HB1211 and massacres in churches and malls.

[2ndAmendment]

I got this from Michael A. Peroutka, the 2004 candidate for the Constitution party. Does this ring true for anyone else but me and I think Larry? There is a biil before the Maryland House HB1211 that would allow citizens to exercise their right to bear arms in Maryland. You may want to contact your representative and support this.[size=-2][size=-2][/size][/size]

<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody> <tr> <td valign="top">
8028 Ritchie Highway
Suite # 303
Pasadena, MD 21122
(877) MAP-2004
|

</td> <td align="right" valign="top">

</td></tr></tbody></table> <hr size="1" width="100%"> March 17, 2005

Church Massacre Shows How Wrong Martin Sheen Was To Oppose Constitutional Right To Self-Defense
​

Dear Friends of the Constitutional Republic,
​

When I first heard about the recent horrible slaughter of seven innocent people during a church service in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, I thought about the Hollywood movie actor Martin Sheen and an anti-gun ad he made for Handgun Control, Inc.

In this TV commercial, about five years ago, a grim-faced Sheen, with an American flag behind him, attacked the idea of legislation that would allow individuals to carry "hidden handguns" in, among other places, churches. But, the truth is --- as the Milwaukee church massacre demonstrates --- that making it legal to carry concealed weapons in churches is not as crazy as Sheen and his anti-Second Amendment, anti-self-defense friends at Handgun Control, Inc. would like us to believe.

In recent years, many other innocent people in churches have been murdered by an individual who was the only one who was armed:

In September of 1999, Larry Gene Ashbrook walked into the Wedgewood Baptist Church in Ft. Worth, Texas, with two guns. He murdered seven people, injured seven others and then killed himself. Two video tapes showed Ashbrook calmly firing his guns. The Acting Police Chief of Ft. Worth, Ralph Mendoza, says these tapes show this cold-blooded murderer committing his massacre in a "methodical manner," standing there where he "fired shot after shot after shot," pacing back and forth.

​

But, of course, Ashbrook was able to carry out his slaughter at a leisurely pace. Why? Because none of his victims, or anybody else in the church at that time, were armed. Thus, they were sitting ducks and never had a chance.

In March of 1999, in Gonzales, Louisiana, Shon Miller, Jr. entered the New St. John Fellowship Church, fired two rounds into the ceiling, and 17 more shots, murdering his son, his wife, a deacon and injuring four others. You guessed it. None of Miller's victims or anyone around them were armed.

In Columbia, Tennessee, on New Year's Eve of 1999, two men were shot in the parking lot of the First Freewill Baptist Church. One died, one did not. Jamie Edward Thompson was charged in these shootings. Again, no victim was armed.

​

Would it have saved lives in that Milwaukee church if one or more members of the congregation had been armed? Most likely the answer is yes. A "Washington Post" story (7/15/2000) reports how in 1993 the Rev. Michael R. Duesterhaus, a Roman Catholic priest at Holy Spirit Catholic Church in Annandale, Virginia, woke up at 3 a.m. to the sound of someone breaking into his study. The priest took out a 9mm pistol, flipped on a light and ordered the intruder to freeze and lie on the floor. The intruder stopped and then reached for his belt. Deusterhaus fired. The man paused, apparently wounded, then ran into the hall.

The priest pursued him and fired again, at his feet. The priest then fired a third time, deliberately wide of his target. The man ran out the side door escaping with a small amount of cash. The "Post" noted that this incident "contrasts sharply" with the June, 2000, "brutal slaying" of Monsignor Thomas Wells at the Mother Seaton Catholic Church in Germantown, Maryland, who died after being repeatedly stabbed. The difference between these two events is that Monsignor Wells was unarmed.

Would it have actually saved lives for some members of that Milwaukee congregation to have been armed? Maybe, maybe not. But --- whether Martin Sheen likes it or not --- those folks had and have the God-given, Second Amendment-protected right to keep and bear arms for self-defense.


For God, Family, & the Republic,

Michael A. Peroutka

<small></small>
​

<small>Manage your God, Family, Republic Activities
| | Contact Us
Volunteer & Groups Link | Contribute
Get Gear </small><small>
</small>
​

<table id="Table4" style="border: 1px solid rgb(241, 241, 241); font-size: 12px; font-family: Verdana;" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody></tbody></table>

 

[itsbob]

AMEN!! Went to a church in NH, where any given Sunday there was at least 5 of us that were armed.. two of them being women. There was a gun club that took the Army and marine tradition of "coining" to a different level.. when meeting in public, they would have to show each other that they were carrying, if they weren't you owed the other member $5..

