There is something unhealthy about a city administration that lists destroying valuable property as one of its highest priorities. That is the case with Savannah, Georgia. According to WTOC, Savannah, Georgia has a great many important issues on their plate. After considerable effort, they whittled down their list to their six highest priorities. Bold added. From wtoc.com:
The city has had a lot of issues, but city council members managed to narrow them down to a list of just six items. This list includes addressing the on-going blight issues, dramatic increases to commercial property taxes, improving transparency with the Pardons and Parole Board, ID cards for parolees, reinstating the law that allows law enforcement agencies to destroy weapons and drainage improvements.The priority to destroy weapons is in opposition to a state law that requires that the valuable assets be sold to licensed dealers rather than be destroyed. Destruction of these valuable items only benefits firearms manufacturers. If there are fewer used guns to supply the demand, then more new guns will be manufactured and sold. But city councils, especially of large urban areas, often have no understanding of simple economics.
City leaders are asking the law to be changed so that local jurisdictions have the option of destroying *or* selling weapons at auction. Despite the city's efforts in making this a top priority, Rep. Ron Stephens says not to get your hopes up.When the firearms are sold to licensed dealers, they are treated just like new firearms are treated. Numerous academic studies have shown that destruction of such guns has no measurable effect on crime.
Part of 1,400 guns to be sold by Richmond Co, Georgia in 2013.
Image from chronicle.augusta.com
It is understandable that people who wish the public disarmed want to send a message "Guns bad", by publicly destroying guns.
But making sending such a message one of the six top priorities of a city shows we are dealing with a delusional group, not rational players. The chance of the State of Georgia reversing this law is essentially nil. The bill, SB 350, passed in the Georgia Senate in 2012, 49 to 4.
Consider a statement made by an Atlanta Democrat, Sen. Vincent Fort, about the bill, three years after its passage, in 2015. From ajc.com:
Fort doesn’t always agree with the Reed administration, but he does this time. “We’re going to find that those guns are going to be used in crimes. I have no doubt about that. To put that many guns back on the street, when we should be doing the opposite, is bizarre,” Fort said.Fort's statement is itself bizarre. The guns mentioned will be put on the shelf in gun stores, right alongside other new and used guns for sale. If they are not there, some other gun will be sold. If there are not enough guns to meet demand, more will be made. Their presence will make zero difference in the availability of guns. Numerous academic studies have shown that their presence will make no difference in crime.
When such attitudes are prevalent on a City Council, doubt is cast on the logic of other decisions that they make.
©2016 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.
Gun Watch
Posts
5 comments:
reinstating the law that allows law enforcement agencies to destroy weapons and drainage improvements.
How many drainage improvements do the law enforcement agencies want to destroy?
Probably if you take those kinds of people out and beat the crap out of them every day they may change their mind and think having a gun to stop the beatings might be a good Idea. Of course there are people that like to be abused but even those crazies would change their mind if they decide self defense may save them more pain than they can tolerate. Having a gun does not require use but it certainly detours the need to use it more often than not.
If you read the constitution the way I do , government can not take your means of self defense. certainly they can fine you or even jail you if you commit certain acts but the government can not take personal property without paying you fair market value. stealing your guns is a federal crime. a badge does not change the fact that taking your property without paying fair market values is still stealing. do you think they would have 1400 guns if they had to pay fair market value.
It is my belief that even a felony conviction can not remove your right to self defense. the constitution is very clear , the government can not take personal property without paying fair market values. conviction for a crime is one thing and stealing property is another.
If you pay a fine for speeding they do not get to take your car. You pay your fine and your debt is paid. If you are convicted and go to jail, you serve your time and your debt is paid. nothing allows government to take your property for free. until the existing laws are worded differently, taking your guns is a crime.
This Idea is tied to shall not infringe, any law that would take your guns is a violation of shall not infringe. remembering that the phrase is all encompassing. opinions do not count what is written is what is enforceable. assuming that taking your guns is legal does not make it legal. It is just as wrong to assume that permits or registration stop crime.
I personally can think of a thousand ways to kill someone without a gun. the only way to stop people from thinking is to kill them. the last time I checked that is still illegal. I actually have several hundred ways to kill people in my home and none of them are registered or even require registration.
to continue my last because this cuts you off after 4096 characters. the Bible tells us the difference between killing and murder, some think it is the same thing. If so why do we have justifiable homicide or self defense laws? if someone really wants you dead and make plans for that end it is murder. if they kill you because you make it necessary that is self defense.
When is the last time you had to register a roll of bailing wire or some one inch wooden dowels. In a couple of minutes you can make a deadly weapon that trims the head off at the neck very well. I make fishing pole holders that can beat your brains out in seconds. How do you know what is in what you eat un less you make it your self. If you know what you are looking for you can find numerous deadly poisons all over the desert.
The point is if you want someone dead you do not have to use a gun. registering and licensing accomplishes nothing beneficial.
I personally have a history of 20 years in health care, I can guarantee you there are many more ways to kill someone than there are ways to save their life. the fact is I know many of those ways on both sides. there are hundreds of medications that can kill you. Many common household cleaning products that can kill you. accidents happen God knows when someone dies and all of the circumstances. read the Old Testament God ordered many soldiers in to battle. they never went in to give hair cuts. If you actually study the issue. conscientious objectors are anti Christian and should be willing to be human shields. basically they are egg sucking cowards claiming they should not be required to kill. the true translation from Aramaic to English is you shall not murder. thou shall not kill is an incorrect translation. Kill and MURTDER are two very different words. that is why every word in the constitution was carefully picked. that is why Shall Not be Infringed was used and why permit and license are not words used in the second amendment.
I believe it was Forrest's daddy who told him,
"Stupid is, as Stupid does."
I believe Forrest Gump never knew his father, but he said that his Momma told him that.
Other than that ... point well taken.
Post a Comment