Philadelphia Police officer John Pawlowski was not killed by Rasheed Scruggs -- he was killed by the .357 pistol that Scruggs was using. Take away that gun and Scruggs is just another thug with his hands in his pockets. And good-looking family man John Pawlowski might be alive today.
Philadelphia has already tried to change the law so that it can enforce its own gun codes inside the city limits. The city lost in the courts because the monumentally well-financed gun lobby came in as a freind of the courts to fight the move. They trotted out the same tired excuses: hunters are law-abiding citizens, guns don't kill, criminals do; we have the guarantee of the Second Amendment.
This is a news flash for that gun lobby: Back when they wrote the second amendment, Americans were still burning women as witches; guns do, indeed kill, just like that .357, and the main prey that is being hunted in Philadelphia right now are human beings, especially police officers.
Philadelphia needs the power to ban the sale and possession of hand guns once and for all.
If that upsets the gun lobby, so be it. Mayor Michael Nutter can't even disguise the hopelessness and disgust in his voice every time he talks about the murder of another policeman. That is understandable; as long as there is such easy access to guns in the city, there can be no safety. Philadelphia should not be forced to abide by the same gun laws that appy to some upstate county where there are more bears than people. To expect the city to do so is madness.
Comments
let us outlaw cars. they kill, not their drivers. & maybee also food, it kills through obesity. dismiss god too while were at it. perhaps even rational thought, should be outlawed, given its' propensity to kill off derilect nonsense such as can be seen by the mindful. careful what you ask for, i may give it to you.... love hurts. rosebud fritz yeastedt
At what point after the ban on the sale or possession of hand guns do you see gun crime declining in Philadelphia? What examples do you have that promote this ban as a good way to reduce gun crime?
More fuzzy illogic from the victim disarmament crowd. Scruggs was already a 'prohibited person' having been convicted of a 1997 armed robbery. He had no qualms about unlawfully having a gun or killing a cop but somehow making the gun even <I>more</i> illegal would have stopped him?
This illogical argument can be taken even a step further, let us examine which ethnic groups are responsible for the majority of killings of police officers and prohibit that group from owning guns
Who can be so stupid to think that banning handguns would keep them away from criminals?
Mike you state "Take away that gun and Scruggs is just another thug with his hands in his pockets." By the same token, take away the thug and the gun is just another paperweight. It is an inanimate object incapable of acting on it's own. It has to have the input of a person with the intent to use it.
What a friken idiot.
This is the same nonsense that hasn't worked for years.
Take a good look at the FBI data about gun crime and tell me what you see:
cant post URLs on this sorry web site but I owuld direct you to the Department Of Justice website.
Just Google DOJ Statistics and you will find government data showing blacks are far more likely to kill one another with guns that are whites.
I would argue that this is likley due more to the outlook for those who live in ghetos but these stats don't lie.
You can ban handguns all you want but what on earth makes you think criminals will obey those laws???? Someone contemplating murder isn't going to worry about a firearms violation. Even if you could confiscate all firearms it is very easy to make them in your garage. Go to my website to for links to examples:
rideronthestorm-armed.angelfire.com
Ammunition is also easy to ban but impossible to eliminate. First police will be ambushed for their weapons and ammo. Second millions of people reload their own ammo. 3rd there are millions of rounds in homes across the country. 4th black powder is easy to make and very effective as the civil war showed.
"Philadelphia Police officer John Pawlowski was not killed by Rasheed Scruggs -- he was killed by the .357 pistol that Scruggs was using." So then Scruggs won't go to jail, right? By the way, criminals like this don't need firearms to attack unarmed women, children, or the elderly. Why do you want to make it easier for criminals to rape women?
So when you ban all of handgun sales in Philadelphia and the murder rates continue to rise what are you going to blame next?
Get off your intellectual high horse and put the blame where it belongs, ON THE INDIVIDUAL that committed the murder.
I am a reasonable, educated person who is willing to consider all viewpoints, but, seriously: this has to be one of the most historically illiterate and culturally unaware articles I have ever read. So, they were burning witches in the late 1700s in America? Please provide that source. Are you also going to tell us that police officers don't die in England and Australia, two countries with some of the most stringent gun laws in the world?? I really have to ask: how does limiting the possessions of law-abiding citizens prevent a criminal, who is of a mind-set to kill a police officer, from owning a weapon as he sees fit? I just meet a former Philly police officer who moved to my area out in Wyoming. He told of how he used to carry an extra weapon in his car for fear of being murdered by other police in that city, because so many of them were taking bribes and dealing in drugs on the job. Yet, their leader, this sad little thug of a Mayor, gets choked up when he hears about a citizen having a gun! No wonder! He and his gangsters would have the run of the town otherwise. To date, the state of Florida has issued 1.8 million concealed weapons permits. Of these, roughly 150 have been revoked because of violent crime committed by a license holder. There are 300 million firearms in the United States. Does that mean 300 million people died last year??? A gun is safer in your home than your staircase. This author is hilarious.
