News-Record.com

Sweetie, I hate to tell you, but by outlawing guns, ammunition, and bullet-proof vests, (which are actually only bullet-resistant), would not decrease the number of crimes. If anything, they would increase. Normal law-abiding citizens would become criminals because they would want to keep their firearms at any cost. While we're at it, how about we outlaw fireplaces. Hundreds of firefighters lose their lives every year in fires. I hope that the officer gets better, I truly do, however, when myself or any other firefighter, police officer, or EMT goes takes that oath and goes to work everyday, we know that there is a chance that we might not come home.

"Yes, granted, there would be that small percentage of people who would buy and sell items illegally, but that hasn’t stopped America from making certain drugs illegal. But if we just didn’t allow people to buy guns and things like bulletproof vests, the amount of crimes would decrease. "

I think the guy's argument is pitiful weak at best.

Certain drugs are illegal, but folks still manage to get 'em. Ditto guns .. although it does seem harder to get some guns.

It can happen here.

Your analysis is flawed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4eyFHYQLzIE

"I think the guy's argument is pitiful weak at best."

Never met a guy named Sarah :)

"Yes, granted, there would be that small percentage of people who would buy and sell items illegally, but that hasn’t stopped America from making certain drugs illegal. But if we just didn’t allow people to buy guns and things like bulletproof vests, the amount of crimes would decrease."

Ms. Fricke, I believe you just destroyed your own argument. Just in case you're not paying attention, global illegal drug sales are estimated to be $400 billion (yes with a "B") per year. That's hardly a small percentage. If you're curious where this figure comes from; here's a few sources.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_trafficking
http://www.publicpolicy.umd.edu/faculty/reuter/COOK2.pdf

Perhaps you might try doing some research into the matter before sending in another letter, chock full of nothing but bleeding-heart-liberal drivel.

GREENSBORO — Police reported two robberies in the city overnight.

At 8:24 p.m. Sunday, according to Greensboro police, a delivery driver for New York Pizza was robbed while making a stop at 708 Milton St. Zach Isiah Lewis, 25, was unhurt when he was approached by a man with a handgun. The suspect took Lewis' cell phone and wallet.

Police had an incomplete description of the suspect, who was last seen walking toward Brice Street.

At 9:12 p.m. Sunday, the Kangaroo gas station at 3302 S. Holden Road was robbed by a man who said he was armed. The suspect demanded cash and cigarettes and left on foot. No injuries were reported.

Police described the suspect as a black man in his 20s who stood 5-foot-9 and weighed 140 pounds. He wore a dark jacket and pants and white sunglasses.

Getting rid of the thugs would help too . . .

Obamanation is all about . . . change . . .

Yet another letter from an anti-gunner based on emotion and not facts.
This letter as most on the subject is based on the premise: I fear guns because I am ignorant of guns. Thefore no one should be allowed to own them.
You state: "But if we just didn’t allow people to buy guns and things like bulletproof vests, the amount of crimes would decrease. "
Using that logic, lets go a little further.
Sell no cars, it will end auto related deaths.
Sell no alcohol, it will end drunk drivers.
Sell no....... well you get it ,right?
Of course this will all be based on the honor system, which worked so well in the past and now.
What has been best in reducing crime is to allow people to carry concealed weapons. Not to forbid them from owing weapons.

Today, Dec. 1, 2008:

"The U.S. military expects to have 20,000 uniformed troops inside the United States by 2011 trained to help state and local officials respond to a nuclear terrorist attack or other domestic catastrophe, according to Pentagon officials."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/30/AR2008113002217_pf.html

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20081201/ts_alt_afp/usmilitarytroops

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/12/01/politics/washingtonpost/main4639998.shtml

Buy more guns. Read more Samuel Adams. Ms. Fricke is depending on us.

Getting rid of idiots who want to scrap the second amendment will make people safer, Sarah.

I normally do a good job of reading the local paper; so where did the police officer get shot by someone wearing a vest? I hope the officer was wearing a vest.

Vests are not generally available to the public. Reputable merchants do not sell body armor without identifying the buyer and the purpose for the armor. Selling body armor to felons is a federal violation. Even so, in a country which has unsuccessful fought a "war on drugs" for decades you have to know restricted items will always find their way to the marketplace and into the wrong hands.

