There's certainly nothing new there. Here's the informative part.
Years ago, I applied for a firearms purchaser's permit for a column comparing gun laws in New Jersey and Pennsylvania.
In the Garden State, where I live, officials take the right to bear arms so seriously a detective knocked on the door to ask my husband if he knew and approved of my plans.
I blanched at the implication, but came around after the president of the National Organization for Women told me spousal-notification laws help abuse victims muster the strength to flee.
The Keystone State has no such provision, because in Pennsylvania guns are a way of life. And death.
In 2006, 50 of the 92 Pennsylvanians who were killed in domestic violence were shot. Last summer, 50 people across the state (victims and their abusers who then committed suicide) were killed in bursts of domestic violence; unsurprisingly, more than half were felled by a bullet.
Can anyone claim that gun laws don't save lives after reading that? I don't think so, at least not in good faith. Please explain if you disagree.
What's your opinion about writing about Meleanie Hain? Is it only acceptable to use her name if what we're saying is pro-gun? Isn't it possible to respectfully comment on her final experience as it pertains to the gun debate without being accused of "dancing in her blood" and all the rest? I think so. And I think Ms. Yant Kinney has done just that.
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
In 2006, 50 of the 92 Pennsylvanians who were killed in domestic violence were shot.
ReplyDeleteIn 2006, 92 of the Pennsylvanians who were killed in domestic violence were killed by another human being.
What are you going to do about that? Ever single firearm was used by a person....yet you continue to focus on the tool.
Can anyone claim that gun laws don't save lives after reading that?
You offer no proof, no evidence, no statistics showing that states with high gun control laws have less domestic violence deaths than states with low gun control laws.
You offer nothing to back up your statement
You also fail to show any statistics on how many lives are saved by firearms.
What's the rate for Gun-Unfriendly New Jersey? How many women were killed in the same timeline (also one year makes for noisy data)
ReplyDeleteSomething tells me that when guns are taken away, domestic violence does not drop by half.
And of course the most dangerous thing Meleanie Hain did was live with a dangerous man.
All women should take note of that.
Tell you what Mike - if you can name one, just one of the many "common sense gun laws" proposed by the Brady Campaign or MAIG that would have conclusively prevented Meleanie Hain's murder, then you might have a leg to stand on.
ReplyDeleteI'm going to hold my breath.
And what gun laws would have saved Hain MikeB? Her husband was law enforcement.
ReplyDelete" I blanched at the implication, but came around after the president of the National Organization for Women told me spousal-notification laws help abuse victims muster the strength to flee."
ReplyDeleteOh I see...
A scum bag spouse who plans on murdering their partner will have have so much respect for the law that they'll apply for a permit to own a gun.
Don't ya think that a scum bag spouse who is intent on killing their spouse will ignore firearms laws?
You find THAT respectful???
ReplyDeleteWOW!
In the case of Melanie Hain, spousal notification would have been useless. His gun was issued to him by the state.
ReplyDeleteSeveral of you guys keep asking what law would have prevented this. Well, the answer is that no law would have definitely 100% prevented it, no law could. But, that system in NJ outlined by Ms. Yant Kinny very well might have put a spotlight on the dark domestic scene Meleanie was living in. Better testing and stricter supervision of armed guards and other pseudo-law enforcement people, which is what the husband was, might have denied him access to weapons. A general change in the direction that the pro-gun crowd is pushing the country towards might have helped too.
ReplyDeleteWhat's your point, no law can stop these things so we should have no laws?
So we take rights away from those who have committed no crimes, and done no wrong, for something that "might put a spotlight on the dark domestic scene Meleanie was living in."
ReplyDeleteEven tho she was pretty open about her domestic situation.
You are impressive, Mike.
MikeB, playing loose with the facts.
ReplyDeleteScott Hain was not "psuedo law-enforcement" He was a law enforcement officer in the state of Pennsylvania, not an "armed guard."
But hey, honesty has never been your strongsuit Mike.
Mike W., I'm getting a little pissed off at your nasty attitude.
ReplyDeleteAssociated Press: "The Corrections Department says Scott Hain was a state parole officer since August 2008 and previously was a state prison guard."
I call that pseudo-cop. You can agree with that or not, but tone down the nasty comments, please.
Wow, Watch out MikeW,
ReplyDeleteYou are close to getting MikeB mad because you are telling the truth about him.
Notice how it is just his opinion on what is a "pseudo cop" or not, no evidence?
See, I'm starting to figure out MikeB's reason for his "commenting policy". It is to avoid personal responsibility.
You can say that his post contains lies, distortions, untruths, and dishonesty but you can't say he is being dishonest.
That way he avoids all direct personal responsibility for what he says. It is a shame, people used to take pride and responsibility for what they believed.
Now some people don't want to be called for what they are.
MikeB - You say he's a "psuedo cop" I say you're dishonest.
ReplyDeleteGuess what? You ARE dishonest. In Pennsylvania a parole officer is considered a LEO BY LAW
You say otherwise, therefore you are playing loose with the facts and being dishonest. That's not nasty, it's true.
You don't want to be called dishonest then don't say things that aren't true.
Take NJ for example.
ReplyDeleteIn New Jersey, parole officers are sworn law enforcement officers
http://www.state.nj.us/parole/supervision.html
Oh, and here's PA, since that's what were discussing.
Pennsylvania parole agents are sworn law enforcement officers
http://www.ova.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/community/resources/9246/glossary_of_terms/540375
So, who's being dishonest again MikeB? I'm not nasty I'm right. Deal with it.