Detroit police chief: Want crime to drop? Start carrying

posted at 11:31 am on January 3, 2014 by Ed Morrissey

James Craig just took over the office of police chief last summer, but he’s already making waves in Detroit. A reorganization of the police force in the bankrupt metropolis has resulted in a higher clearance rate in murder cases, and the murder rate dropped almost 14% in 2013 from its two-decade high in 2012. However, Craig has some advice for his fellow citizens in Motor City if they really want a drop in crime — arm yourselves:

If more citizens were armed, criminals would think twice about attacking them, Detroit Police Chief James Craig said Thursday.

Urban police chiefs are typically in favor of gun control or reluctant to discuss the issue, but Craig on Thursday was candid about how he’s changed his mind.

“When we look at the good community members who have concealed weapons permits, the likelihood they’ll shoot is based on a lack of confidence in this Police Department,” Craig said at a press conference at police headquarters, adding that he thinks more Detroit citizens feel safer, thanks in part to a 7 percent drop in violent crime in 2013.

Craig wasn’t always in favor of carry permits. While serving in Los Angeles, where permits are issued on a notoriously miserly (and some would add arbitrary) manner, Craig thought that disarmament was the answer. It wasn’t until he went to a carry-friendly jurisdiction that he understood the difference:

Craig said he started believing that legal gun owners can deter crime when he became police chief in Portland, Maine, in 2009.

“Coming from California (Craig was on the Los Angeles police force for 28 years), where it takes an act of Congress to get a concealed weapon permit, I got to Maine, where they give out lots of CCWs (carrying concealed weapon permits), and I had a stack of CCW permits I was denying; that was my orientation.

“I changed my orientation real quick. Maine is one of the safest places in America. Clearly, suspects knew that good Americans were armed.”

It’s not the first time that Craig has endorsed carry permits. Two weeks ago, the Detroit News notes, he told a local radio show that responsibly armed citizens act as a deterrent, in a city that can clearly use one. Even though the murder rate has dropped, Detroit had as many homicides in 2013 as New York City, which has more than ten times its population. Chicago had only 29 more than Detroit despite having nearly four times the population. It’s worth noting that both New York City and Chicago have extraordinary restrictions on gun ownership, let alone carry permits, and Chicago routinely ranks among the worst American metropolitan areas for homicides and violent crime.

At least one recent study suggests that Craig hits the nail on the head. A long-range study by a Quinnipiac University economist shows that states with more restrictions on firearm ownership and carry permits had higher murder rates by guns than gun-friendly states, and suggests that increasing restrictions on concealed-carry permits pushes the murder rate up, not down. It also showed that assault-weapons bans had no effect on murder rates.

Perhaps more police chiefs will change their orientation with this information at hand. State legislatures should get ahead of that curve.

Addendum: Via Instapundit, let’s not forget that increasing restrictions on gun ownership can be bad for the economy as well as the crime rate, as it will be in Colorado:

Magpul Industries announced today that it is relocating its operations to Wyoming and Texas.

The company is relocating manufacturing, distribution and shipping operations to Cheyenne, Wyoming. Magpul is leasing a 58,000 square foot manufacturing and distribution facility during the construction of a 100,000 square foot build-to-suit facility in the Cheyenne Business Parkway. The Wyoming relocation is being completed with support from Governor Matt Mead, the Wyoming Business Council and Cheyenne LEADS.

Magpul is moving its corporate headquarters to Texas. Three North Central Texas sites are under final consideration, and the transition to the Texas headquarters will begin as soon as the facility is selected. The Texas relocation is being accomplished with support from Governor Rick Perry and the Texas Economic Development Corporation.

“Magpul made the decision to relocate in March 2013 and has proceeded on an aggressive but deliberate path” says Doug Smith, Chief Operating Officer for Magpul Industries. “These dual moves will be carried out in a manner that ensures our operations and supply chain will not be interrupted and our loyal customers will not be affected.”