I still have my permit from PA, and wonder if there is reciprocity with MD or not..

 

[2ndAmendment]

I still have my permit from PA, and wonder if there is reciprocity with MD or not..

No.

 

[2ndAmendment]

I think this is very informative for people of all religion regarding protecting yourself and property.

<tt>
Chris W. Stark - Director
P.O. Box 16441
Colorado Springs, CO, 80935-6441
Office: 1-719-649-3835
http://www.GunOwnersAlliance.com
Director@GunOwnersAlliance.com

13 March 2005
++++++++++++++++++

Weapons and Self Defense in Jewish Law

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
"Lethal Laws - Gun Control is the KEY to GENOCIDE" is a must read!
http://www.gunownersalliance.com/Lethal_Laws_book.htm
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Copyright © 2005 by Rabbi R. Mermelstein.
Republication permitted only if this e-mail alert
is left intact in its original state.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


This alert is located at:

http://www.gunownersalliance.com/Rabbi_0363.htm

Weapons and Self Defense in Jewish Law
Copyright © by Rabbi R. Mermelstein
Rabbi@GunOwnersAlliance.com

Last month I excused myself from writing a concise pamphlet addressing
Jewish law and the obligation to defend life. My reasoning, in full,
can be read at http://www.gunownersalliance.com/Rabbi_0362.htm .

Within a couple of days, a very persuasive reader of our Ask the Rabbi
column wrote that, my reasoning notwithstanding, there was a need for
information of this nature. Little new appears here. I've spelled out
nearly every point that follows throughout many posts found on this
website, but never before did I compile them in one place.

Jewish law, our ancient legal system derived from the Torah (the biblical
books of Genesis through Deuteronomy), codified by the Mishneh, and further
clarified and refined in the Talmud and the works of its latter day
commentators, is quite adamant regarding the preservation of innocent
life even at the expense of killing another individual whose intentions
are murderous.

The biblical source for the obligation to defend oneself against an
unprovoked attack is Exodus 22:1. Other English bible versions, the
King James Version for example, number this verse as 22:2. There the
bible states, "If a thief is found breaking in, and is killed, no
liability (guilt) is incurred."

The bible does not instruct how the intruder is to be killed, only
that the homeowner may kill him. The logic is that the thief, knowing
that the home is occupied and nobody will stand around like a dolt as
his possessions are being carted away right before his eyes, is prepared
to murder the homeowner if necessary to burglarize the home.

The Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Sanhedrin 72A states, "Since the burglar
is going to kill you, rise up (overcome your meekness and reluctance to
be violent) and kill him first."

Maimonides (Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon, often referred to as the
RAMBAM-1135-1204 CE), in Hilchos G'neiva (Laws Pertaining to Theft),
Chapter 9, explains further.

Sub-chapter 7: "A burglar, whether by day or night, has neither blood
nor soul with regard to anyone killing him. It does not fall solely
to the homeowner to kill him. Anyone may do so. The burglar may be
killed on an ordinary weekday or on the Sabbath (during which time
even the killing of an insect is prohibited). Any means available may
be used to kill the burglar, since by his exercise of free choice his
life has lost all value."

Sub-chapter 8: "It is irrelevant if the burglar actually breaks through
a door and actually enters the home or is found in the homeowner's garden,
courtyard or fenced area (where property is stored). It is equally
irrelevant if the break-in occurs during the day or night. Why, then,
does the Torah use the language "break in"? In most cases burglaries
are break-ins under cover of darkness."

Sub-chapter 9: "What is the reason that the Torah permits the burglar
to be slain, since his intent is only the theft of property and not
murder per se (nowhere else in the Torah do we find the crime of
property theft to be punishable by death)? There is a valid assumption
that the homeowner will attempt to prevent the theft, leaving the burglar
no option but to kill him. This places the burglar in the category of
'a pursuer with the intent to murder' and must therefore be killed,
whether the burglar is an adult, youth, male, or female."

Thus the Torah affirms the sanctity of one's home, personal property,
and life against the aggression of an intruder.

The Torah also obligates us to act, not stand idly by, if another
person's life is endangered. Leviticus 19:16 states "Do not circulate
gossip or stand by idly when your brother's life is endangered."

The Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Sanhedrin 73A says it explicitly:
"Where is it taught that it is obligatory to save someone who is
being pursued by another with the intent to murder? The Torah
teaches "Do not stand by idly when your brother's life is endangered."

</tt>

 

[2ndAmendment]

continued ...

<tt> This injunction applies to saving a woman (or man) from being raped,
as the Torah equates murder and rape. Deuteronomy 22:26 states (regarding
a betrothed woman who is violated in a field, outside of town, where
no one can hear her cries for help and come to her aid) "The woman is
blameless (and cannot possibly be suspected of an adulterous relationship),
because just as a man rises up against another man to murder him so is
the case of a helpless woman." Obviously, the same law applies to a
single woman. The thread in that Torah passage is speaking of betrothed
women. Nothing can be taken out of context.

Maimonides, in Laws Pertaining to Murderers and the Preservation of
Life, Chapter 1, sub-chapter 10, explains Deuteronomy 22:26 further:

"But if someone is nearby to save the woman from being violated, that
person must stop the rapist even if it involves killing him if no lesser
force will suffice."

In no instance does the Torah condone 'vigilante law'. Once a murder
has been committed, and there are witnesses to the act, they may not
take it upon themselves to kill the murderer. There must be a trial,
as is required by Common Law jurisprudence. However, if someone is
pursuing another with violent intent and is ordered to desist by
witnesses yet the pursuer ignores the warning, anyone must stop him
by any means possible, including lethal force. If lesser force is
sufficient, though it involves grievous and permanent injury to the
pursuer, taking his life is not justified. (Maimonides, Laws Pertaining
to Murderers and the Preservation of Life, Chapter 1, sub-chapter 7.)
Common Law generally applies this principle when determining whether
lethal force was justified in acts of self defense or the prevention
of violence to a third party, either for law enforcement officers
or private persons.

Anti-gun municipalities and ranking law enforcement officials stress
preventive measures and non-lethal alternatives for citizens to ensure
their personal safety: Walking in groups at night, loud whistles,
martial arts training, pepper sprays, home security systems, barking
dogs, taser guns that electrically stun an attacker at a short distance
(not approved for private citizens in all states), etc. From the
perspective of Jewish law, all these things are useful to a point but
ultimately fail when the attacker is not deterred or repelled through
their application.

The taking of a human life, while repugnant to all civilized people,
is often not only justified but obligatory within the framework of
biblical law. The firearm is the most efficient of modern tools to
preserve life. A firearm is a deterrent to violent crime, light years
ahead of high pitched whistles or sirens screwed on to canisters of
compressed air (when was the last time you ran outside to investigate
a loud alarm blaring somewhere in your neighborhood?), barking dogs
that miraculously shut up and wag their tails when thrown a piece of
meat (cooked or raw, no less!), trick martial arts maneuvers learned
from VHS tapes or DVDs as demonstrated by experts with years of
training that you will never acquire, or pepper sprays that make a
rapist's eyes shed copious rivulets of water and enrage him, but do
not stop him from raping.

In spite of common sense and logic, many people are obstinately and
inflexibly opposed to private citizens owning firearms and learning
a basic level of proficiency in their safe and effective use. These
same people are quick to praise the rapid response time of local law
enforcement agencies that are under no legal burden to protect anyone.
As far as the 9-1-1 emergency hotline is concerned, it can be assumed
with complete safety that nobody in its history ever told the operator
to dispatch only unarmed cops. It might come as a mild shock to people
who would never lay a hand on a firearm, as if it were some sort of
ticking time bomb liable to discharge and kill on its own without
forewarning yet at the same time are quite comforted by the sight of
a handgun in the holster of a police officer, if they were to learn
that the average patrol officer has less proficiency with his or her
firearm than the semi-enthusiastic citizen gun owner who makes it a
point to get professional training over the course of several weekends
and then practices at the local shooting range once every two months.

Here are a few of the most common flawed arguments against firearms
ownership used by schooled Jews and rebuttals to each one.

1. A firearm is a dangerous device. Since the Torah prohibits owning
a vicious dog that may attack others (unless it is restrained with a
chain), or even possessing a defective ladder that may break and injure
the user (Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Bava Kama 15B), owning a firearm
is likewise prohibited. ("You shall not bring blood upon your home."
- - -Deuteronomy 22:8.)

