The New York Times thinks you are a criminal if you own a gun. The editorial writers at the Times simply don't believe that you could possibly be a law abiding citizen if you are interested in self defense, their most recent anti-gun piece reveals.
Their January 30th piece, incongruously titled "A Day Without Guns ..." -- incongruous because the piece itself does not address any such subject as a day without guns -- cannot be interpreted too many other ways than contempt for both the citizenry as well as the Constitution.
Twenty years ago, the Florida Legislature cravenly decided to allow "law abiding" citizens to carry concealed weapons merely by declaring their preference for self-defense. Then last July, at the prodding of the gun lobby, the current crop of state lawmakers proved they could be even more corrupt and cowardly than their predecessors by deciding to make the list of gun-toting Floridians a secret.
The quotes around "law abiding" says it all. In such a case, the usage of quotes marks obviously denotes sarcasm as opposed to a mere quote and their position that no gun owner could be a law abiding citizen rings through loud and clear.
More ridiculous is all the overly emotional language. Words like "cravenly", "corrupt and cowardly", and "gruesome" infuse the piece with a healthy dose of unbridled disgust and hatred making the editorial more fire-and-brimstone sermon than policy discussion. It also makes any thinking person who might be open to question the 2nd Amendment incredulous.
It should be reminded that the NYT is objecting to a full expression of an Amendment to the Constitution. If the Times is so dismissive of the Constitution, one wonders why they got their undies in a bunch when fellow "journalist" Judith Miller was under the microscope a few years ago. They were falling all over themselves to express HER Constitutional rights, but those who want to assure their rights to self defense are not so fortunate as to receive the Times' support, it seems.
No, according to the times, Florida's gun owners are just murderers, burglars and child molesters.
More simpleminded than their claims that gun owners are somehow untrustworthy is their claim that Florida's state government wants gun owner's to go about shooting anyone who gets in a their way.
Florida’s legislators take the position that it’s no fun to have a gun if you can’t use it. So they loosened the laws on self-defense to allow a civilian to stand and use deadly force “if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary.” If lawmakers had any sense of shame, they would undo these lethal threats to their constituents.
"No fun to have a gun if you can’t use it"?
I'd say the Times feels the same way about the 1st Amendment. It isn't nearly as fun to have a Constitutionally guaranteed right to freedom of the press unless you use it. I see, though, that the Times is all for expressing THEIR favorite Constitutional right.
Tell ya what New York Times. You express your right to a free press and I'll express mine to self-protection. The difference is, I understand and support your Constitutional right. Too bad you aren't American enough to support mine.
One last point is interesting. The Times does not mention how, as they seem to see it, a rampant increase of gun ownership in Florida has increased their usage. Maybe it's because a corresponding rise in gun crime has NOT been observed with the increase in gun owner's rights? After all, if illegal gun usage was running high in Florida, wouldn't you imagine the Times would be ballyhooing such a statistic to buttress their irrational hatred of the 2nd Amendment?
I have a deal for you New York Times. Along with us both observing our favored amendment I'll also express my right not to buy your rag. Deal?
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Another article designed to b
January 30, 2007 - 06:42 ET by ThisnThatAnother article designed to boost their falling circulation. I'll bet they have to double-up on their newprint orders, now, just to keep up with the increased demand for their newspaper after this wonderful piece.
I live in Florida, and own
January 30, 2007 - 06:50 ET by zhombreI live in Florida, and own two guns. I'm one of those craven law-abiding citizens the Times editorialists hold in such contempt, even though I haven't shot anybody. However, if I see a copy of the NY Times left inadvertantly on my lawn, I wll put it out of its misery.
How dare law abiding citizens
January 30, 2007 - 07:10 ET by Mica the MagnificentHow dare law abiding citizens own guns! In the world of the NYT's only criminals should own guns! That is the natural order of the lib world.
Law abiding=victim. What don't we understand?