The company began a nationwide search for a new base of operations after legislation was enacted in Colorado that dramatically limits the sale of firearms accessories – the core of Magpul’s business. Magpul plans on initially transitioning 92% of its current workforce outside of Colorado within 12-16 months and will maintain only limited operations in Colorado.

“Moving operations to states that support our culture of individual liberties and personal responsibility is important,” says Richard Fitzpatrick, Chief Executive Officer for Magpul Industries. “This relocation will also improve business operations and logistics as we utilize the strengths of Texas and Wyoming in our expansion.”


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

what an idiot

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:34 AM

what an idiot

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:34 AM

… when you can’t argue with the facts …

M240H on January 3, 2014 at 11:38 AM

Sounds a bit like Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke.

Steve Eggleston on January 3, 2014 at 11:39 AM

what an idiot

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:34 AM

That you are pajama boy. Learn punctuation while you still can.

arnold ziffel on January 3, 2014 at 11:40 AM

Good for you chief…. welcome to the dark side (according to the lefties)

cmsinaz on January 3, 2014 at 11:40 AM

… when you can’t argue with the facts …

M240H on January 3, 2014 at 11:38 AM

facts tell me that there are fewer gun fatalities in brittain (gun control country) than America

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:41 AM

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:34 AM

Don’t you just hate it when facts and statistics don’t go your way?

Cindy Munford on January 3, 2014 at 11:41 AM

That you are pajama boy. Learn punctuation while you still can.

arnold ziffel on January 3, 2014 at 11:40 AM

They don’t teach punctuation at hardverd law skrewl.

VegasRick on January 3, 2014 at 11:42 AM

facts tell me that there are fewer gun fatalities in brittain (gun control country) than America

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:41 AM

Tell that to the British soldier who had his throat cut but two Muslims in midday.

BuckeyeSam on January 3, 2014 at 11:42 AM

what an idiot

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:34 AM

… when you can’t argue with the facts …

M240H on January 3, 2014 at 11:38 AM

Maybe he’s talking about his own past positions and statements now that he’s been convinced by factual evidence and abandoned his emotional leftist justification for his arguments?

peski on January 3, 2014 at 11:43 AM

An armed society is a polite society.

TKindred on January 3, 2014 at 11:43 AM

Perhaps more police chiefs will change their orientation with this information at hand. State legislatures should get ahead of that curve.

Ed, how naive. This info has been known for years if not decades. The lefties will not listen.

FOWG1 on January 3, 2014 at 11:44 AM

facts tell me that there are fewer gun fatalities in brittain (gun control country) than America

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:41 AM

You are only concerned about gun fatalities, not murders in general?

clancy_wiggum on January 3, 2014 at 11:44 AM

np don’t be so hard in yourself. You can still have a V8! Your Mom picked some up on the way home from my house this morning.

And remember, self flagellation it’s not just for breakfast anymore!

fewenuff on January 3, 2014 at 11:44 AM

The gun expert has already weighed-in, I see.

Bishop on January 3, 2014 at 11:45 AM

… when you can’t argue with the facts …

M240H on January 3, 2014 at 11:38 AM

When it comes to hyperpartisan, it doesn’t matter what the facts are. That said, they aren’t on his side.

Steve Eggleston on January 3, 2014 at 11:45 AM

what an idiot

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:34 AM

Soft targets are always preferred over hard targets.
A person could get hurt going up against a hard target.

awc on January 3, 2014 at 11:45 AM

facts tell me that there are fewer gun fatalities in brittain (gun control country) than America

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:41 AM

They also tell you that Britain has more violent crime than the US. But in order to know that you’d need to be literate.

(birttain?)

Yeah, you are an idiot.

peski on January 3, 2014 at 11:45 AM

Don’t you just hate it when facts and statistics don’t go your way?

Cindy Munford on January 3, 2014 at 11:41 AM

One would think he would be used to it by now.

Steve Eggleston on January 3, 2014 at 11:46 AM

Mugged by reality.