Fact:
=====
A vicious dog acts according to its nature and a rickety ladder by its
condition is a mindless object that is an accident waiting to happen.
A firearm is an inanimate object just like a ladder in perfect condition
(read the label on the top step: "NOT A STEP-DO NOT STAND"). It certainly
cannot act according to its "vicious inclination", since it has no
inclination. No firearm can discharge without being acted upon. This
requires a human action. We are permitted to use toxic household
chemicals, power tools, kitchen knives, scissors, etc, all of which
are capable of taking a life if they fall into the hands of children,
or mentally defective or chemically intoxicated adults. Common sense
dictates that firearms either be stored in a locked container or under
the immediate and constant supervision of a responsible person
knowledgeable in their use. Families with small children even attach
safety covers on electrical outlets to prevent curious hands from
inserting metal objects in them with resultant electrocution. Infants
learning to walk have been known to overturn pots on the stove, causing
severe and often fatal burns. And of course, there is a bathtub and
sometimes a swimming pool. The home, even devoid of a firearm, is a
dangerous place. Parents and older family members with common sense
take every precaution to thwart disaster. Bringing a firearm into the
home merely adds to existing and essential items that must be kept out
of the wrong hands. In and of itself, a loaded firearm is completely
harmless. It can even save lives.

2. Weapons are associated with Esau, the eldest son of the patriarch
Isaac, who was a hunter ("a man of the field" - Genesis 25:27) and a
murderer. Jews should not emulate this sort of person.

Fact:
======
Equating murder with the taking of a life to defend a life is comparing
apples and oranges. Hebrew, the language of the Bible, uses two distinctly
different words for murder and killing. Hunting for sport is prohibited
(Rabbi Yehuda Landau [1713-1793], Noda B'Yehuda, Yoreh Deah, Madura
Tinyana, 10). Owning, and using, a firearm for self defense is neither
murder nor hunting. If a firearm in the hands of a trained person is the
most efficient tool to defend life, simple logic would dictate that
owning a firearm is not merely permissible but an obligation according
to Jewish law. Of course, in many major American cities where Jews reside
obtaining the necessary permission to have a firearm is either very
difficult or impossible. In that case it would be advisable to master
the art of aimed knife throwing and keeping a pointy one handy. The
police have no obligation to save you; the unarmed and scared witless
neighbors are ignoring your screams and burglar alarm, and your watchdog
is busy munching a piece of tasty steak thrown at it by the intruder.

3. The Torah is so concerned with the safety of people that it mandates
a fence around the perimeter of a flat roof to prevent anyone working
up there from falling to the ground (Deuteronomy 22:8). How much more
so should we ensure safety within the home!

</tt>

 

[itsbob]

No.

Just googled it.. thanks.

I'll just have to be sure I never let my PA license expire, and wiat for the day I can get one here.

 

[2ndAmendment]

and still continued (the 10000 word limit is a pain)

<tt> Fact:
======
See Fact 2. Keep any potential hazards secured and out of the wrong
hands. Responsible behavior is the buzzword here. An adult without the
sense to be proactive and prevent accidents shouldn't be trusted to
make a bottle for the baby in the middle of the night. That person
could confuse the milk container with the container of Liquid Plumber.

It is noteworthy to mention Nachmanides (Rabbi Moshe ben Nachman, often
referred to as the RAMBAN- 1194-1270 CE) in his classic commentary on
the Torah (Genesis 4:22) wherein he expounds on the deeper meaning of
Tuval Cain, the name given to one of Cain's descendants. "Tuval" is a
form of the Hebrew word for "spice" and "flavor enhancer"-he enhanced
the art of making swords, spears, lances, and implements of war
(weapons!), thereby following in the footsteps of his forebear Cain,
the world's first murderer. Observes the RAMBAN, "The sword does not
murder, and there is no sin in making one." Advocates of armed self
defense did not coin the bromide "Guns don't kill people; people kill
people". Nachmanides advanced the concept nearly 800 years ago, and he
wasn't a beer swilling, gun waving redneck from a red state driving a
pickup truck bearing a National Rifle Association bumper sticker. He
didn't even display a Confederate flag or listen to country music! Is
that unbelievable, or what?

I promised that persuasive reader that I would take her good counsel
and compile in one place, suitable for printing, the correct Jewish
view of armed self defense and firearms ownership. If there are
anti-gun Jews or Christians who will benefit from this information
written at her behest, she can take all the credit.