I'll bet the NYT's people are hanging upside down like bats all over Florida waiting for one of these law abiders to shoot something. Then it's swarm! Swarm! Swarm!
NY Times Lord has Gun Permit
January 30, 2007 - 07:18 ET by Jack BauerTypical liberals.
One law for the rich, powerful and famous-- another law for those dumb shmucks (like thee and me) at whom the libz sneer at from their lofty heights as they quaff their champers and then go shoot a few peasants.
Dr. Michael S. Brown, optometrist and member of Doctors for Sensible Gun Laws reports
Let us take this moment to re
January 30, 2007 - 07:30 ET by NL207Let us take this moment to remember Representative Maurice Hinchey, D-NY, who is presently stumping around the country for the return of the "Fairness Doctrine" on AM Radio.
Some years ago, Hinchey, a devout opponent of private gun ownership, was arrested trying to bring a firearm onto a commercial airliner. It is difficult to have any respect whatsoever for hypocrites like him.
Hypocrite? Why, he doesn't th
January 30, 2007 - 07:40 ET by Warner Todd HustonHypocrite? Why, he doesn't think so. Heck, HIS safety is "important" so he "needs" that gun. YOUR safety, on the other hand, is NOT important. YOU are NOT important enough to be exempt from law like HE is.
Just ask him!
I live in Texas, both my wife
January 30, 2007 - 07:56 ET by Subsailor599I live in Texas, both my wife and I are licensed to carry mainly because of the areas that we drive through to get to work and back home. All this time I thought we were the "lawbidding citizen", thanks to the NYT I find out that we are worse than the criminals that rob, steal and kill.
"When the law was first
January 30, 2007 - 07:59 ET by Indiana Joe"When the law was first enacted, there were fewer than 25,000 licensed gun holders. Since then, the state roll has boomed to 410,000 and counting. As the veil descends... The Florida Sun-Sentinel are laying bare the fact that more than 1,400 people easily got gun licenses despite pleading guilty or no contest to felonies that included manslaughter, burglary and child molestation. In Broward County alone, gun licenses grew in 20 years to more than 35,000 from 25."
The NYT is surprised that, once a law was passed permitting something, that "something" increased? How obtuse of them. What would one expect, a decrease?
And, out of 410,000 permits state-wide, they can find 1,400 that were probably issued in error. Gee, I can do that math. That works out to a 0.34% "failure" rate. Which means a 99.66% "success" rate. OMG, the sky IS falling! Yes, we must immediately disarm that 99.66% who are fully in compliance with this evil law!
Because the streets of Florida now run with blood and resemble the Old West, right? Right?
... umm... errr... well....
Idiots.
Private gun ownership by law-
January 30, 2007 - 07:59 ET by Dave RPrivate gun ownership by law-abiding citizens represents independence from government which, to the liberal mind, is completely intolerable.
The DimLibs at the NYT are just following an old tradition among the totalitarian minded, which is to disarm the populace thereby enslaving them. After all, It worked for Stalin, Mao, Hitler and all the the rest, who found it was much easier to control an unarmed citizenry than an armed one.
*ding ding ding* We have a
January 30, 2007 - 08:21 ET by American Infidel*ding ding ding* We have a winner!
We've finally given liberals a war against fundamentalism, and they don't want to fight it. They would, except it would put them on the same side as the United States.
Ann Coulter
wow! I never thought liberals
January 30, 2007 - 08:15 ET by amberwow! I never thought liberals would think it was corrupt to keep people's property private. I think full disclosure for everything the people at the NYT owns is in order. Let's see someone hire them once we find they have 5,000 playboys; or maybe they have a secret stash of Limbaugh letters... or maybe all of those gay sex videos of them and their gardener. Or how about us try and take them seriously once we find all of their fan mail from Castro and Chavez.
Meanwhile I will make public not only the guns I own, but what kind of kitchen knives I have, how many baseball bats I own....... Oh. and by the way, I spank my kids too, so I guess I should clain that I own a pair of hands.