The writer looks like the kind of guy who likes hanging around playgrounds, if you know what I mean.
That is like saying the politition didn't; the lie lied!
Philidelphia needs to enforce the present gun laws. The perp wasn't skipping hoiome from Sunday school with his .357 in hand. My guess is he had a criminal record and had the gun illegally.
Ok, what do we charge the "gun" with?
last time I checked, if someone wants to kill someone they don't need a gun to accomplish that. It is important to focus that we need to enforce the existing law. It would be not less a tragedy if he was killed with a knife or was stabbed with a ball point pen.
News flash....
Chicago and DC (until recently) completely banned handguns and those cities saw soaring crime rates. It may sound counterintuitive but it does seem that stringent gun control laws do that opposite of their well intended purpose. It is just one of those strange human things - more guns does equal less crime. Go figure, but it seems to be true.
I am glad you live in PRNJ because you certainly are in line with the government there. I think you are just trolling to get noticed so that you can keep your job at a writer, by writing silly "insights" that you don't believe in, just to get people to respond. Shameful tactic, terrible delivery...don't wanna say where your head is, but it's pretty deep in there.
I agree with you Mr. Mallowe !!! What is going on is insane. All these pro hand gun folks can go live in Philly, you are all crazy anyway!
If you take guns away from law abiding citizens, then the only people with guns will be law enforcement and criminals. When seconds count, I reserve the liberty to defend myself. Ignorance to firearms is not an excuse for you to oppose guns. There are many more dangerous murderers in our country: automobiles, alcohol, water, the human heart, fat (you're not at fault for being obese, we should blame the food!)
Oh, Mike Mallowe, you are so wrong...! Just sit down and think about it. In a few minutes the Second Amendment will make sense to you, too.
Mike,Anti Gun people like you make me laugh. Do you really think a criminal who goes around shooting police officers is really going to care about a law that says he can't have a hand gun. Please remember the same people who are going around shooting at the police are the same people that break every other law already written why wouldn't they break that one law?. I am a honest law-abiding gun owner who would never ever shoot at a police officer or any other human being, why? because I abide by the laws I am not a criminal. Writing a law that takes guns away from good people will NEVER take the guns out of the peoples hands that are going around shooting at our police in fact it just creates a new black market and guns will still be available to those who car nothing about the law or life.
Answers for those who think that "gun control" is the best for America
hubpages dot com/hub/Answers-for-those-who-think-that-gun-control-is-the-best-for-America
Why ban guns? Ban thugs like Rasheed from ever living in Philly instead.
Rasheed Scruggs' rap sheet:
He had been arrested nine times for crimes including robbery, car theft, weapons offenses and drugs, according to police and court records.
He was convicted of a 1997 armed robbery and sentenced to five to 10 years in prison. He was released in 2002, but he violated his parole in 2004 and was sent back to prison for an additional year.
Hmmm.......We should ban guns, and trample my rights, so that criminals won't have them. Sorta like, lets trash the 1A and Freedom of the Press so that Child Pornographers can't claim 1A rights, which the US Supreme Court claims they have.
This makes sense. Remove a Constitutional right from someone living in Philly because someone else in Philly does felony crime. Does this mean I can't drive to work because my neighbor was DWI last night?
We lock up dangerous, repeat criminals, let them go because the state can't warehouse them due to costs and having a high prison population who have committed victimless crimes (mere possession of something)then act to remove the rights of everyone else when the bad guy returns to his previous employment. The system helps create the problem yet those who do nothing wrong have to pay. Gee, this sounds like the government we have in Washington now.
Morons
"Shall we ban fire because it burns, or water because one might drown..." - Cesare Beccaria (noted jurist of old).
"Foolish liberals who are trying to read the 2nd Amendment out of the Constitution by claiming it's not an individual right or that it's too much of a public safety hazard don't see the danger in the big picture. They're courting disaster by encouraging others to use the same means to eliminate portions of the Constitution they don't like." - Alan Dershowitz (certainly no right-wing gun nut)
Since the definition of 'infringed' is the same today as it was in the 18th century when the Bill of Rights was ratified, exactly what part of "shall not be infringed" do you fail to grasp?
"Philadelphia needs the power to ban the sale and possession of hand guns once and for all."
It is said that a gentleman always says what he means and means what he says.
You certainly don't mean what you say.
Ban possession of handguns? What about the police...certainly they'd have handguns. How about VIP bodyguards? Mayor Nutter and Governor Rendell are always accompanied by armed officers paid by the taxpayers.