Rabbi R. Mermelstein
Rabbi@GunOwnersAlliance.com

This alert is located at:

http://www.gunownersalliance.com/Rabbi_0363.htm

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
We send our alerts/newsletter out free of charge to all who request it.
Can you help with our expenses? Help Support the work of Gun Owners
Alliance! Suggested contributions? As an opener, the price of a box of
ammo ($15-$20). Contribute at http://www.gunownersalliance.com/Join.htm
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
</tt>

 

[somdcrab]

 

[soul4sale]

this has potential...

When I first heard about the recent horrible slaughter of seven innocent people during a church service in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, I thought about the Hollywood movie actor Martin Sheen and an anti-gun ad he made for Handgun Control, Inc.

Oh gawd. How did he not manage to work Michael Moore and Jane Fonda or perhaps Ted Kennedy into this little "message?" You need to name drop three or four bogiemen these days to get anyone's attention.

Guess there's a reason why this guy is Con. Party material. Yes, candidiate, that's just what we need: A few hundred Bible-thumping bright eyes packing heat in the middle of holy roller fits, just in case, in the off chance, that some dumba$$ decides to go on a rampage.

Actually, you know what? That's a great idea. Tec9s for Jesus. Give those fat, untrained b@stards a few dozen straps, dope 'em up on Rambo movies and send them into worship to "protect" the flock. The ensuing chaotic crossfire during the next "demon possession" would likely thin the herd quite a bit. Faith-based euthenasia, a Darwinian triumph. Just send in the Salvation Army to mop up at no cost to the taxpayer.

Where do I sign up for campaign contributions?

 

[willie]

A holy roller with a gun? That is something to think about.

 

[greeker375]

If you think about who would be allowed to legally carry a concealed weapon, who might it be? A citizen who has been fingerprinted, had their past scrutinized thoroughly, been subject to background investigations via personal references and has had no contact with the judicial authorities.

Now, think about who is currently carrying. Very few licensed citizens and a ton who are carrying illegally and with no fear of the police.

Were there to be a Constitutional referendum we'd need 3/4's of the states to approve legal concealed carry and maybe make it Nationwide. If my math is correct, 36 states (72% of all states) have already approved concealed carry - with documented crime reduction - so, in essence, we are almost there Nationally, but, behind the 8 ball in Maryland.

Constitutionally, our rights have been violated. The Constitution does not call for registration nor does it mandate licensing. These are legislative creations to control the populace. That said, I don't automatically believe eveyone should be approved to carry concealed, but, those without criminal records that can show competence with a weapon should not arbitrarily be denied that right.

 

[Bustem' Down]

All that said, States have laws about concealed handguns. What about unconcealed? I think people would be even less likely to mug you if ya had one swinging from your belt.

 

[greeker375]

Hey Bust...I am not in favor of advertising. If there is a germ in my midst who plans on doing something wrong I'd rather they not know my ability to thwart them. Let it be a complete surprise to them if they think everyone is a mark.

 

[Ken King]

Concealed or open doesn't make much difference in Maryland for handguns.

§ 4-203. Wearing, carrying, or transporting handgun.

(a) Prohibited.-

(1) Except as provided in subsection (b) of this section, a person may not:

(i) wear, carry, or transport a handgun, whether concealed or open, on or about the person; or
(ii) wear, carry, or knowingly transport a handgun, whether concealed or open, in a vehicle traveling on a road or parking lot generally used by the public, highway, waterway, or airway of the State.

(2) There is a rebuttable presumption that a person who transports a handgun under paragraph (1)(ii) of this subsection transports the handgun knowingly.

(b) Exceptions.- This section does not prohibit:

(1) the wearing, carrying, or transporting of a handgun by a person who is on active assignment engaged in law enforcement, is authorized at the time and under the circumstances to wear, carry, or transport the handgun as part of the person's official equipment, and is:
(i) a law enforcement official of the United States, the State, or a county or city of the State;
(ii) a member of the armed forces of the United States or of the National Guard on duty or traveling to or from duty;
(iii) a law enforcement official of another state or subdivision of another state temporarily in this State on official business;
(iv) a correctional officer or warden of a correctional facility in the State;
(v) a sheriff or full-time assistant or deputy sheriff of the State; or
(vi) a temporary or part-time sheriff's deputy;

