Detroit Free Press Columnist Says Gun Debate Over
Detroit Free Press columnist Rochelle Riley recently wrote that the time for gun control debate is over. She says it is now time for a serious national discussion about who can buy and keep a firearm. I’m not sure what Riley means by discussion. I suppose she thinks we all now agree with her position because of recent illegal shooting that have taken prominence in the news.
Riley says it is time to stop using the 2nd Amendment as an excuse to be dangerous. I disagree. The 2nd Amendment isn’t an excuse, it is a Right that many people of the world don’t have. I have a Right to own a firearm for protection, for recreation or for whatever reason I want. Firearm ownership doesn’t make someone dangerous, actions make someone dangerous. For example, most of us use our automobiles for transport. But on occasion, someone will intentionally use their vehicle to kill someone. At other times, vehicles accidently kill. By Riley’s logic, we need to have a national conversation about automobile control to keep vehicle out of the hands of someone who is dangerous. Read more
Michigan’s Wayne County Launches Gun Lock Drive
Wayne County Sheriff Benny Napoleon has joined forces with area religious leaders to begin distributing gun locks at churches and social agencies. The goal is to reduce accidental shooting, especially of young children who play with loaded firearms. The story, written by The Detroit Free Press, points out the tragedy of a three year old dying after getting hold of her grandmother’s handgun, but doesn’t mention why grandmother felt she needed a handgun in the home to begin with. Read more
Gun Sales Bring in Big Dollars for States
Where is the news that firearm sales are bringing in money to states that really could use it? Only the Detroit Free Press has picked up on this noting:
“A federal tax collected on firearms and ammunition sales is redistributed to wildlife and hunting programs in each state, and only three — Alaska, Texas and Pennsylvania — get more money than the $17 million Michigan is expecting this year: $6 million more than last year’s record.”
We’ll have to wait and see if the rest of the mainstream media up on this story.
Detroit Latest City to Hold Firearms Buyback
The state of Michigan has probably been hit as hard as anywhere by the global economic crisis, a.k.a. the recession, and the city of Detroit is the latest to hold a gun buyback. The problem we see is that the buyback offers a mere $20 for each firearm. How many rare and valuable items will be essentially sold for $20 when these items could have fetched far more money for the owner?
The Detroit News ran this piece that offered this insight:
“‘Getting unwanted and unused guns out of homes can help prevent unnecessary or accidental shootings that can occur when these firearms are left unsecured,’ Police Chief Warren Evans said.”
With all due respect, is there any proof that getting “unused guns” out of a home will prevent accidental shootings? If the firearm is unused, as in not regularly taken out, doesn’t that mean that it could just as easily remain there? And wouldn’t trigger locks, and safe storage also provide accidental shootings?
The Detroit Free Press ran its own story that further offered some interesting information:
“Participants can get $20 for each gun that is turned in. There is no limit to how many guns each person can turn in; however, funds will cover only the first 75 that are turned in, police said.”
So let’s get this straight. The city only has $1500 for this program. That’s sort of a why bother? That means the most the city can hope for then is that residents show up, find out there isn’t even the $20 and will decide to simply hand over their guns for free. Incredible. Talk about the worst type of bait and switch this holiday season.
Even The Chicago Tribune weighed in on this one:
“Police Chief Warren Evans says by ‘getting unwanted and unused guns out of homes,’ accidental and unnecessary shootings can be prevented. Removing guns from city streets also is part of ongoing police enforcement efforts.”
Was it such a slow news day that The Chicago Tribune had to weigh in on a happening in Detroit? And more importantly, where did the Chicago paper get the added insight that removing guns from the streets was part of the effort by the Detroit PD? If this was the case wouldn’t the hometown papers pick up on this? Maybe the Chicago paper wanted to suggest that these buybacks are about “getting guns off the street,” something that we’ve never seen solid proof regarding, and given that Chicago has its own gun buybacks, maybe this is just a reminder to the residents. But from the words spoken by the Chief, it sounds like this is more getting guns out of the home instead.