CDeb on January 3, 2014 at 11:46 AM

Ted Kennedy’s car has killed more people than my gun.

famous amos on January 3, 2014 at 11:46 AM

facts tell me that there are fewer gun fatalities in brittain (gun control country) than America

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:41 AM

Tell that to the British soldier who had his throat cut but two Muslims in midday.

BuckeyeSam on January 3, 2014 at 11:42 AM

Nonpartisan is too busy patting himself on the back for supporting gun control in Britain and the U.S. to have any sympathy for the soldier’s family, or have any brains to understand that a killer is going to kill no matter what, and will use whatever weapons they can get.

In Nonpartisan’s fantasy world, guns leap into people’s hands and force them to kill people. There are no responsible gun owners in Nonpartisan’s world. Only scary guns that kill people.

theotherone on January 3, 2014 at 11:47 AM

When I lived at Mack and Alter on the eastern border of Detroit, 5 years ago, I thought for a moment the police were going to drive me to the gun shop and buy my gun for me. They were very happy to have armed citizens there.

Flange on January 3, 2014 at 11:47 AM

They don’t teach punctuation at hardverd law skrewl.

VegasRick on January 3, 2014 at 11:42 AM

Or capitalization (capitalisation if we’re using British English) or spelling or parallelism.

facts Facts tell me that there are fewer gun fatalities in brittain Britain (gun control country) than in America.

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:41 AM

BuckeyeSam on January 3, 2014 at 11:47 AM

Tell that to the British soldier who had his throat cut but two Muslims in midday.

BuckeyeSam on January 3, 2014 at 11:42 AM

imagine how many those two muslim animals could’ve killed if they had semi-automatic rifles?

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:47 AM

The gun expert has already weighed-in, I see.

Bishop on January 3, 2014 at 11:45 AM

Skeeter guns!

VegasRick on January 3, 2014 at 11:48 AM

Freaking moron. It’s a well know fact that more guns don’t stop crime and that if you do carry one it will be used by the criminal to kill you. It’s also a well know fact that if you have a gun for protection that you will have a false sense of safety which will most likely get you killed. Having a gun is pretty much a given that a member of your household will die from that gun. All in all he is a moron for even hinting that having a gun will protect you. What you need for the best protection is a cell phone to call 911 with. Thank BO that he has the insight to provide free phones to people in these unsafe areas.

Dr. Frank Enstine on January 3, 2014 at 11:49 AM

imagine how many those two muslim animals could’ve killed if they had semi-automatic rifles?

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:47 AM

None, after the British soldier took them out defending himself–saving the British taxpayers untold sums in trial and incarceration costs.

BuckeyeSam on January 3, 2014 at 11:49 AM

imagine how many those two muslim animals could’ve killed if they had semi-automatic rifles?

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:47 AM

In the “gun free zone” that is England? Many.

How many would they have killed if several folks around them were armed (if they even would have tried)?

CDeb on January 3, 2014 at 11:49 AM

facts tell me that there are fewer gun fatalities in brittain (gun control country) than America

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:41 AM

This is true. However, what you conveniently leave out, is that overall murder and violent assault has risen dramatically in Britain since handguns were outlawed.

The criminals simply stopped carrying handguns are started carrying knives. A LOT easier to conceal and dispose of than a firearm, and just as useful to the criminal when he knows that the victim has no means to resist.

As Henry Clay remarked ” A man with a rifle is a citizen. A man without one is a subject.”

We are citizens. The British are subjects. That says it all.

TKindred on January 3, 2014 at 11:49 AM

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:47 AM

Well, we aren’t talking about your pipe dreams, we are talking about what works here.

Cindy Munford on January 3, 2014 at 11:49 AM

from my understanding, a skeet gun would lack killing power as its not built to kill

nonpartisan on April 7, 2013 at 11:45 AM

Gun Expert.

Bishop on January 3, 2014 at 11:50 AM

Since WWII the deadliest weapon of choice worldwide is the machete. Rwandans killed a million people in a hundred days with machetes. And yet, no country seeks to decommission edged tools and weapons. Gun control is a political bludgeon, not a solution to violent crime.