(2) the wearing, carrying, or transporting of a handgun by a person to whom a permit to wear, carry, or transport the handgun has been issued under Title 5, Subtitle 3 of the Public Safety Article;

(3) the carrying of a handgun on the person or in a vehicle while the person is transporting the handgun to or from the place of legal purchase or sale, or to or from a bona fide repair shop, or between bona fide residences of the person, or between the bona fide residence and place of business of the person, if the business is operated and owned substantially by the person if each handgun is unloaded and carried in an enclosed case or an enclosed holster;

(4) the wearing, carrying, or transporting by a person of a handgun used in connection with an organized military activity, a target shoot, formal or informal target practice, sport shooting event, hunting, a Department of Natural Resources-sponsored firearms and hunter safety class, trapping, or a dog obedience training class or show, while the person is engaged in, on the way to, or returning from that activity if each handgun is unloaded and carried in an enclosed case or an enclosed holster;

(5) the moving by a bona fide gun collector of part or all of the collector's gun collection from place to place for public or private exhibition if each handgun is unloaded and carried in an enclosed case or an enclosed holster;

(6) the wearing, carrying, or transporting of a handgun by a person on real estate that the person owns or leases or where the person resides or within the confines of a business establishment that the person owns or leases;

(7) the wearing, carrying, or transporting of a handgun by a supervisory employee:
(i) in the course of employment;
(ii) within the confines of the business establishment in which the supervisory employee is employed; and
(iii) when so authorized by the owner or manager of the business establishment; or

(8) the carrying or transporting of a signal pistol or other visual distress signal approved by the United States Coast Guard in a vessel on the waterways of the State or, if the signal pistol or other visual distress signal is unloaded and carried in an enclosed case, in a vehicle.

(c) Penalty.-

(1) A person who violates this section is guilty of a misdemeanor and on conviction is subject to the penalties provided in this subsection.

(2) If the person has not previously been convicted under this section, § 4-204 of this subtitle, or § 4-101 or § 4-102 of this title:
(i) except as provided in item (ii) of this paragraph, the person is subject to imprisonment for not less than 30 days and not exceeding 3 years or a fine of not less than $250 and not exceeding $2,500 or both; but
(ii) if it appears from the evidence that the handgun was worn, carried, or transported on public school property in the State, the person shall be sentenced to imprisonment for not less than 90 days.

(3) (i) If the person has previously been convicted once under this section, § 4-204 of this subtitle, or § 4-101 or § 4-102 of this title, the person shall be sentenced:
1. to imprisonment for not less than 1 year and not exceeding 10 years; but
2. if it appears from the evidence that the handgun was worn, carried, or transported on public school property in the State, to imprisonment for not less than 3 years and not exceeding 10 years.
(ii) The court may not impose less than the applicable minimum sentence provided under subparagraph (i) of this paragraph.

(4) (i) If the person has previously been convicted more than once under this section, § 4-204 of this subtitle, or § 4-101 or § 4-102 of this title, or of any combination of these crimes, the person shall be sentenced:
1. to imprisonment for not less than 3 years and not exceeding 10 years; but
2. A. if it appears from the evidence that the handgun was worn, carried, or transported on public school property in the State, to imprisonment for not less than 5 years and not exceeding 10 years; or
B. if it appears from the evidence that the handgun was worn, carried, or transported with the deliberate purpose of injuring or killing another person, to imprisonment for not less than 5 years and not exceeding 10 years.
(ii) The court may not impose less than the applicable minimum sentence provided under subparagraph (i) of this paragraph.

 

[Larry Gude]

Common sense...

A few hundred Bible-thumping bright eyes packing heat in the middle of holy roller fits

Sounds like your problem isn't with guns?

Now, to the meat.

A GUN IS A TOOL.


Where are fires possible?

Pretty much everywhere.

Do we ban fire extinguishers from church?

A: (for those challenged) NO.

Where do bad people show up?

Pretty much everywhere.

Pretty easy, huh?





END OF STORY.

 

[Ken King]

Sounds like your problem isn't with guns?

Now, to the meat.

A GUN IS A TOOL.


Where are fires possible?

Pretty much everywhere.

Do we ban fire extinguishers from church?

A: (for those challenged) NO.

Where do bad people show up?

Pretty much everywhere.

Pretty easy, huh?





END OF STORY.

Verbal economy and absolute clarity.