You are here: Los Angeles Politics

California News

Which O.C. firms made 'great workplaces' job site?
OC Register.com - 1 hr 41 mins ago
Divers rescued sea turtle near SoCal power plant
Examiner.com - 2 hrs 11 mins ago
Oxnard man gets 26 years for ice cream holdup
Examiner.com - 3 hrs ago

Dixon, state’s attorney testify for gun legislation

CommentsComment on this article
Mar 7, 2008 12:00 AM (176 days ago) by Len Lazarick, The Examiner
This story ranks Not ranked
Related Topics: Annapolis

Annapolis (Map, News) - Baltimore Mayor Sheila Dixon and State’s Attorney Patricia Jessamy testified Thursday for four bills on firearms they said would help keep gun offenders off the street.

In prepared testimony for the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee, Dixon noted that half the homicide suspects in the city last year had a prior gun offense, and 20 percent of them had had multiple gun offenses. Four out five homicides in the city are committed with guns.

One bill reduces the amount of “good time” credits for someone serving the mandatory five-year sentence for a gun offense, so that they would have to serve at least three years and two months in prison.

A second bill would prohibit granting bail to anyone charged with a gun offense that has a prior conviction.

This story continues below
Advertisement

A third bill would ban the possession of a firearm by anyone who is the subject of a final protective order related to domestic violence and abuse.

A fourth bill would require all gun owners to report a stolen weapon within 72 hours of the theft or face a misdemeanor for failure to do so.

Dixon said 46 guns were reported stolen in Baltimore in the past six months, but in the same time period, the city’s Gun Trace Task Force interviewed 26 people whose guns were used in crimes but had never reported them missing to police.

llazarick@baltimoreexaminer.com

Add a Comment


Name: (required)
Comments:
characters left
Comments are regulated by the Terms of Use.

Comments from Examiner Readers

5:27 AM MST on Thu., Feb. 14, 2008 re: "Mayors vow action on illegal firearms"

 John L said:
Sounds like a show trial arrest that just happens to (Ha Ha)coincide with the commie Bloomburg's groupie mayors. Some poor 63 year old guy starts selling off parts of a life-long collection of guns and needing a "Gun sale crime for the mayor's show" they bust this victim of circumstance. Be aware that selling a personal long gun at a gun show is perfectly legal and happens all of the time. Notice they did not state what it was. Betcha it wasn't a handgun.Will also bet that the charges get quietly dropped AFTER the mayor's dog and pony show and once the NRA legal defense people get involved. I hope this guy sues the pants off of these lying slimeballs.

 61 agree | 61 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree

11:48 AM MST on Thu., Feb. 7, 2008 re: "Gun measure seeks to make it easier for average citizens to carry firearms"

 John3Sobieski said:
All good people should be able to defend themselves with lethal force, because there are bad people willing to use lethal force to harm them. Let me remind you, that before the Virginia Tech Shooting, the student body put forward a proposal to allow CCW's on campus. The school authorities rejected it. That man then slaughtered 32 other people, when a CCW holder could have stopped him much sooner. The issue is settled, gentlemen, guns SAVE lives

 47 agree | 42 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
2:43 PM MST on Tue., Jan. 29, 2008 re: "Gun measure seeks to make it easier for average citizens to carry firearms"

 Examiner Reader said:
Let's micro stamp politicians who make really stupid suggestions and then pass a law that they can never be elected to anything again....Ellen you are an idiot!

 32 agree | 36 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
6:34 PM MST on Fri., Jan. 25, 2008 re: "Gun measure seeks to make it easier for average citizens to carry firearms"

 Maryland resident and veteran said:
I have Concealed Carry permits that allow me to carry in 34 states. My home state of MD is not one of them. I am a law abiding citizen with one exception. I have been carrying a concealed gun daily for 27 years (since 21) exercising my right to protect myself. This has saved my life once from an attacking cougar, once saved my brother and I from an attack by three baseball bat wielding hoodlums, and just last week halted an attack on myself and my son right in front of our home. This does not include the use inside our home defending against a home invasion last October. I never had to fire the gun except for the first incident. In none of these situations could police protect me. It was up to me to defend myself and loved ones. I have never heard one good reason for taking that right away from me. The criminals will always have a means to attack their victims no matter how much we try to prevent them. Make me 100% law abiding by changing this ridiculous law. Shall issue in MD NOW!

