Post Tribune page 11

[XDs4me]

A gentleman name John Wolf wrote an article in todays Post Tribune knocking the NRA and believes that the police should concentrate on taking guns away from people and that is more important than dealing with drug dealers.
I encourage you to email this guy with your thoughts after reading his article at jwolf18046@aol. I did!!!

 

[rambone]

Here's the article:

Gun law enforcement would boost safety :: Opinion :: Post-Tribune


March 31, 2010

BY JOHN WOLF

The recent skating rink shootings in Gary are as nonsensical as most shootings.

Americans have a love affair with guns and prove it daily by allowing our laws on gun control to be rescinded.

While law enforcement officers and most big-city mayors denounce the guns saturating our cities, few have come up with solutions that challenge the wrath of the National Rifle Association, Washington's most powerful lobby.

A Jan. 10 Christian Science Monitor feature article by Stephanie Hanes offers a new approach by Baltimore police commissioner Frederick Bealefeld III.

Baltimore has one of the highest homicide rates in the country. Instead of tackling drugs, Baltimore is focusing on guns.

"It's not the guy with the kilo of weed in his car, it's the one with the Glock in his waistband," says Bealefeld. He targets gun trafficking with the goal of getting guns off the streets.

The NRA targeted Washington's D.C.'s gun restrictions and won. Now Chicago is in it sights. Other municipalities will follow. With the new focus, Baltimore has seen its lowest homicide rates in 20 years. Complaints against the police also have dropped.

Purchase of handguns or even automatic weapons is fairly easy in the United States, as shown in the massacre at Virginia Tech. Mental illness did not prevent a student from purchasing a weapon that was obviously not for hunting or target shooting.

It is easier to purchase such a weapon at a gun show. Trafficking in weapons -- legitimately purchased or stolen -- is easy.

The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence says the NRA lobby seems determined to spend aggressively on its vision of America where the right for anyone to carry any kind of gun anywhere includes airports, bars, schools, courthouses, state parks, political rallies -- you name it. The Wild West image of John Wayne will come back untamed.

The National Rifle Association is funded mostly not by members who are legitimate hunters and sportsmen but by the gun manufacturing industry.

Home protection appeals to many law-abiding citizens. Unfortunately, many homicides occur in home disputes, with known parties or by accident.

My family has a personal experience with guns. My Indiana grandfather was shot by an angered saloonkeeper but recovered. The saloon owner rightly believed Grandfather had obstructed his business with migratory farm workers. Thereafter, Grandfather had a revolver in his home.

One night, his eldest son came home unexpectedly from the Columbian Exposition in Chicago and sought entrance to his locked home. Thinking it was an intruder, my grandfather opened the front door and aimed the pistol at the shadowy figure. Fortunately, the gun misfired. I would not be writing this column had the result been different.

Could Gary profit from the Baltimore focus on weapons? Can the NRA be stopped from its attempts to stop gun restrictions that are legitimate under the (Constitution's) Second Amendment?


John Wolf is a retired minister who lives in Valparaiso.

 

[jedi]

Me thinks this is the guy that worth last year on how the bible says "no guns" in the newspaper.

 

[eldirector]

http://www.post-trib.com/news/opinion/2131234,col-wolf-0316.articleI understand Mr. Wolf has strong emotions about firearms, based on personal experience with his grandfather. However, he is a bit misguided.

He is blurring the line between LEGAL CITIZENS and their right to bear arms, and FELONS who have chosen to give up that right. He is appealing to the EMOTION of gun-wielding criminals to prevent the rest of us from enjoying our rights.

Mr. Wolf - By your own logic, the action of a few criminals should restrict the rights of all citizens. Should we attack Christianity because of the actions of a few "christian" fundamentalists? They also used a tool (the Bible) to insight violence. Should this tool be outlawed? This is a flawed argument.

Additional Comments below. Might draft this up as a Op/Ed or a letter.....
-----------------------------------

Americans have a love affair with guns and prove it daily by allowing our laws on gun control to be rescinded. Actually, we have a love-affair (inflammatory wording?) with our RIGHTS. Infringements are being rescinded.

While law enforcement officers and most big-city mayors denounce the guns saturating (inflammatory wording?) our cities, few have come up with solutions that challenge the wrath (inflammatory wording?) of the National Rifle Association, Washington's most powerful lobby.

A Jan. 10 Christian Science Monitor feature article by Stephanie Hanes offers a new approach by Baltimore police commissioner Frederick Bealefeld III.

Baltimore has one of the highest homicide rates in the country. Instead of tackling drugs, Baltimore is focusing on guns.

