The governor of Pennsylvania wants to take away your Constitutionally guaranteed right to bear arms. He believes that there are guns flying or walking around his Commonwealth and this nation on their own, blasting away at the citizens under his charge. He believes that if he just takes away your guns, then the bad people who want to sell drugs and rob folks will never again have firearms in their hands. This must be the case. He must believe that, like some crazed cartoon, a gun walks up to people on its own and demands their cash. Or that a gun shoots itself at people on a drug corner. Or that guns leave their homes, drive down the block in their cars, and kill police officers. Never mind all of the evidence that seems to point to something completely different. That there actually do seem to be human beings who are carrying those guns, robbing people with them, and pulling the trigger to shoot people. And there is a funny thing about the vast majority of the people who it seems are always carrying those guns. They have a criminal record, have been arrested by law enforcement already, been convicted by juries and judges already, and been sent to prison already. Unfortunately for their subsequent robbery and assault and murder victims, many of them have been released early from their sentences. People sentenced to 15-20 year sentences get out routinely in a half dozen years. People sentenced to 25 years behind bars are out in a decade. And what do the heavy majority then do? They return to a life of crime, often using guns to accomplish this task. But perhaps Governor Ed Rendell understands this, and maybe he just thinks that if we do away with guns then it will be more difficult for these individuals to obtain them. What do you think? Do you think that if a bad guy wants to get a gun, no matter what kind of laws and restrictions the Governor has instituted, that he will not be able to get one? I mean, there are literally tens of thousands of guns already in the hands of private citizens across the country, and no amount of legislation enacted is going to ever do away with that fact. No, the fact is that bad guys will always be able to get their hands on guns, and the further fact is that Governor Ed Rendell knows it. He is not a stupid man, he is just a politician, and what politicians have learned over the years to do best is to make people feel good, to make them feel as if the politicians are doing something, anything, to help alleviate problems. Just like any other politician who has ever said them, Governor Rendell knows that when he and other pols speak lines such as "We're going after the guns! This is outrageous, all these shootings! Something has to be done, and we're going to do it!" he sounds tough, and some people believe it means he is looking out for them. The fact is that politicians know that they can never do away with all the guns out there, and that they cannot keep them out of the hands of bad guys. They simply do not have the political courage to stand up and tell you the truth, that the vast majority of gun crimes, like any other crimes, are committed by the same small percentage of the population over and over again, and that if you just keep these folks off the streets, crime will drop precipitously. If someone gets 25 years in jail, keep them in jail for 25 years. That's a quarter of a century that some violent criminal will not be able to victimize society. If they commit another such crime on being released, double their penalty. That pretty much takes them out of the game for the rest of their lives and ours. Spray paint doesn't cause graffiti, ignorant and delinquent people do. Matches don't light forest fires, careless and reckless people do. Guns don't rob, injure, and kill, dangerous people do. If the Governor and others like him are ever successful in restricting or limiting the purchase of guns, then the only people who will have a hard time getting their hands on them will be law abiding citizens such as you and I. There is a popular argument that these generally liberal politicians like to make, that individuals should be able to own a handgun, but not high-powered, military-style, automatic or semi-automatic weapons. They like to say that no one needs weapons such as those. Why is that? Who are they to decide that they know better than the framers of our American Constitution, who envisioned ownership of private firearms as a means of ensuring that the government could not oppress the people at the barrels of its own guns one day? Americans have the right, guaranteed by our Constitution, to protect ourselves with private firearm ownership. That was the intent of our Founding Fathers, that has been the position of numerous court decisions down through our history, and that is the reality of the situation. Liberal politicians such as Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell would be far more sincere, and far more effective, if they spent less time worrying about taking away our guns and more time worrying about taking away freedom from criminals and keeping them behind bars where they belong.