Just like in the Clinton WH
January 30, 2007 - 08:16 ET by PawpawNThis is no different than the way Clinton's WH was run. If any law abiding person said anything wrong about them, WHAM!! Read "UNLIMITED ACCESS" by Gary Aldrich for an eye opener and why all is happening today in the intellegence community, etc. See the real Hill R C, etc!!
The NYT's will be sad to lear
January 30, 2007 - 08:17 ET by Right Wing Attack DogThe NYT's will be sad to learn that 'right to carry' schools and gun sales are booming in my neck of the woods. It's one stop shopping at 3 different locations within 12 miles of my home. A law abiding citizen can earn his gun course diploma and buy the weapon of his or her choice, all in one place. Ladies are fastest growing group.
according to the times, Flori
January 30, 2007 - 08:20 ET by Dave ROh, and one more thing:
according to the times, Florida's gun owners are just murderers, burglars and child molesters.
Yeah, the very kind of people liberal judges repeatly put back out on the streets!
BTW, I hope the small "t" times was done on purpose, as it adds refreshing air of subtle belittlement to the piece. Perhaps it will catch on among all the contributers here at NB. :-)
When the Florida Legislators
January 30, 2007 - 08:28 ET by BufordWhen the Florida Legislators passed the Right to Carry law in 1987 the anti-gun people were predicting "shootouts in the street", didn't happen. Last year when the folks in Tallahassee passed the law allowing us to use deadly force without retreating the anti-gun people were predicting "shootouts in the street", didn't happen.
Although I am licensed to carry and do, the last thing I want to do is use my weapon........but I can and will if necessary.
Buford,I'm with you there.
January 30, 2007 - 08:58 ET by Dave RBuford,
I'm with you there. I hope I am never placed in a position to have to make that decision for real, but I know I am prepared to, as I have had a few instances when I thought I just might actually have to. Fortunately, I was able to diffuse things without having to resort to that sort of force.
I know many on the left think we gun owners, particularly in this part of the country, are jest itchin' fer somebody to break into our homes so we can "blow 'em away," but that is simply a myth that has risen out of ignorance.
Remember, however, that it is always better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it.
Thank God I live in Georgia, which is a must-issue state.
I share your sentiments. Next
January 30, 2007 - 10:58 ET by Mean Gene Dr. LoveI share your sentiments. Next to losing a child or my spouse, the next scariest thing to me is to shoot someone, but I will do it if they invade my home or try to harm my family or someone else that is helpless. I would guess that 99% of lawful CCWs understand the mountains of legal proceedings they will face if they pull the trigger, that's why we train, practice, and remember to keep our cool to try to resolve the situation without violence first. Why the left can't seem to understand that is beyond me. Maybe they should start reasoning with their brains instead of their hearts.
A good argument for more CCWs can be found at this excellent blog. New entries are published every day.
Gun Safety Tip #8: No matter how responsible he seems, never give your gun to a monkey. (www.imao.us)
I cannot wait until I get som
January 30, 2007 - 08:35 ET by dvdaughtryI cannot wait until I get some bills paid off so I can upgrade (and add to) my 9mm to a .45 magnum. It's also a shame I have a soft spot for Labrador Retrievers and live in a small house, because I would love to have a pair of 120 pound Rotweillers patrolling my yard. But my wife wouldn't have it. The dogs that is.
Warner, no, the Times wouldn't be and currently are not.
January 30, 2007 - 09:01 ET by acaiguanaWarner, no, the Times wouldn't be and currently are not.
After all, if illegal gun usage was running high in Florida, wouldn't you imagine the Times would be ballyhooing such a statistic to buttress their irrational hatred of the 2nd Amendment?
I had to comment here. The inner-city gangs have tons of guns. Every kid over 10 (and maybe some of them) have guns. All of these guns are illegal.