RushBaby on January 3, 2014 at 11:50 AM

James Craig just took over the office of police chief last summer, but he’s already making waves in Detroit.

Not for long. Coming out pro-gun like this? He’s going to get targeted by the left and forced out of his position in a year.

Doomberg on January 3, 2014 at 11:50 AM

imagine how many those two muslim animals could’ve killed if they had semi-automatic rifles?

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:47 AM

Imagine how quickly the Soldier could have defended himself if he were allowed to carry a handgun.

VegasRick on January 3, 2014 at 11:51 AM

facts tell me that there are fewer gun fatalities in brittain (gun control country) than America

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:41 AM

I hate to disturb your world view. Please research FBI crime stats and then remove the numbers achieved by a certain minority group. You will find the results for this country compare favorably with Europe.

BTW What about Switzerland. You guys never mention that country where nearly every house has a military rifle in it. Huh?

FOWG1 on January 3, 2014 at 11:51 AM

It is a natural right, regardless of laws, for a human being to be able to defend him/herself. I pistol is the great equalizer; and any human being that defends themselves against oppressive aggression is morally just. Yes they might go to jail say in California or New York City but they are none the less justified. Tyrants might throw them in jail, but the self defending human did nothing wrong except for violate some mala proghibita law.

MoreLiberty on January 3, 2014 at 11:51 AM

facts tell me that there are fewer gun fatalities in brittain (gun control country) than America

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:41 AM

But are there fewer violent crimes?
How about crimes with a knife?
How about a bat or a pipe?
Fists maybe?

Dr. Frank Enstine on January 3, 2014 at 11:51 AM

imagine how many those two muslim animals could’ve killed if they had semi-automatic rifles?

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:47 AM

First off, since it did happen in an unarmed Britain, it’s true they could have killed lots more with a semi-automatic; however, there’s a reason they don’t try it in certain parts of the U.S. because there’s this thing called “concealed carry” which allows U.S. citizens to walk about legally armed and ready to defend themselves and others from attack.

Secondly, don’t fool yourself–killers aren’t limited to just one victim even if they choose a sword:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akihabara_massacre

theotherone on January 3, 2014 at 11:51 AM

facts tell me that there are fewer gun fatalities in brittain (gun control country) than America

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:41 AM

They have 1/5 the population, but there is more:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkHpCfBr0Bs

We have repeatedly proven that cities that ban firearms turn into slaughter houses. Look at Chicago. Look at DC. But don’t let facts get in the way.

dogsoldier on January 3, 2014 at 11:51 AM

Addendum: Via Instapundit, let’s not forget that increasing restrictions on gun ownership can be bad for the economy as well as the crime rate, as it will be in Colorado:

Magpul Industries announced today that it is relocating its operations to Wyoming and Texas.

Well, maybe Magpul’s employees are less likely to be high on pot in Wyoming than in Colorado!

Steve Z on January 3, 2014 at 11:52 AM

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:47 AM

Don’t worry pajama boy, your mommy will protect you from those scary guns. Oh, and please don’t call your preezy a muslim animal, that’s raaaacist.

BeachBum on January 3, 2014 at 11:52 AM

Just imagine np in a foxhole with you or in a firefight.I would love to see a Marine DI with he/she/it.

docflash on January 3, 2014 at 11:52 AM

In the “gun free zone” that is England? Many.

How many would they have killed if several folks around them were armed (if they even would have tried)?

CDeb on January 3, 2014 at 11:49 AM

this myth pisses me off

that a gun free zone is such a easier target for a criminal

the fact is, even in a gun carrying zone, ppl are not all walking around with their fingers on the trigger, ready at a moments notice to stop a raging lunatic

in fact, in such a zone, citizens may pull out their guns and in panic kill other innocents

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:53 AM

Gun Expert.

Bishop on January 3, 2014 at 11:50 AM

You misspelled Gum.

VegasRick on January 3, 2014 at 11:53 AM

imagine how many those two muslim animals could’ve killed if they had semi-automatic rifles?