 49 agree | 37 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
5:03 PM MST on Fri., Jan. 25, 2008 re: "Gun measure seeks to make it easier for average citizens to carry firearms"

 Examiner Reader said:
The time has come Maryland. The people of Maryland have spoken. The rest of the country is getting smarter and providing SHALL ISSUE laws with great results. Liberty stands on Marylands doorstep and watches how you will respond.

 42 agree | 46 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
9:38 AM MST on Fri., Jan. 25, 2008 re: "Gun measure seeks to make it easier for average citizens to carry firearms"

 Josh said:
The comment about PA is true, also I should point out that Philly actually has previously had laws stating that even if you have a PA permit you may not carry in Philly, I believe just last year the state supreme court ruled this as an invalid law... Either way, very ironic that the place with the highest crime rate in PA for years has been the one place citizens were NOT allowed to carry.

 38 agree | 42 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
7:27 PM MST on Thu., Jan. 24, 2008 re: "Gun measure seeks to make it easier for average citizens to carry firearms"

 Examiner Reader said:
PA lets you carry on the street, has a lower crime rate, with the exception of Philly. Get in line!! Clint Eastwood would never have this outrage. Picket, protest this people. Old wild, wild west style.

 42 agree | 39 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
4:20 PM MST on Thu., Jan. 24, 2008 re: "Gun measure seeks to make it easier for average citizens to carry firearms"

 Concerned Marylander said:
I applied for my permit, despite being told by a number of people that I would never get it. I supplied the MSP with what I felt was a resonable threat to my safety. I ofcourse got my dissapproval letter, but decided to push the issue. My next step was an informal review, with two troopers as if they were there to gang up on me. The bottom line was, the MSP makes the decision and that decision was no. I was told that if I was attacked on my own property I already had the right to carry a gun, threats over the phone don't count because nobody can hurt you through the phone, if I were assaulted in public they could arrest that person so the threat would no longer exist, and anyone could be jumped in their driveway by a criminal so I am not special, therefore don't get a permit. The attorney general has previously ruled that MSP will not be held responsible for an individual's safety, and the MSP says you have no right to carry a means of personal protection. It's time for change!!!!!

 50 agree | 45 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
3:58 PM MST on Thu., Jan. 24, 2008 re: "Gun measure seeks to make it easier for average citizens to carry firearms"

 Lambo said:
Re: Maryland Concealed Carry Law As a sign of solidarity & a visual Protest, My proposal: Seriously, how about we all start wearing an empty holster when out & about? Don't forget to attach a label with the quote, " EMPTY due to 2nd Class Citizenship".

 48 agree | 43 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
3:11 PM MST on Thu., Jan. 24, 2008 re: "Gun measure seeks to make it easier for average citizens to carry firearms"

 Examiner Reader said:
I live in PG County. I've called the police at least 30 times in 8 years about cars parking near a field that backs my house. IF the police come, they just send them off. I've personally gone up to cars after the frustation and I've personally seen drug and alcohol use, urination in the street and a few sex acts, not to mention the garbage they leave behind. Once a teenager threatened to get a gun out of his truck. Our street has also been tagged by the Bloods. However, I did get a ticket for having my truck unattended while warming up in MY driveway. That officer told me if I help increase the crime rates by having my vehicle stolen, it's harder for the county to draw taxable business. So, does an anti-gun person want to tell me what's most important to govies?

 61 agree | 41 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
10:07 AM MST on Thu., Jan. 24, 2008 re: "Gun measure seeks to make it easier for average citizens to carry firearms"

 John T. Block, southern AA Co. said:
I am a former Md. state employee, 27years. When I worked in Annapolis, I went to "J" Barricks and asked for the ccw application forms. The Cpl. at the front desk _refused_ to even give me a set of forms! Self-defence is a right under the Constitutions, both state and Federal. But having the right means nothing if the Gov. can deny a citizen the _means_ of exercising it. Anyone who looks at the issue honestly knows the threat to society comes from criminals who will carry & use whatever weapon they feel they need for the illegal business they do, not the law-abiding citizen who wants to be able to legally carry for protection. In a State where great concern is raised over witness intimidation by gangs, and "stop snitichin'" videos seem to worry authorities & community leaders, allowing honest folk legal means of self-defence would seem to be a no-brainer. Thank you.