These illegal guns (mostly stolen or smuggled in) keep killing these inner-city gang kids, innocent children on front steps, old women making dinner and keeping whole families sleeping on floors in neighborhoods one should never enter without....
well...
a really BIG gun.
Of course, that would be the 'legal' guns the Times is so wrapped up about.
So, where is the real reporting about the inner-city gang stuff? Where is it? It is like the 'green' zone in Iraq. These reporters are afraid to take on the gangs. In many of our cities even the cops are afraid to take on the gangs.
Where does that leave the rest of us?
I am so sick of the focus on Iraq when we have such carnage in our streets; such fear in our neighborhoods; such arrogant warlordism by our gangsters and their leaders; such debasing of women and children in our ghettos.
When will this issue really be addressed? Of course the first step is to declare the 'war on poverty' a failure and then to declare a 'war on gangs'. A real war on gangs.
ACA
...
Acaiguana says: "I love blind Monkeys and any inference that I am making fun of blind Monkeys would be wrong.
No Fun To Not Use A Gun?
January 30, 2007 - 09:04 ET by emjem24Why this overwhelming fear of the second amendment, libs? You afraid that all us law-abiding, gun-toting conservatives might take to the streets and use the guns on you? I think that's the real fear. However, being a gun-toting conservative myself, if some burgler/criminal broke into my home you bet I'd defend myself. I'm sorry, if someone threatened my life or that of my family, I wouldn't stand blithely by and let it all disappear. That's the difference between libs and conservatives. We'll stand up for our beliefs and see something through while the libs will wring their hands and cry, "what will we do? Let's talk it over and sing peace songs. Let's form another committee. Oh, I know! Let's go to the UN."
The difficult we do immediately; the impossible takes a little longer. Air Force Motto
emjem says: When your brain's stuck on liberalism it self-destructs.
The NYT is reached the point
January 30, 2007 - 09:07 ET by King of the BritonsThe NYT is reached the point of doing nothing but "preaching to their choir." All serious readers who think for themselves have long since left that congregation for real news. The Old Gray Lady has become a bitter mother-in-law who lives in a room over the garage, smokes cigarettes, and scares little kids.
Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!´´
--Patrick Henry
Not long ago, I perused Minne
January 30, 2007 - 09:12 ET by AlgerHissNot long ago, I perused Minnesota state statutes to answer a simple question:
If I stood amongst a group of licensed doctors, then licensed school teachers, then people that were licensed to carry a firearm, which group(s) would offer the best chance of being felon free?
There were/are numerous felonies that doctors and school teachers can have in their background and yet still retain their licenses. Of course, the group of licensed firearm carry people were allowed no such leeway.
The intellectually vulgar NYT, along with the extreme leftist Rochester Post Bulletin would choose to ignore this minor point.
Rochester, Minnesota: A Fem_Leftist City!
All this leads me to the ques
January 30, 2007 - 09:44 ET by hatukAll this leads me to the question, do LIBS have the right to be stupid? I am proud to say I will take my privately owned firearms into the streets and fight to preserve their rights and mine if need be! I doubt if they would do the same for me.
Something crossed my mind the
January 30, 2007 - 09:52 ET by Chicago RepublicanSomething crossed my mind the other day along these lines. These same Leftists that bitch and moan about the NSA's Foriegn surveillance program as an intrusion of civil liberties by the Bush Administration wouldn't feel threatened in the least if the federal government went house-to-house and rounded up all firearms and the Second Amendment was amended out of the Constitution. Am I the only one that is perplexed by this?
Businesses in my state can po
January 30, 2007 - 10:09 ET by hatukBusinesses in my state can post their buildings stopping concealed handgun license holders from entering, I send them the following whenever I run across them:
We have noticed your sign, and will respect your wishes by doing business elsewhere.
As a Concealed Handgun Permit Holder :
- I am a legal resident of the state of Texas.
- I have never been convicted of a felony.
- I have not been convicted of any Class A or B Misdemeanor in the last 5 years.
- I am not delinquent in child support, student loans or state and local taxes.