"It's not the guy with the kilo of weed in his car, it's the one with the Glock in his waistband," says Bealefeld. He targets gun trafficking with the goal of getting guns off the streets. I assume they are targeting illegal possession?

The NRA targeted Washington's D.C.'s gun restrictions and won. Now Chicago is in it sights. Other municipalities will follow. With the new focus, Baltimore has seen its lowest homicide rates in 20 years. Complaints against the police also have dropped.

Purchase of handguns or even automatic weapons is fairly easy in the United States, as shown in the massacre at Virginia Tech (What on earth does handgun purchasing have to do with this? Everything was done legally, up to the point where that guy decided to commit murder. You think handgun availability would have stopped him?). Mental illness did not prevent a student from purchasing a weapon that was obviously not for hunting or target shooting (No history of mental illness, up to that point. Also, hunting and target shooting are not the only allowed uses for a license, permit, or purchase).

It is easier to purchase such a weapon at a gun show(No, it is easier to purchase from a private seller. Dealers are held to the same laws even at shows). Trafficking in weapons -- legitimately purchased or stolen -- is easy. (Legitimate, yes. Stolen, not so much)

The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence says the NRA lobby seems determined to spend aggressively on its vision of America where the right for anyone to carry any kind of gun anywhere includes airports, bars, schools, courthouses, state parks, political rallies -- you name it. The Wild West image of John Wayne will come back untamed. (Inflammatory, and incorrect. Convicted felons would still be restricted. Otherwise, the right would not be infringed. Many of these locations are legal today)

The National Rifle Association is funded mostly not by members who are legitimate hunters and sportsmen but by the gun manufacturing industry. (Correct. It is also funded by citizens interested in self-protection and the 2A).

Home protection appeals to many law-abiding citizens. Unfortunately, many homicides occur in home disputes, with known parties or by accident. (Correct. And many do not involve firearms)

My family has a personal experience with guns. My Indiana grandfather was shot by an angered saloonkeeper but recovered. The saloon owner rightly believed Grandfather had obstructed his business with migratory farm workers. Thereafter, Grandfather had a revolver in his home.

One night, his eldest son came home unexpectedly from the Columbian Exposition in Chicago and sought entrance to his locked home. Thinking it was an intruder, my grandfather opened the front door and aimed the pistol at the shadowy figure. Fortunately, the gun misfired. I would not be writing this column had the result been different.(Good story, and it appeals to many emotions. However, if that had NOT been your father walking in, but a robber/murderer/rapist, at least your grandfather would have had the means to defend himself. Rule #2 - Know your target).

Could Gary profit from the Baltimore focus on weapons? (Yes. Focus on stolen weapons and illegal possession) Can the NRA be stopped from its attempts to stop gun restrictions that are legitimate under the (Constitution's) Second Amendment? (No. There are very few legitimate restrictions. "Shall Not Be Infringed" is pretty clear)


John Wolf is a retired minister who lives in Valparaiso. I am an average citizen and family-man, living in Brownsburg.

 

[Hornett]

Here is my email

Mr Wolf,

I saw your article in the Post-Tribune.
I am one of those people that disagree with practically everything you wrote in your article.
I just want to comment on a few items for you to think about.
First, you mentioned DC and Chicago as targets of the NRA.
Are these two cities the bastions of security that you see as the future for the United States?
They are consistently in the top cities for violent crime, yet they have the most restrictive gun laws.
As a matter of fact, the crime rate in DC went down after the public right to defend their homes was reestablished.

Next the comment by the Baltimore Police Commissioner "It's not the guy with the kilo of weed in his car, it's the one with the Glock in his waistband."
It's not the weed OR the Glock doing the killing. It's the FELON pulling the trigger.
There are thousands of people (not police) in the US carrying handguns everyday and not killing or hurting anyone.
There are evil people that are willing to hurt me or my family and disarming me just makes that easier for them to accomplish their evil intentions.

Why (in your ideal world) is hunting and target shooting the only good reason to have guns?
Self protection is a perfectly legitimate and constitutionally protected reason to have a firearm.
I wake up every day NOT planning on killing anyone, yet I carry a handgun, just in case of the rare incident that someone is planning dire harm to me or my family while we are minding my own business.

I think you are basing you vision of the 'Wild West' on the movies.
People were peaceful and peace loving during those times.
Jesse James and the outlaws you read about are famous because they were the exception to the typically peaceful community, not the rule
Hey If I think there is going to be trouble, I avoid it.

You mentioned the Virginia Tech massacre and it was a terrible tragedy.
But, Virginia Tech is a gun free zone.
Guns are not allowed there.
Any student caught with a gun is expelled.
So, NO ONE there that day had the means to defend themselves against a single madman intent on doing them harm.
Virginia Tech could have been prevented by a single student with a self defense handgun.