Now about the guns. I am a veteran and former law enforcement officer. The discussion about guns is not new to me. I carry a gun to protect myself, my family and innocent other citizens in my presence from criminal attack. I have absolutely no intention of harming anyone. I have carried weapons for decades without having to harm anyone. Personally, having a gun has stopped bad situations from getting worse. I have seen the evil people will do to others and I will not willingly be a victim.

You and other misguided people like you will not tell me I have to give up the means to protect my home and family. We have adequate laws and restrictions in place for firearms. From the beginning of time people have violated laws and even good people sometimes use poor judgment. Taking firearms away from law abiding citizens will not change that; but it will cause crime to INCREASE. The police can not and will not protect you. They protect society in two ways, deterrence and investigation of crimes to punish the responsible persons. Only YOU can protect yourself, so you better wake up and think about that.

Getting rid of firearms will make people safer

I'm sorry to inform the writer of LTE. The facts say just the opposite.

http://www.kxmb.com/getArticle.asp?ArticleId=196038

Letting the cops search our homes at any time for any reason would keep us all safer, too.

Allowing the police to beat confessions out of suspects will make it easier to convict the bad guys.

Silencing all political dissent will make it easier for politicians to put their grand plans into place.

I think I'll keep my Constitutionally guaranteed freedoms, Sarah.

justsomedude, the concerned folks are a step ahead of you:

June '01:
"Operation Clean Sweep has sent teams of police and housing-authority guards to conduct surprise searches for weapons, drugs and illegal residents in project buildings."

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101910617-157262,00.html

Oh yeah, that's in Chicago. And, more interestingly, Chicago has a gun ban.

March '08:
"Despite its ban, Chicago tops the nation in confiscated firearms. Last year, Chicago police seized about 7,400 guns and received 6,000 at voluntary turn-ins. Over the past decade, Chicago police have confiscated an average of 10,800 guns per year."

http://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-Magazine/March-2008/Bang/

There's been some bigwig politician in the news who is from Chicago, but I can't quite put my finger on who it is. Tip of my tongue...

Giving up all of our rights and submitting to the will of an authoritarian government might make our bodies, but not our liberties.
Remember, it is this government that is allowing melamine-tainted infant formula into our country claiming it is "safe", safe in the same way we would all be if totalitarian-minded leftists disarmed a lawfully armed populace.
It's why I am a member of the NRA and the NRA-ILA: to keep our Constitutional right to bear arms specifically to defend ourselves from oppression by a government like the one Sarah envisions.

Roger: Is the Chicago ban still in force? We all know it is unconstitutional as per the Supreme Court.

"Operation Clean Sweep has sent teams of police and housing-authority guards to conduct surprise searches for weapons, drugs and illegal residents in project buildings."

How is that legal? Surprise, warrantless searches? I thought only neocons supported warrantless searches. Please don't tell me its because they live in public housing...a contract cannot supersede constitutional law (or murder could be legalized just by writing a contract).

Look for me, I'll be the boy in a large plastic bubble.

I don't think it's been overturned yet, verelse. Or technically the same since it's a city and not a federal enclave. I think it will have to reach the Supreme Court eventually, too. Interesting situation. And I think an overturning would be national news considering the connection to Obama. I'm bothered by the searches, too, but I don't think it's much different than all of us asking permission and being charged a fee to exercise a clearly written right (concealed carry). We collectively and slowly give up our rights or begin to believe that the government grants them to us. There are LTEs stating the latter pretty often.

FWIW, India has a history of healthy gun control. Seems like something happened there over the holidays. Interesting article here:

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/world-news/article14086308.ece

"But what angered Mr D'Souza almost as much were the masses of armed police hiding in the area who simply refused to shoot back."

and here:

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/12/gun_control_in_india.html

I liked the Ghandi quote-

"Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest."

I'd be interested to know how Ms. Fricke would address that great and peaceful man.

I think resurrecting Civil Defense, but adding arms and training, might be necessary to combat Islamic Terrorism and world jihad. I am a responsible parent in that I taught my kids proper care and use of fire arms.
My oldest demonstrated his knowledge to some jihadis in Iraq and Afghanistan, bless his heart.

I like the idea of it, too, but I doubt that's the direction we're headed or could possibly head. We're being taught that we need to be taken care of, and I don't think we'll be able to easily come back from the mindset.

I like the Swiss model for service. Shame how those kinds of things have to come about.

And I'd love to see firearms safety/training as a requirement for graduating high school. You (collective you) don't have to like one or want one, but you'll at least understand how they work and what to do to make it safe if one is ever found. Or, heaven forbid, one ever needed to be used.