Disarm trigger-happy youths
An exasperated Mayor Frank Jackson of Cleveland on Monday called on Ohio lawmakers to prohibit anyone under 21 from possessing a firearm.
Jackson went ballistic over the Sept. 1 slaying of 12-year-old Asteve'e "Cookie" Thomas, who was caught in a crossfire during a gun battle between two Cleveland men.
Mayors in many U.S. cities, including Cincinnati, are fed up with innocent residents getting shot up by would-be Billy the Kids not much older than the Cleveland 12-year-old that was hit by a stray bullet.
But there are a few pesky problems with Jackson's proposal, not least of which is finding enough lawmakers to back such a ban here in NRA territory. Another is that current Ohio and Kentucky laws, which require gun buyers to be at least 18, haven't kept under-age urban teens from packing heat or using it.
One shooter in the Thomas homicide was age 20; the other, 35. The 35-year-old claims he was defending himself from being robbed at gunpoint.
But Mayor Jackson must figure he'd be happy just to improve the odds a little for surviving in the inner city. He told the Associated Press that Cleveland police statistics from 2004 through 2006 showed that 70 percent of those arrested for gun crimes were younger than 28.
From state to state we have never managed to all agree at precisely which age young people suddenly become rational enough to drive a car, drink alcohol or buy a gun. But we do say you must be 21 to carry a concealed firearm. Go figure.
Any chance under heaven the mayor's proposal can avoid an early death?
posted by Tony Lang at 12:35 PM
4 Comments:
at 3:54 PM, September 12, 2007 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 12:00 PM, September 13, 2007 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 12:16 PM, September 15, 2007 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 4:00 AM, September 16, 2007 
Anonymous said...
-
-
Post a Comment*We don't need yet another law. We need to enforce the laws already on the books. We need to STOP plea bargaining down WUD and CC charges, and send these people to prison for the maximum time allowed. We need to move these charges to federal jurisdiction and prosecute to the fullest extent.
I can't say I'm surprised to hear another idiot politician propose to break their oath of office (in which they had pledged to support and defend the Constitution and with it, the people's right to self defense by keeping and bearing arms) in pursuit of illegal laws designed to attack the rights of innocent citizens which simultaneously do absolutely nothing to stop criminals from committing crimes. The amount of stupidity involved with proposing such a "law" is practically beyond measure.
In reviewing the facts of the situation, we see right off the bat that had this unconstitutional (that means illegal for the government to do for those very ignorant anti-gun nuts out there) piece of garbage actually been on the law books, the child who was hit by a stray bullet would still be very much dead considering that neither criminal involved with this particular event which has got Cleveland's moonbat mayor in motion would have been affected since they were both over mayor moonbat's proposed age.
Perhaps we could save time and just declare that killing someone while committing a crime be a crime? Oops too late, we have already done that. Maybe we could make it illegal for a criminal to use a weapon like a firearm in the commission of any crime? Oops again, we already did that too! So maybe we should make it illegal to murder or attempt to murder someone else? Damn! Too late again, that too has been done. By my count at least four (count them F-O-U-R [4]) and possibly as much as six or more laws were broken during this criminal shootout in which mayor moonbat thinks one more law (his law) would have foiled the crime. Earth to mayor moonbat, we call them criminals because they break the law, additional laws, especially unconstitutional ones which would only work on the law-abiding who are not inclined to commit crimes are not going to stop a single tragedy like this one. It is the person using the tool, not the tool itself that is the problem here.
So in closing, if you truly want to fix the problem here, you leave honest and innocent citizen gun owners and potential owners alone and attack the criminal by actually locking them up for extremely long periods of time and/or executing them in a very timely manner when called for by the nature of their crime(s).
Current federal law prohibits anyone under the age of 21 from purchasing or posessing a hand gun.No state can supersede this law.
The editorial was misleading stating that Ohio and Kentucky laws allow purchasing of firearms at 18 years of age.
"Another is that current Ohio and Kentucky laws, which require gun buyers to be at least 18, haven't kept underage urban teens from packing heat or using it."
Federal law allows for 18 year olds who pass the Brady Check to purchase long guns. Those are rifles and shotguns. Those are not something that someone would be "packing heat" with.
Handguns can only be legally purchased by non-felons who also pass the Brady Check and are 21 years of age or more.
Thugs on the street are not going to adhere to any law that exists now or in the future. The best course of action is to strongly enforce existing gun laws of which are very numerous.
Strong police enforcement along with a court system actually sentencing offenders to harsh prison terms would be a good place to start.
* Our online blogs currently are hosted and operated by a third party, namely, Blogger.com. You are now leaving the Cincinnati.Com website and will be linked to Blogger.com's registration page. The Blogger.com site and its associated services are not controlled by Cincinnati.Com and different terms of use and privacy policy will apply to your use of the Blogger.com site and services.
By proceeding and/or registering with Blogger.com you agree and understand that Cincinnati.Com is not responsible for the Blogger.com site you are about to access or for any service you may use while on the Blogger.com site. << Home