Finally, regarding your personal experience with your grandfather.
Shame on you.
What your grandfather did that night would not have been condoned by any gun owners that I know.
Bluntly, it was very stupid.
I was taught when I was 14 years old that you never ever point a gun at anything until it is identified.
'Be sure of your target and what is behind it.'
I am glad that the gun misfired and your grandfather learned a valuable lesson while avoiding a tragedy.

I do propose a solution to the rising crime and violence in America.
Harsh punishment for repeat offenders.
The felons you read about and see on the evening news are typically repeat offenders with a rap sheet as long as your arm.
I do understand that anyone can make a mistake, but 6 mistakes, 11 mistakes, 20?
There comes a point where we have to quit letting evil people out to commit more crimes.

Thanks for your time,
Bryan

 

[DocBoCook]

+1. excellent email. Well spoken, facts straight and education delivered. Now, will he actually absorb any of it?

 

[E5RANGER375]

HERE IS MY EMAIL TO JOHN THE NON BIASED REPORTER

john,

Arent media personalities supposed to be objective and write facts not opinions? Your views on guns show you are not educated in these matters. It is a constitutional right, to keep and bear arms. Its not up for debate by you or the government. Gun rights is in the foundation this country was based on, and what made our Indipendance even possible. When a people are unarmed, they cease to be citizens and are instead subjects. One of the first things the British imposed on colonist was a ban on arms so they could not deffend themselves. Not only the Federal Constitution but the Indiana State Constitution mentions the Citizens right to bear arms to be able to deffend the State, the Country, and our homes if neccessary. I think a good read over the Founding of this country would do you some good as well.

Remember John, criminals will ALWAYS get guns, no matter if you banned them totaly, they will make them, steal them, hide them, and then all of the law abiding citizens will be un-armed sitting ducks. All criminals are FOR gun control, because they know they will never turn theirs in and we will be easy pickins. Now i do believe in STRICT punishments for the violation of a gun laws, or the use of a gun in a crime. But the government cannot and will not take away guns in this country. It will never happen, because people view this as a fundamental right and wont back down from it. There are a lot more Pro-Gun citizens than anti-gun. look at your recent national poles.

Also, the story you wrote about your ancestor almost killing your grandfather or your father, was VERY RECKLESS of him. You cannot shoot at shaddows, even on your own property, and no responsible gun owner would do such a thing. I would encourage you to take a basic handgun coarse at a local range by a qualified NRA instructor. you might decide you still dont like and are afraid of guns, or you may feel empowered now that youd realize the safe handling practices most legal gun owners use, and who knows maybe youd go to a range every once in a while, and eventualy keep one for your protection and exercise your constitutional right. But either way, at least you would then have an accurate and informed picture of both sides of the story so you could write more informed articles next time on guns in America. Anti-gun people are mostly just people who are afraid of what they realy dont have never been properly taught about. Groups like the Brady Ass. just seek to play on peoples fears and lack of knowledge to push their agenda. Please read the facts and write facts from now on.

All The Best

A Responsible and Legal Gun Owner

 

[Hornett]

OK, "reckless" is a better term than "stupid" which is what I said.

Sorry

 

[E5RANGER375]

lol, its ok. when i wrote my letter i hadnt even read yours yet. its funny how we both mentioned that incident though. if you and i are just 2 members on INGO and realized it was a stupid or reckless incident, then i imagine he will be getting a lot of "hey dummy" mail. he just showed me the stupiddity thats in his blood, so im pretty confident with that article and that incident, hes a stupid person too. lol

 

[redneckmedic]

Arent media personalities supposed to be objective and write facts not opinions? Your views on guns show you are not educated in these matters. It is a constitutional right, to keep and bear arms. Its not up for debate by you or the government. Gun rights is in the foundation this country was based on, and what made our Indipendance even possible. When a people are unarmed, they cease to be citizens and are instead subjects. One of the first things the British imposed on colonist was a ban on arms so they could not deffend themselves. Not only the Federal Constitution but the Indiana State Constitution mentions the Citizens right to bear arms to be able to deffend the State, the Country, and our homes if neccessary. I think a good read over the Founding of this country would do you some good as well.

Remember John, criminals will ALWAYS get guns, no matter if you banned them totaly, they will make them, steal them, hide them, and then all of the law abiding citizens will be un-armed sitting ducks. All criminals are FOR gun control, because they know they will never turn theirs in and we will be easy pickins. Now i do believe in STRICT punishments for the violation of a gun laws, or the use of a gun in a crime. But the government cannot and will not take away guns in this country. It will never happen, because people view this as a fundamental right and wont back down from it. There are a lot more Pro-Gun citizens than anti-gun. look at your recent national poles.