 57 agree | 43 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
8:32 AM MST on Thu., Jan. 24, 2008 re: "Gun measure seeks to make it easier for average citizens to carry firearms"

 Marc in AA County said:
The retired trooper makes some sage points. Criminals really only fear someone hurting them. Jail and prison is a joke, they are out in no time. Most thugs get off lightly and they know this. Law abiding people who have the law behind them should have nothing to fear from their government, but they do. Listen to what the anti-CCW crowd is saying about guns: all guns are bad, even in the hands of good people. To fight back with a viable defensive weapon (I'm paraphrasing the retired trooper) is the only way to survive if no one is there to save you. In addition to pepper spray not being effective in the rain, wind or on someone who is amped up on meth, what if there is more than one attacker? Story after story recounts how someone was attacked by 2 or 3 people, even more. Well, a gun would even things a bit wouldn't they? This isn't an "arms race" on the street as the anti-CCW people claim. It's all about the frustration of being set upon by violent people and fighting back.

 48 agree | 37 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
8:18 AM MST on Thu., Jan. 24, 2008 re: "Gun measure seeks to make it easier for average citizens to carry firearms"

 This law is overdue PASS IT NOW said:
It's time for this law. This law will not "create more guns" the guns are already out there. It will deter crime. The law as it is now is outdated and should be unconstitutional. SHALL ISSUE! SHALL ISSUE! Want me to pass a test to show I can handle it? no problem! Give me the same test that our police officers take. I'll probably out perform them!

 51 agree | 39 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
4:00 AM MST on Thu., Jan. 24, 2008 re: "Gun measure seeks to make it easier for average citizens to carry firearms"

 Neil Evangelista said:
The fact is that governments should not be involved in permitting the carriage of weapons, either concealed or openly. The right of self-defense is a corollary to the right to life; to deny one is to deny the other. And the purpose of government is to insure our rights, not to infringe on them. In Murdock v. Pennsylvania (1943) the Supreme Court stated that a constitutionally-protected right may not be licensed, nor a fee charged. The Right to Keep and Bear Arms is one of those protected natural rights. In Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham, Alabama (1962) the Court decided that “If the state does attempt to convert a liberty into a privilege, the citizen can engage in the right with impunity.” (That means they can't punish you, folks!) To paraphrase an oft-quoted movie line, "Permits? We don' need no steenking permits!" Neil Evangelista Personal Protection Instructor

 52 agree | 45 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
9:28 PM MST on Wed., Jan. 23, 2008 re: "Gun measure seeks to make it easier for average citizens to carry firearms"

 Examiner Reader said:
I am a retired state trooper and would very much like to talk about this topic with some civility. Using terms like "gun crazies" completely clouds the frustration felt by those who are fed up with crime. It is true that law enforcement cannot be everywhere at the same time. This is a fact that many do not want to admit because it would fuel the pro-CCW side. All I can say is this, ladies and gentlemen: criminals ONLY fear violence being inflicted upon them. Whether it is a homeowner or pedestrian with a legally carried concealed firearm or someone who smacks them with a bat, it's all they understand. The problem with bats, knives, etc as self defense weapons is that you have to basically be in such close proximity to your attacker that you risk great bodily injury while trying to defend yourself. A handgun puts distance between you and your attacker and is therefore a more viable self defense weapon. Pepper spray works great, but not in the rain/wind, or if someone is on drugs.

 66 agree | 42 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
7:17 PM MST on Wed., Jan. 23, 2008 re: "Gun measure seeks to make it easier for average citizens to carry firearms"

 Examiner Reader said:
It's about time for MD to pass such a law and become a "Shall Issue" state. Like most states that have done so, violent crime and murder would most likely be reduced. States that have banned guns, usually see an increase in crime and violence. There's some truth to the saying that, "If guns are illegal, then only criminals will have guns". Criminals don't follow the law. And criminals love knowing that their potential victims don't have a way to protect themselves. This makes everybody vulnerable.

