Anti Gun/Anti-NRA column in Hbg, PA Patriot news "Fear of NRA kills needed gun laws"

[OCJ]

Please feel free to respond to the author of this article. Her contact information is below. Also be encouraged to write letters to the editor. NANCY ESHELMAN: 717-255-8163 or [email protected] The newspaper's website is through http://www.pennlive.com . This woman has already made her stance clear on alot of issues and she lacks common sense in alot of her articles. She recently wrote another column saying that law enforcement shouldnt "ruin kids lives" by arresting them for dealing/doing drugs and that its no big deal if kids take part in such activities.

The article is expressing her pro-one-gun-a-month-view. For those of you that don't know, the city of Philadelphia is trying to pass a one-gun-per-month law. Unfortunately such a law would probably be attempted to be replicated at the state level, as our governor is the former mayor of philadelphia and has often been called the "Governor of Philadelphia".

Please write to this columnist and the newspaper editor and explain that these proposed gun laws that she praises do not affect the criminals on the street. Your street gangs do not purchase their guns from the friendly neighborhood gun shop and will continue to purchase as many as they want illegally while the law abiding citizen will have even more limitations. Who knows what else this might open the door to if the legislators find out they can get away with this new regulation.

http://www.pennlive.com/columns/pat...ex.ssf?/base/news/1155176741235100.xml&coll=1

Fear of NRA kills needed gun laws
Thursday, August 10, 2006

Philadelphia, gripped by gun violence, fought back with a summit last month.

The two-hour session, held on the last day of July, came after 232 people had taken fatal bullets this year.

In Reading Sunday, a police officer died from being shot in the chest near City Hall. His death came just hours after a man shot at a playground died near the front porch of a city councilwoman.

Harrisburg might be smaller than either Philly or Reading, but it isn't immune from senseless violence.

Jesus Castenada, 29, was cleaning out a house on Allison Hill when, police said, he was shot and killed last month by a man they described as a crack addict looking for money for drugs.

Hitender Thakur, a nursing student, was a clerk at City Gas and Diesel at 16th and State streets when he was killed May 25 for $100.

Last year, 536 people died in Pennsylvania from gun violence, according to the state police.

While there's plenty I could say, I prefer to step aside today and let Walter M. Phillips Jr., head of the Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency, do the talking.

The former state and federal prosecutor, now a member of a Philadelphia law firm, spoke volumes when he begged the state's 1,200 police chiefs to keep the issue of gun violence alive in their communities.

"One would think we could rely on our Legislature to do something about gun violence," Phillips said. "But our legislators have proven time and again that they are too weak-kneed to stand up to the National Rifle Association and the influence that the NRA has.

"Let me say this about the NRA -- I begrudgingly admire them. They are a very effective, powerful lobby -- they get things done. But I also believe they have become too much of an influence on the legislative process, both in Congress and in Pennsylvania," Phillips said.

"I have no problem with hunters owning as many guns as they want. I have no problem with collectors owning as many guns as they want. And I have no problem with citizens owning guns for protection," he said.

"But those guns are not the same guns that are being bought and sold on the streets of Pennsylvania for the purpose of terrorizing innocent people.

"As a result of the NRA's generous campaign contributions, good legislation -- meaningful legislation -- legislation that could truly reduce gun violence in Pennsylvania, has been bottled up in committees in both the Senate and the House in Harrisburg not just for months, but for years and years.

"Pennsylvania has become the laughingstock of the country because of our weak gun laws. ..."

The Brady Campaign to Reduce Gun Violence issues an annual report card grading the states. Pennsylvania got a D+, Phillips said.

Among the remedies he favors is legislation that would allow the purchase of just one handgun each month.

"If Pennsylvania had one-gun-a-month legislation, gangs wouldn't be coming here to buy carloads of handguns," he said.

"I recently asked a long-standing member of the Legislature if the one-gun-a-month legislation were to come up on the House floor for a vote today, how many legislators would vote for it.

"His answer was, 'about 30.' That's 30 of 203.

"I then asked him, suppose the vote was held in secret?

"He said, "You'd easily get 180 votes."

"In their heart of hearts, legislators know that the right thing to do is to pass this legislation -- but they are afraid of the NRA."

NANCY ESHELMAN: 717-255-8163 or [email protected]

 

[Norton]

"Pennsylvania has become the laughingstock of the country because of our weak gun laws. ..."

The Brady Campaign to Reduce Gun Violence issues an annual report card grading the states. Pennsylvania got a D+, Phillips said.

Some consider it a laughingstock.......others consider it a badge of honor.

 

[Standing Wolf]

I'll go along with one gun a month laws when leftist extremists agree to limit book and magazine buying to one a month.

 

[OCJ]

I wonder if our legislators are putting as much effort into preventing deaths from auto accidents, drunk driving, drownings, and all the other activities that kill more people than firearms.

