I could tell most of them were under 30 but the ages ranged from 17 to 56 including a pregnant 18 year old. So tell me Mr. Daley, how is this gun free Utopia working out for you?

All of these folks that were shot and wounded and the families of those that were killed, should start a class action law suite agains Mr. Daily and the City of Chicago. Since the city took away their gun rights, then the city and Mr. Daily are responsible for there protection.

[Terry_P]

Originally Posted by armedandsafe

Actually, his statement had an error in it. Criminals and politicians are not two classes in Chicago. They are one, single class.

Pops

Excellent point.

Advice from Curtis and Leroy:

Limit all U.S. politicians to two terms.

One in office and one in prison

Detroit and Chicago already do this.

[Trouble 45-70]

What Curtis and Leroy said.

[wyoredot]

What an outrage! Daley is a steaming pile of ykw for even considering that this man was wrong. He took a leach off the streets and saved his family! The man should be appluaded for this act, not demonized, for Gods sake...

[rentalguy1]

eff Daley, and eff shy town

[NRA_guy]

Originally Posted by Rocketman1

All of these folks that were shot and wounded and the families of those that were killed, should start a class action law suite agains Mr. Daily and the City of Chicago. Since the city took away their gun rights, then the city and Mr. Daily are responsible for there protection.

The Supreme Court has ruled that the government owes the citizens no protection from criminals.

[Rocketman1]

Originally Posted by NRA_guy

The Supreme Court has ruled that the government owes the citizens no protection from criminals.

And... so if the federal government can't protect us from criminals then the government and local governments should not be able to take away our gun rights so we can protect our selves.

In this case the local government took away gun rights, so the victims should be able to sue the pants of the city of Chicago.