 51 agree | 40 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
7:14 PM MST on Wed., Jan. 23, 2008 re: "Gun measure seeks to make it easier for average citizens to carry firearms"

 Dedicated_Dad said:
Go to YouTube and search for "make your own gun free zone" This video makes the point in a particularly poignant way. DD

 40 agree | 42 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
6:47 PM MST on Wed., Jan. 23, 2008 re: "Gun measure seeks to make it easier for average citizens to carry firearms"

 Dedicated_Dad said:
It's painfully obvious where the line is drawn on this issue. On the one hand, you have a group of people speaking of facts and figures, proveable, documentable, easily verifiable, published, public research. On the other hand, you have a group of people making unreasoned, emotional "arguments" based solely on fear and ignorance. Britain essentially banned all guns. Their crime rate SKYROCKETED due to the old bit of bumper-sticker wisdom: "When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns." Now they're selling stab-resistant vests to parents of grade-school children, and forcing theater groups to "register" plastic swords. The FACT is that at least 40 states have concealed-carry laws more liberal than MD, and all 40 have lower RATES of violent crime. ALL OF THEM. ALL OF THEM have seen said rates FALL after passing "shall-issue" legislation. Further, permit holders are less likely than POLICE to commit a crime with a gun. Still in doubt? (Continued)

 79 agree | 39 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
6:15 PM MST on Wed., Jan. 23, 2008 re: "Gun measure seeks to make it easier for average citizens to carry firearms"

 Josh said:
I attempted to post a comment with links to several articles proving that passing such laws not only does not increase violent crime but in fact reduces it. One article is from www.freep.com and is titled "Michigan sees fewer gun deaths -- with more permits" dated 1/6/2008 of this year. This is an excellent modern day example of a state who as recently as 6 years ago became a "shall-issue" state which is exactly what this bill would do for Maryland. Even those who had opposed the bill in Michigan admitted that things were "not as bad as they had expected" a big confession from your typical anti-gun type. What in fact was found is that in the 6 years that Michigan has been a shall-issue state violent crimes AND gun deaths (both accidental and otherwise) have decreased as the number of permits has increased. The other article was simply information regarding population adjusted crime-rates for MD's surrounding shall-issue states... all of these states have drastically lower crime rates

 54 agree | 46 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
4:04 PM MST on Wed., Jan. 23, 2008 re: "Gun measure seeks to make it easier for average citizens to carry firearms"

 C Mendoza said:
(cont) wish you had kept the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights intact. Illegal aliens have the highest crime rate of all people in the U.S. and concealed carry permitholders is one the very lowest. You are safer around CCW holders than a normal sample of citizens.

 43 agree | 36 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
3:57 PM MST on Wed., Jan. 23, 2008 re: "Gun measure seeks to make it easier for average citizens to carry firearms"

 C Mendoza said:
There is no "gun show loophole." This is a phrase created by anti-gun rights extremists to bait and switch the public. Another fact related to the article is, of guns used in crimes, the latest figures showed less than 1% came from gun shows. It was something like .7%--hardly a number to justify spending all the resources being spent to try to stop gun shows. I have a novel idea. Let's not let murderers, rapists, child molesters, and other violent criminals out of jail!!! If we stop that revolving door, then maybe people won't feel compelled to destroying our rights guaranteed by the Constitution and ending what once was the land of the free and home of the brave. And, you may not think you need to carry a handgun now, but with the number of immigrants entering the country seeking sanctuary and sneaking across the borders--bringing their culture with them, and with the extremely high rate of violent crime committed by immigrants--especially illegal ones, you may just

 71 agree | 47 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
2:52 PM MST on Wed., Jan. 23, 2008 re: "Gun measure seeks to make it easier for average citizens to carry firearms"

 Norton said:
"To those of you that don't belief in the loophole, I say you are turning a blind eye. It's real and you gun crazies need to understand that. More guns aren't the answer, it's getting all those illegal guns off the streets. Punish those that commit gun crimes. Make it harder to get a gun. It's easier to get a gun than get a drivimg license. How messed up is that?" Can you define gun show loophole? As previously stated, there is nothing different about a gun purchase made at a gun show and one made at the physical location of the dealer. There is still the NICS check and there is additionally the 7 day waiting period for regulated firearms. Do you have to wait 7 days and undergo a criminal background check to get a drivers license in MD? I guess then, that by definition it is easier to get the license than a firearm.