Showing posts with label Pennsylvania. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Pennsylvania. Show all posts
Monday, April 20, 2009
Rendell is Wrong on Guns
The governor of Pennsylvania wants to take away your Constitutionally guaranteed right to bear arms. He believes that there are guns flying or walking around his Commonwealth and this nation on their own, blasting away at the citizens under his charge. He believes that if he just takes away your guns, then the bad people who want to sell drugs and rob folks will never again have firearms in their hands. This must be the case. He must believe that, like some crazed cartoon, a gun walks up to people on its own and demands their cash. Or that a gun shoots itself at people on a drug corner. Or that guns leave their homes, drive down the block in their cars, and kill police officers. Never mind all of the evidence that seems to point to something completely different. That there actually do seem to be human beings who are carrying those guns, robbing people with them, and pulling the trigger to shoot people. And there is a funny thing about the vast majority of the people who it seems are always carrying those guns. They have a criminal record, have been arrested by law enforcement already, been convicted by juries and judges already, and been sent to prison already. Unfortunately for their subsequent robbery and assault and murder victims, many of them have been released early from their sentences. People sentenced to 15-20 year sentences get out routinely in a half dozen years. People sentenced to 25 years behind bars are out in a decade. And what do the heavy majority then do? They return to a life of crime, often using guns to accomplish this task. But perhaps Governor Ed Rendell understands this, and maybe he just thinks that if we do away with guns then it will be more difficult for these individuals to obtain them. What do you think? Do you think that if a bad guy wants to get a gun, no matter what kind of laws and restrictions the Governor has instituted, that he will not be able to get one? I mean, there are literally tens of thousands of guns already in the hands of private citizens across the country, and no amount of legislation enacted is going to ever do away with that fact. No, the fact is that bad guys will always be able to get their hands on guns, and the further fact is that Governor Ed Rendell knows it. He is not a stupid man, he is just a politician, and what politicians have learned over the years to do best is to make people feel good, to make them feel as if the politicians are doing something, anything, to help alleviate problems. Just like any other politician who has ever said them, Governor Rendell knows that when he and other pols speak lines such as "We're going after the guns! This is outrageous, all these shootings! Something has to be done, and we're going to do it!" he sounds tough, and some people believe it means he is looking out for them. The fact is that politicians know that they can never do away with all the guns out there, and that they cannot keep them out of the hands of bad guys. They simply do not have the political courage to stand up and tell you the truth, that the vast majority of gun crimes, like any other crimes, are committed by the same small percentage of the population over and over again, and that if you just keep these folks off the streets, crime will drop precipitously. If someone gets 25 years in jail, keep them in jail for 25 years. That's a quarter of a century that some violent criminal will not be able to victimize society. If they commit another such crime on being released, double their penalty. That pretty much takes them out of the game for the rest of their lives and ours. Spray paint doesn't cause graffiti, ignorant and delinquent people do. Matches don't light forest fires, careless and reckless people do. Guns don't rob, injure, and kill, dangerous people do. If the Governor and others like him are ever successful in restricting or limiting the purchase of guns, then the only people who will have a hard time getting their hands on them will be law abiding citizens such as you and I. There is a popular argument that these generally liberal politicians like to make, that individuals should be able to own a handgun, but not high-powered, military-style, automatic or semi-automatic weapons. They like to say that no one needs weapons such as those. Why is that? Who are they to decide that they know better than the framers of our American Constitution, who envisioned ownership of private firearms as a means of ensuring that the government could not oppress the people at the barrels of its own guns one day? Americans have the right, guaranteed by our Constitution, to protect ourselves with private firearm ownership. That was the intent of our Founding Fathers, that has been the position of numerous court decisions down through our history, and that is the reality of the situation. Liberal politicians such as Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell would be far more sincere, and far more effective, if they spent less time worrying about taking away our guns and more time worrying about taking away freedom from criminals and keeping them behind bars where they belong.
