NYT Endorses Law Breaking
Seems the NYT is up in arms over limiting access to gun data. And they tell an outright lie:
These two bills would give crooked dealers more — not less — leeway in interstate trafficking. The Justice Department has warned that the worst provisions would have a “chilling effect” on gun control and law enforcement. If they had been in effect during the deadly spree of the Washington, D.C., snipers, the dealer who peddled the murder rifle and scores of other crime guns could never have been shut down under federal law.
No. Bullseye (the dealer) failed to keep records up to date and failed to report the gun missing. It was stolen. This law only affects gun data not related to criminal investigations.
The gun lobby will do almost anything to deny basic information about the gun mayhem that Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York and 60 other mayors are properly pursuing through the courts.
And Bloomberg broke the law while conducting his investigation to pursue the lawsuit. And the lawsuit likely won’t advance due to the protection of lawful commerce in arms act.
June 19th, 2006 at 9:48 am
Oh, and Bull’s Eye wasn’t shut down. The owner/licensee sold it to someone else (he kept the range) who still operates it, at the same location, under the same name. If he hadn’t sold it, he would have been shut down, so it might be a minor quibble.
Also useful to note that the DC snipers had another rifle, a Remington 700 in .308 IIRC, which they obtained through a straw purchase (again, illegally) which they left behind when some guys off-roading stumbled on their unauthorized target practice in a field overlooking WA-512.
June 19th, 2006 at 6:58 pm
Reading this article made me feel good all over.
Anytime the Gray Lady whines about something I feel strongly about, I know that I am winning the conflict.
I particularly like the complaint about gun stores not reporting to the ATF multiple purchases by the same individual who is ostensibly “arming the underworld.” Utter nonsense.
While our spouses my hope for the passage of the 1 gun per month law, it is meaningless because it can be defeated by the use of straw persons.
More importantly, it sure looks like an infringement to me, if the Constitution were to matter to our lawmakers, the NYT, New York mayors, etc.
You want to know about why you have crime in large cities, all of you big city mayors, look at your Travelling Vicelords, Crips, Gangster Disciples and Latin Kings.
You want to know why we have low crime rates in middle America, look at our demographic make-up. There is no material amount of gang activity and there are lots of guns owned by law abiding citizens.
Where we live, there are an exponential number of lawful gun owners vs. gang members and drug dealers, and it would be highly unhealthy for the latter group to threaten the peaceable living among those of us who buy guns for protection and sport.
Molon labe.
June 21st, 2006 at 1:41 am
Woot, I just ordered 2 AR15 lowers. Take that Brady pussies!
June 23rd, 2006 at 7:42 am
The New York Times has a history of lying and making stories up and getting caught doing it.