 46 agree | 51 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
2:28 PM MST on Wed., Jan. 23, 2008 re: "Gun measure seeks to make it easier for average citizens to carry firearms"

 Examiner Reader said:
1:55: The Virginia Tech massacre occurred in a gun free zone. If one of the victims had access to gun, it’s a safe bet that a lot less people would be dead. The Colorado church shooting is an example. You probably don't own a gun and have never received fire arm training, so don't assume your ignorance is typical for gun owners. Your comments indicate you don’t know what you are talking about, and haven’t taken the time to learn.

 48 agree | 39 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
2:13 PM MST on Wed., Jan. 23, 2008 re: "Gun measure seeks to make it easier for average citizens to carry firearms"

 gtodave said:
There are some pretty ignorant responses here...most showing nothing but fear of the unknown, but many are just plain ridiculous. How do you know how other people will react? Have you been in a situation like that? Do you know that I or someone else hasn't? Even if I were to react by "peeing my pants", why shouldn't I at least have the opportunity to defend myself against a CRIMINAL? Rather than spit out the old and tattered rhetoric, why not read some of the FACTS about what CCW can do for a community. The facts might just get the fear out of you. As said before, nearly 40 states have laws like the one proposed, and they have NONE of the problems many of you have presented. Must be a reason for that, right?

 51 agree | 42 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
1:41 PM MST on Wed., Jan. 23, 2008 re: "Gun measure seeks to make it easier for average citizens to carry firearms"

 Examiner Reader said:
Virginia also has a lower population density too. Isn't that a factor in their lower crime rate?

 43 agree | 48 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
1:34 PM MST on Wed., Jan. 23, 2008 re: "Gun measure seeks to make it easier for average citizens to carry firearms"

 Examiner Reader said:
Virginia has had open carry forever, and concealed carry was added more recently. They are right next door and have consistently had less crime, even in neighborhoods with ethnic/racial makeup similar to those in Maryland's highest crime areas. The highest crime rate is among illegal aliens in both states.

 42 agree | 51 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
1:28 PM MST on Wed., Jan. 23, 2008 re: "Gun measure seeks to make it easier for average citizens to carry firearms"

 Examiner Reader said:
To those of you that don't belief in the loophole, I say you are turning a blind eye. It's real and you gun crazies need to understand that. More guns aren't the answer, it's getting all those illegal guns off the streets. Punish those that commit gun crimes. Make it harder to get a gun. It's easier to get a gun than get a drivimg license. How messed up is that?

 42 agree | 51 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
1:25 PM MST on Wed., Jan. 23, 2008 re: "Gun measure seeks to make it easier for average citizens to carry firearms"

 Norton said:
Nearly 40 states have shall-issue legislation. In not one single incident have the dire warnings of "blood in the streets", or "vigilantism" taken place. Not once. MD is out of step with the rest of the nation and it is time that the citizens of this state were allowed to protect themselves. Ironically, the supreme court has ruled that the government has no responsibility to provide protection yet they deny the individual citizen the means to do the same. I would encourage every skeptic to visit marylandshallissue.org to read the truths about gun control....how many of the gun control measures enacted were actually racist in nature and meant to deny blacks the means to defend themselves. Maryland needs to catch up to the rest of the country.

 48 agree | 37 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
12:55 PM MST on Wed., Jan. 23, 2008 re: "Gun measure seeks to make it easier for average citizens to carry firearms"

 DRH said:
The term "Gun show loophole" is misnomer, just as the term "assault weapon" has been misused and abused to ban a whole class of semi-automatic deer rifles and duck guns. All federally licensed firearm dealers MUST do the normal registration form and background check of a gun purchaser, whether they are in their store or set up at a weekend gun show.