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:47 AM

Look how many speedbump and flashbang killed with pressure cookers. How far would they have run if people in the crowd were armed?

You really are an idiot.

dogsoldier on January 3, 2014 at 11:53 AM

flashlights serve a critical purpose beyond killing…guns serve no such purpose

nonpartisan on August 24, 2013 at 9:11 AM

Gun Expert.

Bishop on January 3, 2014 at 11:54 AM

Since WWII the deadliest weapon of choice worldwide is the machete. Rwandans killed a million people in a hundred days with machetes. And yet, no country seeks to decommission edged tools and weapons. Gun control is a political bludgeon, not a solution to violent crime.

RushBaby on January 3, 2014 at 11:50 AM

lol what an absurd argument

machetes, cars, etc serve a necessary societal purpose beyond killing

to kill with those objects is to twist their purpose

guns, otoh, serve no other purpose beyond killing, maiming, injuring

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:54 AM

in fact, in such a zone, citizens may pull out their guns and in panic kill other innocents

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:53 AM

No, in fact, that is false. Clearly you never lived in such a place.

dogsoldier on January 3, 2014 at 11:54 AM

“Start carrying”

O.K.

Tsar of Earth on January 3, 2014 at 11:55 AM

this myth pisses me off

that a gun free zone is such a easier target for a criminal

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:53 AM

You’re right. I’m ignoring all the mass shootings that happen in non gun-free zones.

CDeb on January 3, 2014 at 11:55 AM

The neat part is that the US has almost a 1:1 ratio of guns to people and still only 3% of crime in the US involves guns.
 
Britain has an almost absolute ban on firearms and still has 0.3% gun crime rate.
 
So less than a three percent difference in gun-crime between us, even with their total ban.
 
Neat, huh?

rogerb on January 3, 2014 at 11:55 AM

Dr. Frank Enstine on January 3, 2014 at 11:49 AM

Too late for the Most Inane Post of 2013, but a good contender for 2014.
Congrats.

justltl on January 3, 2014 at 11:55 AM

imagine how many those two muslim animals could’ve killed if they had semi-automatic rifles?

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:47 AM

Imagine how fast these two Muslim animals could have taken down if others around them had guns too.

Electrongod on January 3, 2014 at 11:56 AM

The two Mooslims that killed Drummer Lee Rigby were armed with, brace yourself, a handgun. I guess that means non partisan is wrong on several levels.

famous amos on January 3, 2014 at 11:56 AM

Imagine if falling space junk started killing innocent people.

rogerb on January 3, 2014 at 11:56 AM

BTW What about Switzerland. You guys never mention that country where nearly every house has a military rifle in it. Huh?

FOWG1 on January 3, 2014 at 11:51 AM

switzerland is a racially homogenous country, its conclusions cannot be applied to the US, a racially heterogenous country

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:57 AM

Maine is safer because it’s mostly white. Take away their guns and it would still be safe.

Charlemagne on January 3, 2014 at 11:57 AM

Ted Kennedy’s car has killed more people than my gun.

famous amos on January 3, 2014 at 11:46 AM

It’s most likely that his politics killed more people than his car or your gun. I’d even be willing to bet that his politics killed more people than nukes have but, it all depends on what you consider is a person.

Dr. Frank Enstine on January 3, 2014 at 11:58 AM

imagine how many those two muslim animals could’ve killed if they had semi-automatic rifles?

This ignores the fact of how quickly they would have been stopped if any of the by-standers were also armed.

bartbeast on January 3, 2014 at 11:58 AM

Dr. Frank Enstine on January 3, 2014 at 11:49 AM

Sarcasm/satire I hope.

justltl on January 3, 2014 at 11:58 AM

Dr. Frank Enstine on January 3, 2014 at 11:49 AM
Sarcasm/satire I hope.

justltl on January 3, 2014 at 11:58 AM

The liberals are so unhinged these days, it’s really hard to tell.

CDeb on January 3, 2014 at 11:59 AM

facts tell me that there are fewer gun fatalities in brittain (gun control country) than America

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:41 AM

And facts tell me there are fewer gun fatalities in Provo, Utah than Britain. Do you have any facts as to why that is the case?