Certainly should the Israeli PM visit Philly, his bodyguards would be armed.
What about ordinary American rich people? Don't they have bodyguards too?
How about the guys who move money around for Brinks and other armored car firms? Don't they need to be "packin'" to protect themselves and all that cash?
What about me and you? If the police, the mayor, the Israeli fellow, and the Brinks guys lives are all worth defending, then aren't your and mine?
My advice: get a concealed carry permit, a good small handgun, some instruction (if you weren't already qualified in the military, like I was) and start carrying. You may save your life, or even better, you may save someone else.
And since, even though you indict me and millions of other Americans with concealed handgun licenses, I will assume you a gentleman and you might want to heed the old adage and really say what you mean.
You don't want to ban handguns.
You just want to ban them for people you and Mayor Nutter consider unimportant.
""hiladelphia Police officer John Pawlowski was not killed by Rasheed Scruggs -- he was killed by the .357 pistol that Scruggs was using.""
Then Free Scruggs and sentence the .357 to death.
""Take away that gun and Scruggs is just another thug with his hands in his pockets. ""
BTW we had a murder in Atlanta on Tuesday of a prominent cancer researcher. She was beaten to death. But I guess that crime doesnt count according ot he Phil Enq cuz no gun was use. Thus it didnt happen
It is so important for everyone to openly state..
The purpose of banning guns is to empower the powerful.. Wealthy Elected and Appointed Officials to do as they please with the people without restraint.
The only reason anyone tries to disarm you is so they can do something to you they feel they cannot safely do before you lack the means to resist.
Mayor Nutter and his defenders are so focused on an object used to facilitate violence that they forget why violence takes place.
Reading Mr. Mallowe's letter, you would think that a firearms sitting on a table causes an uncontrolled urge to shoot another human being.
I guess Mr. Mallowe would subscribe to the notion that scantily clad women who get raped brought the violence upon themselves by their poor choice in clothing.
Unfortunately, what we have in Philadelphia is a dereliction of duty by the Mayor, and by extension, the police to actually confront crime. We all know the police have turned portions of the city over to the criminals with nary a patrol. The fear of police brutality videos staged by the criminals has turned our elected officials and our police department into bowls of quivering jello.
In New York City, Mayor Giuliani took on the criminal element without fear. The criminal class and its defenders screamed, but crime rates dramatically dropped and New York returned to being a tolerable large city where honest citizens could meander the streets without intense fear of the criminal element.
Mayor Nutter is a defacto apologist for the criminal class. His inability to confront crime and his diversionary talk about firearms illustrates the Mayor's fecklessness as a leader.
Rather than banning the posession and sale of firearms we should ban the election and rule of weak-kneed mayors.
1. Guns exist.
2. People exist.
3. Criminals are people.
4. Criminals do not obey the law.
5. If the law prohibits people from buying or possessing guns then criminals will (still) buy and possess guns. (Because criminals don't obey the law.)
Therefore banning guns will not prevent crime. Banning guns will make more people criminals though. Of course if you want your all knowing elite comrades to be able to control society and suppress decent that's important.
So if Scruggs had run the officer down with a car, then the officer would be less dead?
Let's ban the evil cars!
"Philadelphia needs the power to ban the sale and possession of hand guns once and for all." That statement exposes the most shallow and ignorant thought pattern imaginable. Let's takes away guns from law abiding citizens, remove their ability to defend themselves from the criminals who will not obey the gun ban laws - duh! That is going to be sooooo effective! And pigs will fly dispensing gold coins from their butts too.
Mr. Mallowe clearly believes that the woman lying in the ditch, raped, strangled and murdered, is somehow morally superior to the one explaining why she defended herself with her .357 snubnose.
Sometimes one finds criminals in unexpected places. Did Mr. Mallowe ever consider that every ruthless government that has exterminated millions of its own citizens, has first disarmed them? History is your friend. Try a search on Hitler, Pol Pot or Stalin, to name a few notables. Power corrupts, and power over a helpless populace corrupts absolutely.
Marsh Mallowe I am embarrassed for your stupidity. The gun doesn't pull its own trigger you moron. And last I looked the laws don't work on criminals e.g. Murder is ILLEGAL. Mr. Mallowe it is ignorant reporters like you that have taken any credibility the media once had away. You people are SILLY!
Mike Mallowe you are a pathetic idiot. Typical liberal mentality...
It wasn't because Rasheed Scruggs possessed a gun that he murdered officer Palowski -- he obtained the gun because being a violent criminal he had in mind to commit murder.
Take away that gun and he would have gotten another. Take away all privately held legal handguns and he would have bought one from a ring that gets guns by assassinating police officers -- so MORE cops would have been murdered.