 49 agree | 41 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
12:33 PM MST on Wed., Jan. 23, 2008 re: "Gun measure seeks to make it easier for average citizens to carry firearms"

 Examiner Reader said:
There is no "gun show loophole" in Maryland! No matter who the weapon is sold to or purchased from, a background check is required through a licensed dealer before the sale can be made. Where is the proof of any evidence of organized crime benefiting from individual concealed carry in any of the other states that have allowed it's citizens to defend themselves. THERE ISN'T ANY! Additionally concealed means just that, the weapon must be carried in a concealed manner so what would make you wonder if someone had a permit for a weapon you can't see? It's time to quit the left wing babble and stick to the facts.

 42 agree | 35 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
12:29 PM MST on Wed., Jan. 23, 2008 re: "Gun measure seeks to make it easier for average citizens to carry firearms"

 Examiner Reader said:
More guns does equal less crime folks. Read: More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun-Control Laws (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998)(Studies in law and economics)(ISBN: 0226493636). 232p.

 50 agree | 42 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
12:07 PM MST on Wed., Jan. 23, 2008 re: "Gun measure seeks to make it easier for average citizens to carry firearms"

 Examiner Reader said:
How many people would be able to tell the difference between a real permit and a fake if they saw one? Probably not many, because it wouldn't be something we've seen before unless we are a gun carrier. I see a new area of crime that organized crime bosses will take advantage of. The public can and will be fooled by impostors. How about a REAL solution. Stiffer punishment for those committing gun crimes, and end the loopholes at gun shows that allow anyone to buy whatever weapon they choose regardless of background.

 41 agree | 52 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
11:39 AM MST on Wed., Jan. 23, 2008 re: "Gun measure seeks to make it easier for average citizens to carry firearms"

 Examiner Reader said:
You are fooling yourself if you believe that you could stop a criminal by carrying a weapon. Unless you have police/military training you most likely will be scared out of your wits and become a menace to yourself and the people around you that you are trying to "protect".

 65 agree | 50 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
11:37 AM MST on Wed., Jan. 23, 2008 re: "Gun measure seeks to make it easier for average citizens to carry firearms"

 Examiner Reader said:
How do you know if a person has a permit? By requiring him to carry the permit whenever he carries the gun. What if a criminal shoots his victim and claims self-defense because the victim had a gun? The statutes reject aggressors' claims of self-defense. In the Old West, people tended to be polite. Shootouts were rare, and typically happened in saloons between drunken young white trash. Most modern permits are invalid when the carrier is drinking. Crimes such as robbery of individuals and rape were rare. There are, however, some disadvantages to a shall-issue permit system. It might lead to an increase in rents in poor sections of Baltimore, as more middle-class taxpayers will be willing to live and travel there, even as muggers and carjackers lose their only source of income.

 41 agree | 38 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
11:16 AM MST on Wed., Jan. 23, 2008 re: "Gun measure seeks to make it easier for average citizens to carry firearms"

 Right to Carry said:
I carried a concealed handgun in PA for protection for many years. The permitting process was done through the sheriff's office. I felt safer knowing I could defend myself, or others, if confronted by a criminal. Keep in mind, all violent crime is committed by about 3 percent of the population! That's 3 people out of 100 preying upon us. It is time to join the other states and 'level the field'.

 48 agree | 48 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
11:08 AM MST on Wed., Jan. 23, 2008 re: "Gun measure seeks to make it easier for average citizens to carry firearms"

 Examiner Reader said:
Scares the hell out of me that we would allow people to carry guns around. How do we know if the guy next to you is legally carrying or not? To me it just makes it easier for criminals to use a gun. I can say I'm carrying legally, and who would be doubt me?

 38 agree | 53 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
11:06 AM MST on Wed., Jan. 23, 2008 re: "Gun measure seeks to make it easier for average citizens to carry firearms"

 Examiner Reader said:
So Joe carrys a gun and for some reason decides to pull it out as a show of Hey Here I am potential Criminal. The Criminal somehow gets the Gun from Joe and Shoots Joe as he felt he was in imediate harm. The Criminal is not convicted as he was able to prove he felt he was in imediate harm. More Guns never equal less crime, it also puts normal citzens in danger as there is no asurance that the person who you choose to confront is not armed to the Teeth, so a simpile shoving match turns into boot hill. Think about it.