M240H on January 3, 2014 at 11:59 AM

guns, otoh, serve no other purpose beyond killing, maiming, injuring

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:54 AM

Yep, NEVER in history has anyone ever used a gun to protect themselves.

VegasRick on January 3, 2014 at 11:59 AM

what an idiot

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:34 AM
.

… when you can’t argue with the facts …

M240H on January 3, 2014 at 11:38 AM

.
facts tell me that there are fewer gun fatalities in brittain (gun control country) than America

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:41 AM

.
They don’t have ‘liberty’ in the UK like we do, either.
.

“Give me liberty, or give me death”

listens2glenn on January 3, 2014 at 11:59 AM

in fact, in such a zone, citizens may pull out their guns and in panic kill other innocents

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:53 AM

Agreed, only highly trained Gun Experts should be allowed to carry a gun:

As officers approached, police said, the man reached into his pocket as if grabbing a weapon, and two officers fired a total of three shots. The bullets struck a 54-year-old woman in the right knee and a grazed a 35-year-old woman in the buttocks, police said. Police said at the time they thought the man, Glenn Broadnax, was reaching for a gun, but he turned out to be unarmed.

The best part? Broadnax was charged with felonious assault on the two shooting victims.

Bishop on January 3, 2014 at 12:00 PM

in fact, in such a zone, citizens may pull out their guns and in panic kill other innocents

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:53 AM

Any evidence or just an assertion?

arnold ziffel on January 3, 2014 at 12:02 PM

guns, otoh, serve no other purpose beyond killing, maiming, injuring

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:54 AM

.
They work GREAT as an intimidator.

How many crimes were stopped by common citizens, without having to fire a shot?

listens2glenn on January 3, 2014 at 12:03 PM

They work GREAT as an intimidator.
 
listens2glenn on January 3, 2014 at 12:03 PM

 
Nonsense. Haven’t you heard about all of those shootings at gun shows?

rogerb on January 3, 2014 at 12:03 PM

BTW What about Switzerland. You guys never mention that country where nearly every house has a military rifle in it. Huh?

FOWG1 on January 3, 2014 at 11:51 AM

switzerland is a racially homogenous country, its conclusions cannot be applied to the US, a racially heterogenous country

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:57 AM

Now it comes out! NP is a racist. Non-whites can’t control their impulses it seems. No hope at all.

The other view, since we have a minority population, the rest must just accept it and be stripped of self defense.

Truly a deep thinker and RAAACIST!!!

FOWG1 on January 3, 2014 at 12:04 PM

in fact, in such a zone, citizens may pull out their guns and in panic kill other innocents

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:53 AM

.
No, that’s what you would do, if you were armed.

I recommend you (and many other Americans) get some discipline, first.

listens2glenn on January 3, 2014 at 12:05 PM

switzerland is a racially homogenous country, its conclusions cannot be applied to the US, a racially heterogenous country

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:57 AM

What kind of people live in that there Switzerland?

arnold ziffel on January 3, 2014 at 12:05 PM

guns, otoh, serve no other purpose beyond killing, maiming, injuring

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:54 AM

Or as they say in Japan: “Hunting”.

Still, I have to admit I feel sad after a day of clay pigeon shooting, those poor little discs…their whole lives ahead of them…snuffed out by a madman with a gun.

I wonder if Dog Eater feels bad when he murders clays, not that he actually murders murders them because skeet guns don’t have killing power because they’re not meant to kill.

Bishop on January 3, 2014 at 12:05 PM

no one outside of police officers and soldiers should have access to ANY guns PERIOD

nonpartisan on December 15, 2013 at 9:56 AM

Gun Expert.

Bishop on January 3, 2014 at 12:07 PM

I think this is analogous to the Dirty Harry line: “Has he shot six bullets or only five.”

Criminals should always be wondering whether someone is packing.