The only solution is to kill people like Rasheed Scruggs sooner. Guns in private hands can only help with that.
You have to be a special kind of stupid to believe that having "the power to ban the sale and possession of handguns once and for all" will actually mean criminals will not have guns. A man who is determined to use violence against others, even killing, isn't interested in what you ban and don't ban. I guess this kind of thinking is liberalism in action, a fantasy land of the chronically stupid.
You have to be a special kind of stupid to believe that having "the power to ban the sale and possession of handguns once and for all" will actually mean criminals will not have guns. A man who is determined to use violence against others, even killing, isn't interested in what you ban and don't ban. I guess this kind of thinking is liberalism in action, a fantasy land of the chronically stupid.
So, Mr. Mallowe, are you advocating repealing section 21 of the Constitution of PA which says:
Right to Bear Arms
Section 21.
The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State shall not be questioned.
???
So, Mr. Mallowe, are you advocating repealing section 21 of the Constitution of PA which says:
Right to Bear Arms
Section 21.
The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State shall not be questioned.
???
So, Mr. Mallowe, are you advocating repealing section 21 of the Constitution of PA which says:
Right to Bear Arms
Section 21.
The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State shall not be questioned.
???
Dear Mr. Mallowe,
As an investigative reporter one would think you would have investigated this incident further, rather than just spewing your liberal rhetoric. A review of Mr. Scruggs rap sheet reveals a person with a violent past and one that most likely wasn't allowed to even possess a gun!
Oh, wait a minute. He wasn't allowed to have a gun in the first place? Yet, he did. I submit the gun wasn't registered to the murderer. Did you check it out? An honest and curious journalistic mind would want to know. How would a person not permitted to have a gun, come to possess a gun? Certainly not by any legal means, now would he.
You see from another standpoint, the murderer was already "banned" from having a gun. Cities all around this country have tried banning guns, only to find the murder rates rise. It is an interesting result of banning guns.
The only ones who follow the law of gun bans are citizens who are already law abiding. Scruggs was far from law abiding and would have had a gun anyway.
Learn to spell before you take ont he bigger issues, moron.
And yet another newspaper idiot who should be studying for a position with BurgerKing. If people like rashed were to disappear do you realize how peaceful this country would become? (thats people with the attitude and mentality of rasheed)
Mr. Mallowe’s intentionally ambiguous presentation of the circumstances and issues involved is only exceed by his ridiculous and provably false assertion that--<I>as long as there is such easy access to guns in the city, there can be no safety.</I>
One might tend to think an award winning investigative journalist and public service reporter(?)who analyzes and interprets government decisions to explain how they affect citizens in the Philadelphia area--might have instead analyzed and interpreted aspects of a so-called ‘justice system’ which consistently releases known predatory career criminals back into society instead of keeping them in prison where their access to guns is unarguably more limited.
Perhaps in the future, our erudite analyst might consider at length the actual effects upon the Citizenry of persons in government who would unconscionably enact more gun control laws;-laws which are not only in direct violation of the Citizen’s otherwise inalienable right to keep and bear arms, but irrefutably interfere with the Citizen’s moral obligation and duty to provide themselves with arms for their defense, and proven in actuality to be ineffective at deterring anyone intent on committing criminal acts…regardless of the devices they choose to utilize.
Thereafter it might be possible to logically, rationally, objectively and correctly analyze and interpret the impact on society as a whole and the law-abiding Citizens in specific--of actions on the part of persons in government having immunized themselves from any liability and culpability for the consequences to the Citizens of the laws which they enact.
Wow. Another gun that is actually a sentient entity capable of exercising free will. Uhhh, mayor, have y0u actually tried incarcerating the human detritus felons that inhabit your city...or are they merely "misunderstood"?
Here's a news flash for all "award-winning investigative journalists" who think witches were still being burned in 1792: the Salem Witch Trials ended in 1668.
Here's an additional news flash for all "award-winning investigative journalists" who think the gov't's job is to protect us: "...to secure these rights governments are instituted among men...".
If our soi-disant "justice system" actually dealt effectively with feral lowlifes like Rasheed maybe we wouldn't be so keen on being able to do so ourselves.
Philly, where do you find these morons?
Ah, yes--the "to hell with the Constitution" approach.
Try disarming Americans, Mr. Mallowe--just try it. Don't send the police officers for whom you are so concerned--it will, after all, be a dangerous job. Disarm us yourself.
We'll be waiting.
Hey Mike if the 2nd amendment and the "gun lobby" are too big of a hurdle why don't you and Mayor Nutty get a law passed in Philly that violates Amendments 4, 6 and 8 instead. Yeah.., in Philly police should be able to bust down anyones door they think might be a crminal and kill them. Simple! Then nobody gets upset except maybe the criminals.
Pages
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!