Saturday, February 9, 2013

Want home protection, get a shotgun. And gun crime? One law

Pacifica Tribune, Letters to the Editor, 2/6/13, "Guns by Jim Gunn."

Yeah, that will work...
"Editor: If you want a gun for home protection then you want a shotgun with buckshot, not a high-powered rifle or pistol with high capacity magazines. The shotgun with buckshot will not penetrate your sheetrock walls thus not endangering your spouse or children while you deal with the intruder to your home.

A high-powered rifle or pistol will penetrate the sheetrock walls and thus put family members at risk especially if it is in semiautomatic setting. A shotgun can also be used as an effective club on that same intruder.

We also don't need a lot of new gun laws, we only need one new law and that law would mandate the death penalty for anyone who uses a gun in the commission of a crime, period. If there is irrefutable evidence that a person used a gun or threatened to use a gun in the commission of a crime then the appeals process would be waved and the person executed within 6 months of judgment. This will help clear the courts and the prisons as you would not have 20-30 years of appeals in these cases. This law works quite effectively in the countries that already have this law on the books. In these countries crime by gun is virtually nonexistent."

Posted by Kathy Meeh


Anonymous said...

Gosh, Jim Gunn, I can see all those ACLU types turning over in their graves about your "death penalty punishment" idea.

I'm certain that it is a perfectly workable idea in many countries, but not here in America. We'd rather talk it to death, sue it to death, or plain forget about it, rather than deal with the problem.

There probably aren't any stats on this, but I wonder how many people who have lost a loved one to a senseless violent act, are still supportive of the 2nd Amendment?

Anonymous said...

Does anyone thing Jim Gunn is a real person?

Anonymous said...

1010, there is. Did you even try a web search before you asked the question?

Anonymous said...

no need. they've got you.

Anonymous said...

Then if Gunn is proposing a bad idea , how would you feel about a Drone killing Americans without trial?

LAPD using drone to find dorner and has stated it will shoot to kill once he is found. No trial. Death. Yes, ban guns and let the government use drones to kill americans instead. Can't let the stupid people arm themselves for protection when a mad man is on the loose. We got drones!

Kathy Meeh said...

" would you feel about a Drone killing Americans without trial? " Anonymous, 2/10/13, 4:45 PM. Huh?

1. The crazy CA cop killer Christopher Dorner had an option for surrender and trial. No drone searched from cabin to cabin. Police did that. The cop killer killed at least 4 police or police related people, wounded others.

2. The American who joined al-Qaeda in the Middle East, plotted against and killed Americans. Yep, a drone got him. No expensive trial, good riddance FMV.

Dorner was civilian, al-Qaeda is military (terrorism). Apparent there are government drone guidelines, and more in process (its government).

Drones are new technology, I'm looking forward to more civilian uses. Example, civilian search. About the time the older Linda Mar woman was missing, a drone was spotted near the hills. I'm assuming the police were looking for her.

Spent any time in southern California? Drone replacement of helicopter police search should be less noisy and intrusive as well.

Anonymous said...

"No expensive trial, good riddance FMV."

Yes, none of that annoying due process or civil liberty. You must be a big Cheney fan.

Kathy Meeh said...

"none of that annoying due process or civil liberty." Plus your Cheney cheap shot. Anonymous 6:14 PM

So let's go kill a bunch of American troops in the Middle East to catch one rotten traitor to America who is killing Americans. Oh yes that's American justice according to you. Well you have your opinion, I have mine. (However, my opinion is more in line with current Government policy, you know existing law).

I am no fan of Bush or Cheney dragging America into the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. And there is no indication from my comments that I would be. So you're just name calling under unidentified camouflage. How trashy and irrelevant of you.

Anonymous said...

Trashy and irrelevant!?!? At least it's not advocating the casual murder of US citizens without benefit of trial. Anyone with even minimal respect for our Constitution would have much harsher adjectives for that kind of fascist attitude.

Kathy Meeh said...

"... respect for our Constitution.." Anonymous 2/15/13, 7:22 PM ?????

A traitor at war who joined al-Qaeda overseas to plot against America and was killing Americans is "casual murder of US citizen(s) without benefit of trial", according to you. And countering your described opinion, others have "fascist attitude". Huh?

Let's see that US constitution dictate that protects war criminal traitors from being killed by drones, (and that is during war).

Then there is existing US policy governed by legal guidelines, never mind my opinion-- all "fascist attitude" according to you. Go ahead defend your flaky position, I can hardly wait.

Anonymous said...

oh please don't

Anonymous said...

Why does this argument make me think of two heavily padded fighters, slowly circling each other, swinging away with big foam clubs?