Also, the story you wrote about your ancestor almost killing your grandfather or your father, was VERY RECKLESS of him. You cannot shoot at shaddows, even on your own property, and no responsible gun owner would do such a thing. I would encourage you to take a basic handgun coarse at a local range by a qualified NRA instructor. you might decide you still dont like and are afraid of guns, or you may feel empowered now that youd realize the safe handling practices most legal gun owners use, and who knows maybe youd go to a range every once in a while, and eventualy keep one for your protection and exercise your constitutional right. But either way, at least you would then have an accurate and informed picture of both sides of the story so you could write more informed articles next time on guns in America. Anti-gun people are mostly just people who are afraid of what they realy dont have never been properly taught about. Groups like the Brady Ass. just seek to play on peoples fears and lack of knowledge to push their agenda. Please read the facts and write facts from now on.

All The Best

A Responsible and Legal Gun Owner

Great Email.... spell check would have made you look a bit more educated though

One night, his eldest son came home unexpectedly from the Columbian Exposition in Chicago and sought entrance to his locked home. Thinking it was an intruder, my grandfather opened the front door and aimed the pistol at the shadowy figure. Fortunately, the gun misfired. I would not be writing this column had the result been different

Hmmm interesting, up until the shadowy figure part, that idiot deserved to get shot. He was mimicking an intruder to the T.

 

[XDs4me]

It would be nice if the Post Tribune reprinted some of the e-mails he's getting. Inform the uninformed reading his column as well.

 

[bigiron]

Great Email.... spell check would have made you look a bit more educated though

One night, his eldest son came home unexpectedly from the Columbian Exposition in Chicago and sought entrance to his locked home. Thinking it was an intruder, my grandfather opened the front door and aimed the pistol at the shadowy figure. Fortunately, the gun misfired. I would not be writing this column had the result been different

Hmmm interesting, up until the shadowy figure part, that idiot deserved to get shot. He was mimicking an intruder to the T.

huh, i think its worth mentioning as well that his grandfather would be sitting in prison if the firearm had actually worked. i don't think its legal to shoot someone outside your home, its not legal now and never has been. i suppose then his grandfather would be a senseless armed citizen and would help to pad the stats when it comes to morons and guns. prehaps he would have done himself a favor and left that part out. once again our first amendment allows people the opprotunity to speak without thinking. i would respond to him by email as well but i'm sure its a waste of energy and resources.

 

[Pami]

huh, i think its worth mentioning as well that his grandfather would be sitting in prison if the firearm had actually worked. i don't think its legal to shoot someone outside your home, its not legal now and never has been. i suppose then his grandfather would be a senseless armed citizen and would help to pad the stats when it comes to morons and guns. prehaps he would have done himself a favor and left that part out. once again our first amendment allows people the opprotunity to speak without thinking. i would respond to him by email as well but i'm sure its a waste of energy and resources.

Indiana Castle Doctrine extends to the edge of your property. Since the son was in the process of entering the grandfather's home, I think it's safe to say both were on the grandfather's property. I'm just not sure if the Castle Doctrine had been adopted at the time of this story, though. I thought that was a relatively recent thing (last 20-30 years?).

 

[Bill of Rights]

Indiana Castle Doctrine extends to the edge of your property. Since the son was in the process of entering the grandfather's home, I think it's safe to say both were on the grandfather's property. I'm just not sure if the Castle Doctrine had been adopted at the time of this story, though. I thought that was a relatively recent thing (last 20-30 years?).

Castle Doctrine in Indiana is just in the last 4 years or so, wherein it was specified that you have no duty to retreat. No such duty was present in the law prior to that, but it was not explicitly described as being a negative duty. (that is, like OC/CC, it was non-specific, but in the lack of specificity, such a duty should not have been assumed to be present. When CD passed, the absence of that duty was spelled out.)

I am uncertain, but I believe the mention of the right of self-defense to the edge of the property and extending around one's person may have been in there prior to the CD passing as well, but I don't know how to look that up.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[Srtsi4wd]

According to Mr. Wolf's logic, shouldn't Indiana, with our relatively loose gun laws, be a cesspool of violent depravity, with rampant and pervasive gun crime occurring in every city and town?

Hmmmm...... Last time I checked Indiana seems to be a pretty safe place to live.

Now why is it that I dread going to Chicago?

There are no firearms there, its just they seem to have a interesting local weather pattern, horizontal, high speed lead rain.