November 24, 2003

HOME OWNERSHIP = GUN OWNERSHIP (in one Kansas town)

If you're thinking about relocating to Geuda Springs, Kansas, you'd better make sure to bring a gun and ammunition. According to an article in yesterday's Washington Post, Geuda Springs, which doesn't have a local police force of its own, recently passed an ordinance requiring most households to have guns and ammunition.

Noncomplying residents would be fined $10 under the ordinance, passed 3-2 earlier this month by City Council members who thought it would help protect the town of 210 people. Those who suffer from physical or mental disabilities, paupers and people who conscientiously oppose firearms would be exempt.

"This ordinance fulfills the duty to protect by allowing each individual householder to provide for his or her protection," said Councilman John Brewer.

Only in America!

Posted by Mikal at November 24, 2003 10:28 AM | TrackBack


Comments:

Might we try this in New York City?!?

Posted by: Bradley at November 24, 2003 9:18 PM

This brings forth the old argument - "Guns don't kill people, people kill people." I hate that! Why do you have a gun?

Posted by: Cindra at November 25, 2003 8:07 AM

Unreal....

Posted by: Doug at November 25, 2003 12:38 PM

Which is why soemtimes people have to be protected from themselves. Freedom of thought and expression are paramount, but sometimes you wonder at the results.

Posted by: Lee McDaniel at November 25, 2003 12:56 PM

Why stop at guns? They should have rabid dogs in the back yard and land mines in the front yard -- or better yet a tank. I wonder how many household fights will end in gun play then!

Kenny

Posted by: Kenny at November 25, 2003 4:40 PM

According to the Voilence Policy Center, "people living in a household with a gun are almost five times more likely to die by suicide than people living in a gun-free home. In homes with guns, a member of the household is almost three times as likely to be the victim of a homicide compared to gun-free homes".

The self defense argument that gun-right activists use is also faulted with:

For every time a gun in the home is used in a self-defense homicide, a gun will be used inó

* 1.3 unintentional deaths

* 4.6 criminal homicides

* 37 suicides

In 1997 there were 15,690 homicides.

* Of these, 8,503 were committed with handguns.

* Among handgun homicides, only 193 (2.3 percent) were classified as justifiable homicides by civilians.

For every time in 1997 that a civilian used a handgun to kill in self-defense, 43 people lost their lives in handgun homicides alone.

(cited from the Violence Policy Center)


Posted by: Bradley at November 25, 2003 8:39 PM

When I was around 23 years old, a drug dealer jumped in my car with a sawed off shotgun right up at Keystone at the Crossing. If I had had a gun, I would probably be dead today. Instead, the only weapon I had was my tongue. I think he ended up getting out of my car because I couldn't shut up I was so scared. He probably still talks about it today. This chick wouldn't shut up! She was driving me crazy!

Posted by: Cindra at November 26, 2003 8:44 AM

More lives would be saved like your's Cindra if people stopped being so irrational in thinking that owning a gun solves all the homicide problems we face today. No, instead we are a society that is packing, ready to face the world in an aggressive show of force, where no one can feel safe, because to feel safe they tell us we must own a gun. I for one don't feel safe, because it perpetuates violence and creates a power struggle. Imagine all the gun packers on the highway...talk about road-rage!

Posted by: Bradley at November 26, 2003 2:58 PM

your lost actually, most of you anyhow who dont believe that we should be able to defend ourselves. here in minnesota they screamed, yelled, cried and wore body armor when the concealed weapon bill passed, they swore up and down that 50,000 guns would be out on the street, gun smoke in the air, i defy any of you, in any of the other 34 states that have the same law to show me this effect, where is the gun smoke, the law being taken into their own hands, where where whereeeeeeeeeee is it? you guys never actually deal with reality and the reality is, people who apply for this permit, want the gun for the guy who doesnt have a permit and carries anyhow. we buy our guns, they steal theirs.

Posted by: michael thompson at December 23, 2003 4:12 PM

Give em all nukes. The mutual threat of destruction is usually a deterent. If not, we won't have to worry. Simply, because they won't be there anymore For MT, the state of Ohio just passed a conceal and carry law. I went into a restaurant and saw five guys with holstered side arms. Please tell me how I was supposed to enjoy my meal with the knowledge that if they so decided everyone in that restaurant would be dead before any semblence of a police force would be able to arrive.

Posted by: Scared shitless at January 27, 2004 2:37 PM



Post a Comment:









Remember personal info?