Christopher Traynor Fox, the 39-year-old from San Jose, California who was charged with making threatening calls to Mayor Daley, is now denying that he threatened to shoot Daley. Fox's denial came Friday afternoon in the Santa Clara County Jail.
"So, Daley apologized, and he is off the hook, but I am still in jail," said Fox, this past Friday. "I have no bus tickets, no plane ticket; I wasn't planning on going anywhere. I'm not a threat."
Some people, including Mr. Fox himself, are trying to equate what he did with what Mayor Daley did. There's no comparison. The mayor was being video-taped when he made those stupid remarks, obviously intended to express the fact that guns are dangerous and removing them from the streets is good.
Christopher Fox, on the other hand, picked up the phone, called long distance and said the same kind of stupid remarks to Mayor Daley who is a public official.
The mayor's comments required nothing to ensure public safety. Some people decided afterwards to make a big deal out of it, but that happened afterwards when it was already clear there had been no threat.
Mr. Fox was arrested as he should have been. His level of threat needed to be determined and if necessary neutralized by his detention. In my opinion, he should now be released and charged with some minor offenses. But since these involve gun ownership and his mental state and threatening a public official, he should forfeit his rights to own guns the same way a domestic violence offender does.
What do you think? Please leave a comment.
Both Daley and Fox belong in jail. Or they both deserve to be free. Anything less is hypocrisy.
ReplyDeletePersonally, i'm for whatever puts Daley in jail.
This just fits the anti-gunner profile. In their world there are multiple classes of citizens.
ReplyDeleteDaley is a higher class citizen worthy of armed protection where the surfs are not. Likewise, Daley is allowed to make such comments while this lower citizen of course should be jailed and lose his rights forever for the same charge.
We accuse the ant-freedom crowd of being inconsistent yet they are consistent in their hipocrisy.
"Some people, including Mr. Fox himself, are trying to equate what he did with what Mayor Daley did. There's no comparison."
ReplyDeleteYou are 100% correct. One person made a goofy threat, the other picked up a gun and threatened to sodomize a man standing next to him with it.
There is no comparison.
It's telling that Fox is yet another NRA loser who lives with his mom. Aren't there any gunloons who have successful lives?
ReplyDeleteHopefully, Wee'rd will start a Fox defense fund.
--JadeGold
Says FWM:
ReplyDeleteThis just fits the anti-gunner profile. In their world there are multiple classes of citizens.
Exactly, FWM. As I said, our gracious host espouses a multi-tiered First Amendment, with elites enjoying the freedom to make any threat they want, because we all should "know" they're . . . "kidding," or something.
Clearly, Mr. B302000 isn't a big fan of that newfangled "Equal Protection Clause" (which isn't, after all, even 150 years old yet--I guess it would be asking too much to expect him to get on board with such a progressive concept).
I'm pretty sure if some guy picked up a gun, threatened to shove it up your ass & pull the trigger you'd consider that a threat.
ReplyDeleteWhat I wonder is why the anti-gun posters on here keep down playing Daley's remarks. If somebody on our side had said that I would absolutely take them to task for it.
ReplyDeleteChicago, May 30: At least 22 people were wounded in separate shootings around the city roughly between noon Saturday and noon Sunday
ReplyDeletehttp://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2010/05/2-wounded-in-separate-shootings.html
{{If somebody on our side had said that I would absolutely take them to task for it.}}
ReplyDeleteNo, you wouldn't.
But isn't it getting tiresome pretending Daley made a threat? After all, even the reporter to whom the comments were made isn't cowering in fear and demanding legal redress as much as you are.
--JadeGold
"What I wonder is why the anti-gun posters on here keep down playing Daley's remarks. If somebody on our side had said that I would absolutely take them to task for it."
ReplyDeleteDidn't the same thing happen with some anti threatening a gun store owner?
It was something like "we're going to pull (him) out like a rat and snuff him".
There were a load of the unscrupulous claiming that wasn't meant either.
{{If somebody on our side had said that I would absolutely take them to task for it.}}
ReplyDeleteNo, you wouldn't.
While we can dispute whether or not I would take them to task, it is plain for all to see that you wouldn't. It doesn't matter if it is a threat or not. It is something that is not proper for a politician to say to a reporter asking a legitimate question. Why would you defend that type of behavior?
Again, Ruffy, the reporter covers Daley all the time. He probably hears Daley make offhand and colorful remarks pretty frequently. The facts are the reporter didn't run to his local federal marshall and demand witness protection because he believed Daley was serious. He didn't demand Daley be arrested. In fact, he was probably pretty pleased Daley singled him out because it makes his news story unique.
ReplyDeleteI'll bet the reporter has covered Daley at pressers since.
Soooo, what Ruffy is telling me is that when I'm in the gym with a couple of buddies and one tells me he's gonna kick my %$$ today---I should demand the local gendarmes should arrest him.
--JadeGold
JadeGuy writes: Soooo, what Ruffy is telling me is that when I'm in the gym with a couple of buddies and one tells me he's gonna kick my %$$ today---
ReplyDeleteGood one. We all know it's been awhile since you've seen the inside of a gym. I also find the claim that you have any friends highly dubious.
FishyJay, Thanks for that link. There's no doubt about it Chicago is one dangerous place.
ReplyDeleteSo, should we make it easier for people go get guns? Considering the fact that all those guns used illegally started out legally owned and somehow ended up in criminal hands, how could lessening the restrictions possibly help. Your way, the gun flow would increase and so would the bloodshed.
I believe that the gunowner position is that it seems that bad guys are getting pretty much all the guns they want despite gun laws like Chicago's. Other measures are needed beside more of what hasn't worked well. However, those gun laws DO keep guns away from law-abiding good guys, who epecially need them in places like Chicago.
ReplyDeleteFishyJay, Thanks for that link. There's no doubt about it Chicago is one dangerous place.
ReplyDeleteHow could that be Mike? You keep telling us that gun bans are needed for public safety, that they make people safer.
As usual, reality proves you wrong.