 39 agree | 54 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
10:29 AM MST on Wed., Jan. 23, 2008 re: "Gun measure seeks to make it easier for average citizens to carry firearms"

 Examiner Reader said:
It's about time a "shall issue" law be passed. There's abolutely no evidence that legal carry equals increased vigilantism, quite the contrary is true.

 71 agree | 44 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
10:25 AM MST on Wed., Jan. 23, 2008 re: "Gun measure seeks to make it easier for average citizens to carry firearms"

 Examiner Reader said:
In areas of the world where private ownership of firearms was made very difficult the crime rates have risen dramatically. Aggravated assault, rape and murder has risen over 70% in some of these areas since the bans were put in place. It remains true that the Police in this area will NOT protect you. You have NO protection. A woman on the phone to the police who lived on Providence Rd when the Police HQ was on Kenilworth died after 20 minutes on the phone because the Police never arrived. I've personally called for Police assistance more than 40 times. Rarely do they appear in less than 20 minutes. It's true a firearm can kill in a second. It's also true criminals don't care about the law. As we've heard ad infinitum: It's the revolving door "justice" system and lack of enforcement, especially toward the "minority" criminal element that brings about public mistrust and fear. My handgun protects me now. The police never have.

 66 agree | 47 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
9:38 AM MST on Wed., Jan. 23, 2008 re: "Gun measure seeks to make it easier for average citizens to carry firearms"

 Examiner Reader said:
All it takes is a millisecond for a legal gun owner to become a criminal. Let's give everyone a gun and make the world less safe from would be vigilantes that will take the law into their own hands. Makes perfect sense to me. More guns= more chance for me to die.

 44 agree | 63 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
9:31 AM MST on Wed., Jan. 23, 2008 re: "Gun measure seeks to make it easier for average citizens to carry firearms"

 Examiner Reader said:
This is just a thought to stimulate discussion, because, frankly, I don't know. In the days of cowboys in the West where it appears many carried guns, did the doctrine of mutual deterrence actually cause people to think twice before pulling their guns, or was it a mute point and they shot each other up anyways? As far as I know, much of that part of the country was considered lawless and violent and the fact that citizens were carrying guns didn't make a bit of difference when the intention to commit a violent act was conceived.

 57 agree | 49 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
8:42 AM MST on Wed., Jan. 23, 2008 re: "Gun measure seeks to make it easier for average citizens to carry firearms"

 DRH said:
Bravo!

 43 agree | 33 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
7:37 AM MST on Wed., Jan. 23, 2008 re: "Gun measure seeks to make it easier for average citizens to carry firearms"

 Examiner Reader said:
4:54 AM is right! "Shall issue" will be a huge improvement to citizen safety and reduce crime in this state.

 47 agree | 41 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
4:54 AM MST on Wed., Jan. 23, 2008 re: "Gun measure seeks to make it easier for average citizens to carry firearms"

 Examiner Reader said:
As a current holder of an out-of-state Florida concealed carry permit, which allows me to carry in 26 states (Maryland isn't one of them), it's about time Maryland becomes a "shall issue" state. Let's use logic for a change. More legal guns -- less crime. It's a no-brainer.

 78 agree | 44 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
4:45 AM MST on Wed., Jan. 23, 2008 re: "Gun measure seeks to make it easier for average citizens to carry firearms"

 Puzzled said:
A "LEFT WING NUT" WANTS PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO DEFEND THEIR HOMES! WHAT IS THE WORLD COMING TO?

 71 agree | 48 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
3:33 AM MST on Wed., Jan. 23, 2008 re: "Gun measure seeks to make it easier for average citizens to carry firearms"

 Examiner Reader said:
I am permited to carry in Maryland "to and from work "and during normal business activities as manager of same", so my money handling is more important than me!!! I think more people should be permited, the "shall Issue" concept of issuance of permits to law abiding citizens causes the lawbreaker to think twice or three times before a voilent crime is comitted. Proper training and range time for practice are common sense for the normal access to legal firearms. Firearms carried legally by lawabiding citizens would be a good thing, proper thing, the right thing to make happen.

 83 agree | 45 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Advertisement
 
Site Map