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
Too Big For His Britches
When I was a kid our older relatives used to have a saying for when someone got too full of themselves, or got too arrogant, or when someone was constantly pushing the limits too far. They would say that this person was 'too big for his britches', an analogy relating to someone who got so big they were about to burst out of their pants. This would often be followed by an admonition that the person was going to 'get what they had coming to them' one of these days when the 'chickens come home to roost'. Well, the far-too-big-for-his-britches Vince Fumo finally welcomed home the chickens yesterday. After decades of shady backroom politics, the former State Senator and political giant was found guilty yesterday on 137 counts including fraud, obstruction of justice, tax offenses, and conspiracy. When the time comes for sentencing, prosecutors will be seeking to send the now 65-year old Fumo away to prison for more than a decade, meaning that the once mighty kingpin could spend the rest of his life behind bars. Just a day earlier, with the jury holding its deliberations, his typically slimy but skilled defense lawyers attempted one final bit of legal tap-dancing in an effort to free their client. They tried to have a juror thrown off the case and possibly a mistrial declared that would at least temporarily free their client. The reasoning? One of the jurors potentially posted on Facebook that there would be a "big announcement on Monday" in regards to the case. Oh no, the entirety of a lengthy criminal court case with numerous witnesses and mountains of evidence tossed out because one juror made an innocuous comment on a social networking website! The horror of this violation of prudential conduct! Why perhaps because of this simple remark which revealed nothing more than the possible day on which some unknown announcement might be made that possibly involves some event in the juror's life which may or may not involve the trial the justice system should come grinding to a halt? The court should not only halt the deliberations, remove the juror, ignore the evidence, and free the defendant, but perhaps even publicly disgrace the juror, and maybe even fine them or toss them behind bars for contempt? Yet another ridiculous move by the defense team in an effort to toss some 11th-hour Hail Mary in a desperate attempt to delay the inevitable. And boy was this verdict ever inevitable. When interviewed afterwards the comments from the jurors signified that they tried to find a way to acquit Fumo, but that "The evidence was so clear", and that like many disgraced politicians before him that "greed" was his motivation. To list the length and breadth and depth of Vince Fumo's political power and influence would take a full-length book, which someone will inevitably one day write. Suffice it to say, however, that this power did not come from honest political work over the decades. It came from the accumulation of power that itself came from the sale of his office and from political patronage. Vince Fumo is the poster boy for everything that is wrong with Philadelphia politics. The only thing that the vast majority of politicians in the city care about is retaining their power at the cost of service to their constituents and what began as conscience in their dealings. Philadelphia's one-party system invites corruption as politicians feel they must be registered and run as a Democrat or have little to no chance of election. This then causes them to become dependent on the Democratic election machine and money in order to retain their elected positions. This dependency comes at the cost of thier voting for liberal causes that perpetuate the tax-and-spend policies that have driven residents and businesses from the city by the hundreds of thousands over the past few decades. The power that Fumo wielded was from or near the very top of the political power pyramid of this Democratic Party domination process. The FBI may have been concerned with illegalities, misappropriations of funds, and abuse of office, but there is a bigger fish to fry here. The City of Philadelphia is in desperate need of a true conservative political power presence, and I believe that many of Philly's people and pols actually share those tendencies at heart. With a competitive political system that forced elected officials to truly be accountable to the people, the city would be far better off than it is currently under the system which holds it hostage to the Democratic Party alone. It will take a group of political, social, community, and business people to have courage and to organize and drive this effort, but it is an effort that must be made if Philadelphia is to reverse course and again become a world-class city. Fumo is certainly not the only politician at the state or local levels using his power and influence in these ways, and perhaps there are more who are under investigation right now without even knowing it. Shaking ourselves free of political corruption, greed, and scandal is a good beginning. Vince Fumo got too big for his britches a long, long time ago. With the chickens now home to roost, he will finally get what he has coming to him. Hopefully it doesn't result simply in someone else stepping in to fill a power vacuum, but instead marks the beginning of major changes in Philadelphia politics which are necessary and long overdue.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