BuckeyeSam on January 3, 2014 at 12:08 PM

imagine this simple scenario:

would the world be better if there was not ONE single gun or would it be better if EVERY human had a gun

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 12:09 PM

imagine how many those two muslim animals could’ve killed if they had semi-automatic rifles?
nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:47 AM

You are an idiot. They only wanted to kill one soldier. Tgey stood around talking to people while waiting on the cops. If they wanted to kill a bunch instead, they would have first mowed down a bunch of people waiting at the busstop then finish the job with their illegal butcher knives. Yes, their knives were illegal but it didn’t stop them from using it. Oh, and murder is also illegal. Idiot.

AH_C on January 3, 2014 at 12:09 PM

what an idiot

nonpartisan, Juris Doctor on January 3, 2014 at 11:34 AM

Why? Put that Harvard Law degree to good use and do a little research (start with Ed’s links) and articulate a counterargument.

NotCoach on January 3, 2014 at 12:10 PM

Sarcasm/satire I hope.

justltl on January 3, 2014 at 11:58 AM

Hope all you want. We cannot deny anti-gun leftest facts. It is a fact that guns kill and if you shoot the dirt bag scum trying to rape or rob you he, she or it may die. Can anyone live with the knowledge that they have taken the life of some lowlife piece of crap that has no regard for others? Could I live knowing that somebody felt guilty or was troubled by killing such a despicable scum bag in self-defense? It’s a question that quite frankly I have never asked myself but maybe it’s time I did or not.

Dr. Frank Enstine on January 3, 2014 at 12:10 PM

BTW What about Switzerland. You guys never mention that country where nearly every house has a military rifle in it. Huh?

FOWG1 on January 3, 2014 at 11:51 AM
.

switzerland is a racially homogenous country, its conclusions cannot be applied to the US, a racially heterogenous country

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:57 AM

.
Now it comes out! NP is a racist. Non-whites can’t control their impulses it seems. No hope at all.

The other view, since we have a minority population, the rest must just accept it and be stripped of self defense.

Truly a deep thinker and RAAACIST!!!

FOWG1 on January 3, 2014 at 12:04 PM

.
That’s the “Freudian slip” to end all “Freadian slips.”
.
Discipline recognizes NO ethnic boundaries.

I don’t believe mankind is sub-divided into different “races.”

listens2glenn on January 3, 2014 at 12:10 PM

guns, otoh, serve no other purpose beyond killing, maiming, injuring

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:54 AM

If all you can think of to do with a gun is kill someone, then YOU shouldn’t be allowed to have one.

Alberta_Patriot on January 3, 2014 at 12:10 PM

imagine this simple scenario:

would the world be better if there was not ONE single unicorn or would it be better if EVERY human had a unicorn

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 12:09 PM

HumpBot Salvation on January 3, 2014 at 12:11 PM

imagine this simple scenario:

would the world be better if there was not ONE single gun or would it be better if EVERY human had a gun

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 12:09 PM

I don’t think convicted felons should be allowed to own guns. Oh, wait!

VegasRick on January 3, 2014 at 12:11 PM

switzerland is a racially homogenous country, its conclusions cannot be applied to the US, a racially heterogenous country

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:57 AM

So gun ownership is ok in countries that are pure white?

Wow… just… wow.

Alberta_Patriot on January 3, 2014 at 12:12 PM

Too late for the Most Inane Post of 2013, but a good contender for 2014.
Congrats.

justltl on January 3, 2014 at 11:55 AM

Thanks. Is there a prize? I like prizes. To be honest I’ve never won anything. Most likely because I’ve never enter contests or drawing but should that be a reason to never win anything?
Anyway, thanks for the support.

Dr. Frank Enstine on January 3, 2014 at 12:12 PM

What a breath of fresh air from the chief.

MJBrutus on January 3, 2014 at 12:13 PM

facts tell me that there are fewer gun fatalities in brittain (gun control country) than America

nonpartisan, Juris Doctor on January 3, 2014 at 11:41 AM

Gun Crime Soars in England Where Guns Are Banned

Are you sure you understand the meaning of “fact”?

