Newt Gingrich Running For The Presidency?

Well it may soon become a reality, then again maybe not. While driving to work yesterday morning, May 15, I listened to 77WABC talk radio's John Gambling Show. During the show, Mr. Gambling asked Mr. Gingrich if he was about to make an announcement of his own candidacy for for the presidential campaign. Much to my disappointment, Mr. Gingrich said he was not making such an announcement, but did say that he had decided to give it serious consideration, thus leading one to hope he might announce such in the future. It would tickle me pink to see him enter the race.

All the best,
Glenn B

Liability For Reporting Suspicious Activity?

If what is editorialized about here http://www.washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20070514-093346-1946r.htm comes to pass, then our enemies do not need more 9/11 type attacks to defeat us, we will have become a self defeating gaggle of politically insane apologists in that by trying to be politically correct we have totally lost sight of right from wrong. If people are allowed to sue one another because someone reports suspicious behavior to the authorities and no arrest is made, that is absolutely ridiculous. It is the government from which we are protected by the constitution when it says the probable cause is a requirement to arrest or search and seize. Private citizens are not required to have diddly squat in order to give their opinion to authorities that something is suspicious, that is the way it has been throughout history, and that is the way it should remain. As long as a citizen does so in good faith, and not out of maliciousness, they should be protected at all costs from any type of prosecution - criminal or civil. Before a civil or criminal suit could even be considered, the burden of proof in such a case should rest with the person suing, as to that person being able to substantiate, with reasonable certainty, that the other who supplied the authorities with information was being malicious in the first place. That's my two cents - screw the bastards who want to make it impossible for us, by way of our own laws, to defend ourselves from their attempted usurpation of our freedom.

All the best,
Glenn B

What if Guns were Outlawed Tomorrow...

...and everyone who was law abiding and had any guns actually turned in all of their guns. What would happen to the violent crime rates. Look to the United Kingdom, where since 1998 guns have been outlawed, see http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/52378.stm, and where for the last couple of years or so they have been making it a crime to carry something as innocuous as a pocketknife.

Overall, from what I could see, the crime rates go up and down in the UK; however, it became apparent that even while other crime rates seem to be falling, violent crime rates seemed to be rising after the gun ban. Here are some examples of articles that show such:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/1446260.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/norfolk/4468777.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/breakfast/3071703.stm

The violent crime rates are flourishing for those countries, gun crime is often referred to as being part of the 'gun culture', see:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6549873.stm.

Yet other homicides caused by people using other weapons seem to be the most prominent type of homicides. Arrest over teenager stab death from the BBC at

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/tyne/6656679.stm

is just one article within which can be seen the continuation of deadly violence.

Of course, there are many other examples of murders and violent crime taking place in the UK. Here are but a few links to fairly recent articles:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/staffordshire/6656159.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/beds/bucks/herts/6655509.stm

http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A10177355

The below article talks about the murder rates in Scotland, in a country where there are no handguns allowed, and where it is a crime to carry a knife, and where there has been discussion of making it a crime to carry other things that could be used as weapons:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/5366544.stm

Pay careful attention to the type of murders to which they make reference and to the accompanying picture. Make sure to look at what type of weapon was used to kill at least half of the victims. It was not a gun.

Even an article showing a one year decline in the murder rate blames most of the murders on things other than guns. In it the authorities can be seen as calling for a crackdown on knives.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/4038053.stm

Another article Tackling The Scourge of Knife Crime @ http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/5032794.stm highlights all the ways in which the authorities in the UK are trying to lower knife violence. It is ludicrous when you think about it; they sound like a combination of Carolyn McCarthy, Sarah Brady, and Rosie O'Donnell, but instead of seeking to ban firearms, they are now going at knives.

So what is happening in the UK? What is the point of this rant by me? Well, let me put it this way: It seems that folks in the UK are pretty much baffled as to why the violent crime rates keep, for the most part rising, and they seem to want to blame it on the gun culture even though knives and other weapons are used in a great number of the violent crimes. Of course while they still want to blame a lot of the violence of the 'gun culture' and on guns, they also realize in their own misunderstanding sort of way that other evil weapons such as knives are out there< class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_2">that commits the crime, it is the dirtbag lowlife who does that. What they are missing is that once weapons are removed from the hands of the law abiding citizenry, the average citizen then has little to absolutely no way to defend himself against attack from a lowlife dirtbag who is armed with knife or gun. Just look at the crime stats, crime is going down overall, but violent crime is rising. Doesn't anyone get it. Violent crime is more lucrative than non-violent crime if only because you scare the victim enough to give it all up in the case of a robbery - and note they never mention robberies - they just tell you how burglaries (which by legal definition are unarmed crimes) went down. The folks in the UK are proving a point for us here in the USA. Stripping the people of their firearms and other defensive weapons, invites violent crime to flourish, if only because only the criminals now have weapons, and the criminals are opportunists who know a good thing advantage for them when they see it.

By the way, if none of those articles from the UK convinced you, then just check the last few years worth of violent crime rates for Washington, DC where handguns were outlawed. One of the highest violent crime rates in the United States, and how could that be with guns having been outlawed there for over 30 years! Go figure, but I already gave the answer above.

All the best,
Glenn B