- I have had no delinquent conduct in the last 10 years.
- I am free of any and all chemical dependencies.
What do you know about your other customers?
It kind of says it all!
That is an excellent response
January 30, 2007 - 11:06 ET by Mean Gene Dr. LoveThat is an excellent response. Can I borrow it? Plus, the business will never know you are carrying unless there is a real need to use it, which could ultimately save the owner's/employee's/other customer's lives.
Reading some of the entries on this blog you'll find that there are crimes stopped by armed customers at businesses all the time.
Gun Safety Tip #8: No matter how responsible he seems, never give your gun to a monkey. (www.imao.us)
It's not uncommon to read of
January 30, 2007 - 15:24 ET by RunningBeerIt's not uncommon to read of armed citizens fending off criminals here in AZ. But what use to follow was a huge legal defense problem for the shooter since he had to prove self defense. Recently they changed the law putting the burden of proof back on the state. Now prosecuters muct prove it WASN'T self defense. I'm surprised the times hasn't made mention of this problem we are afflicted with in the southwest. Or maybe they're just too scared to come investigate?
Gunz
January 30, 2007 - 19:34 ET by Dad GummitToo bad you weren't in That cafeteria in Killeen a few years back. A person with a LEGAL licensed handgun could have saved... what 16-17 lives?
"A wise man's heart inclines him to the right, but the heart of a fool to the left" Ecclesiastes 10:2
Dad G...Ain't that the truth,
January 30, 2007 - 19:45 ET by bigtimerDad G...
Ain't that the truth, you said it all!
The NYT and other members o
January 30, 2007 - 10:20 ET by HyunchbackThe NYT and other members of the liberal press are against firearms ownership. People who own firearms and see themselves villified by the media as crazy, dangerous and evil.
Having been villified they stop trusting the media that lies. They start questioning the lies that media told them. If they realize that guns aren't the problem then they may also question global warming, welfare politics and the dviinity of Barack Obama.
Again, in the NYT world view, guns cause people to think for themselves which is terrible for NYT subscription rates.
Hey NYT, try THIS on for size
January 30, 2007 - 10:39 ET by Mean Gene Dr. LoveHey NYT, try THIS on for size!
Anyone have crime rate statistics for NY and FL before and after their different gun laws were passed? I used to have a link, but I can't find it anymore.
Gun Safety Tip #8: No matter how responsible he seems, never give your gun to a monkey. (www.imao.us)
How come the records don't sh
January 30, 2007 - 10:56 ET by FastEdHow come the records don't show how many people were NOT victims, simply because THEY had a gun? Why isn't there concern about the bad guys who DON'T have a license? Think they'd get one?
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V
First of all Ed please do n
January 30, 2007 - 11:23 ET by happyuscitizenFirst of all Ed please do not take my response to your post as an insult, but silly fellow, propaganda does not work that way.
It would not behoove the NYT to report both sides of the story to show the positive side of gun ownership along with the negative to the wounded and hopefully dead perps.
Their position is that perps are victims, have always been victims, commit crimes because they are victims, are incarcerated because they have been victimized, and will always be victims. Plus if they are wounded committing their crimes they are entitled to compensation because they were injured on the job. Their favorite example of how bad guns are and why the general public should not ever have them is Bernard Goetz, whom had an illegally purchased .38 revolver after being a victim of two or three violent assaults and was denied a permit for a firearm, whom wounded four thugs on the NYC Subway and was successfully sued after he was raked through the coals.
Meanwhile, you presumably a gun owner, are evil scum because you will not lay down to be robbed, terrorized, murdered, along with your loved ones whom might be violated along the way to an unseamly and early death.
Without the Second Amendment the First Amendment wouldn't have lasted this long. Have a good one I am off to my bunker to clean the weapons, and wait for the jihad on the homefront the libtards are setting us up for.
"I'm just a big fat hairy American Winning Machine!" - Ricky Bobby