NotCoach on January 3, 2014 at 12:13 PM

facts tell me that there are fewer gun fatalities in brittain (gun control country) than America

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:41 AM

Facts tell us that Kennesaw Georgia (where gun ownership is mandatory) hasn’t had a murder since 1982.

How many murders has Britain had since 1982?

Alberta_Patriot on January 3, 2014 at 12:14 PM

I think this is the ultimate story to reference when countering the baloney spouted by the lily-fingered progressive proponents of gun control.

Obviously, we are not going to have knock out games, muggings and joy assaults, and rampant robbery and rape and murder, if the bad guys know that it’s likely that the good guys have guns. Even the Detroit police chief knows this!!!

anotherJoe on January 3, 2014 at 12:14 PM

switzerland is a racially homogenous country, its conclusions cannot be applied to the US, a racially heterogenous country

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:57 AM

I’ll bite. Why would that be?

MJBrutus on January 3, 2014 at 12:14 PM

would the world be better if there was not ONE single gun or would it be better if EVERY human had a gun

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 12:09 PM

Let’s ask the British soldiers at Isandalwhana, or better yet, the victims of Jack the Ripper.

Bishop on January 3, 2014 at 12:15 PM

The liberals are so unhinged these days, it’s really hard to tell.

CDeb on January 3, 2014 at 11:59 AM

Very true. I consider liberalism and leftism as a kind of mental illness. I’ve always been a little clueless as to why it seems to dominate human thought and societies.

Dr. Frank Enstine on January 3, 2014 at 12:15 PM

imagine this simple scenario:

would the world be better if there was not ONE single gun or would it be better if EVERY human had a gun

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 12:09 PM

.
Guns are irrelevant to the “better world” scenario.

The “Dark Ages” as we call them, had no guns. In fact, I think it’s fair to say that the advent of firearms ended the “Dark Ages.”

listens2glenn on January 3, 2014 at 12:16 PM

imagine how many those two muslim animals could’ve killed if they had semi-automatic rifles?

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 11:47 AM

Imagine how many deaths you could cause by taking guns away from people in gang-ridden areas. Makes your heart flutter, don’t it?

Harvard law school…indeed! What a joke.

Solaratov on January 3, 2014 at 12:16 PM

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 12:09 PM

If I were attacked by a person with a knife, my life would be better if I were packing heat.

MJBrutus on January 3, 2014 at 12:16 PM

Gun Crime Soars in England Where Guns Are Banned

Are you sure you understand the meaning of “fact”?

NotCoach on January 3, 2014 at 12:13 PM

yes, allow me to demolish your response

1) the source you linked is a hyperpartisan site, townhall, a site with a clear progun agenda

2) ‘soar’ is subjective and meaningless…as the article referenced a large percentage increase

ie, if there was 1 gun murder in 2012, and there are 2 gun murders in 2013, that’s a 100% increase…which could be characterized as gun murder soaring

nonpartisan on January 3, 2014 at 12:16 PM

Clearly nonpartisan will never be swayed by facts and logic. Judging by the poor grammar and spelling, I’d day he (she?) is, if not a teenager in fact, then a teenager in mentality, thoroughly marinated in urban liberal mysticism, therefore impervious to reason.

RebeccaH on January 3, 2014 at 12:16 PM

As if the true agenda of the gun grabbers was to reduce crime.

tommyboy on January 3, 2014 at 12:17 PM

imagine how many those two muslim animals could’ve killed if they had semi-automatic rifles?

nonpartisan, Juris Dcotor on January 3, 2014 at 11:47 AM

Imagine if you actually knew the details of this particular incident. Look it up and learn what these two savages were doing after they killed that soldier.

NotCoach on January 3, 2014 at 12:17 PM

Based on Non Partisan’s Swizerland comment, he is a bigot, too. I wonder if he realizes that Tina Turner lives there and, brace yourself, she isn’t “Homogeneous” with the Swiss. Considering that the Democrat party is the same party of Bull Conner, I am not surprised.

famous amos on January 3, 2014 at 12:17 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4