 

[Silver Bullet]

Please feel free to respond to the author of this article.

I think I'll just send an extra $5 to the NRA-ILA this month.

 

[No_Brakes23]

I'll go along with one gun a month laws when leftist extremists agree to limit book and magazine buying to one a month.

Quotable, Standing Wolf. And I agree.

As for Nancy Eshelman,

This woman has already made her stance clear on alot of issues and she lacks common sense in alot of her articles.

Then writing her won't help much. She will ignore any well written letters and print any inflammatory stuff. She might even make up her own "Death Threat" letters.

I like Silver Bullet's idea with the exception that perhaps the money should go to PA's state level version of the NRA, or GOA or a similar org. I'll send some more money to the CRPA.

 

[yhtomit]

Typical of Eshelman

If I had to pick a "Big Sister" for the cover image of a book written along the lines of 1984 (surely there are some female-led autocratic dystopias in literature, but I can't think of any off-hand), Nancy Eshelman's stern-grandmother column-heading photo would be a good start.

I suspect (but don't really know) that she doesn't actually believe in (much of) the trite, glib, self-righteous, smug, smarmy, lowest-common denominator blather she spouts, that it's just a living for her. Not sure which way is worse ...

timothy

 

[Billll]

O yes! absolutely! You are hereby limited to 1 (one) print publication, book, magazine or newspaper, per month. Additionally, when attempting to make such purchase, you will be required to fill out a form with much detailed personal information, which the media seller will be required to keep on file untill he goes out of business, at which time the form will be turned over to the Bureau of All Print, Film, and Electronic media for safekeeping. Finally, the media outlet will be required to check with the Thought Police in Washington to determine your suitability to posess the media you are attempting to purchase. This is an "instant" check, and if you haven't heard from Washington in 3 days to the negative, the purchase may go through.

Local law may augment these requirements to include a 1 to 7 day "dumbing down" period before you may take posession of the media in question. Be advised, that political literature, or "assault media" may also be subject to additional restrictions, especially during the time frame immediately preceeding a federal election when it is explicitly banned, except for that issued by authorized agents of the government (incumbents).

Following the settlement of all lawsuits arising from aforementioned federal elections, the Elective Terror Level will be reduced from
LaPetomaine: (OHMYGOD! We gotta do something to protect our phony-balony jobs!)
to
Long: (Unless I get caught with a live boy or a dead girl, this job is mine forever.)

Upon reduction of the ETL, "assaualt literature" will be treated as ordinary literature.

 

[alan]

To bad that the NRA wasn't really feared. If it had been, we would quite happily be living WITHOUT the graces confired on us all by the Gun Control Act of 1968, among other unwanted/unneeded legislative "benefits".

As for Philadelphia, seems as if they magically become part of Pennsylvania when "state money" is being allocated. How about giving Philadelphia to New Jersey, permanently. Might be a lot less expensive in the long run, maybe even in the short run.

 

[Lupinus]

I'll go along with one gun a month laws when leftist extremists agree to limit book and magazine buying to one a month.

would that count taking things out of the library

I'd be doomed

I like reading thank you

Besides, all of us that buy gun magazines (yes the reading kind) would be screwed

Your logic is flawed

 

[Otherguy Overby]

Some people

These people are:

The ones who want the US to lose the war on terror, abandon Iraq and negotiate with terrorists.

At best, they are useful idiots.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot[

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In political jargon, the term "useful idiot" was used during the Cold War by anti-communists to describe Soviet sympathizers in western countries (particularly in the United States) and the alleged attitude of the Soviet government towards them. The implication was that the person in question was naïve, foolish, or in willful denial, and that he or she was being cynically used by the Soviet Union, or another Communist state. The term is still in use and used more broadly to describe someone who is perceived to be manipulated by political movement, terrorist group, or hostile government, whether or not the group is Communist in nature.

At worst, they are traitors.

 

[Cesiumsponge]

"If Pennsylvania had one-gun-a-month legislation, gangs wouldn't be coming here to buy carloads of handguns," he said.

Wait...so passing this law would magically turn gang members into law-abiding citizens and they would be bottlenecked in aquiring large quantities of firearms for their illegal activities?

"I have no problem with hunters owning as many guns as they want. I have no problem with collectors owning as many guns as they want. And I have no problem with citizens owning guns for protection," he said..."But those guns are not the same guns that are being bought and sold on the streets of Pennsylvania for the purpose of terrorizing innocent people."

Isn't that contradictory? Guns being purchased "on the street" implies illegal firearms which aren't regulated by the one-a-month law because the dealers and buyers aren't following the law to begin with. Likewise, I was not aware firearm companies specifically make firearms that aren't used for hunting, collecting, or self-defense...that they have an entire line of firearms marketed for use "on the street" for "Terrorizing innocent people."

Where can I buy the newest Ruger Terrorist Extreme in 9mm?

 

[JohnBT]

"To bad that the NRA wasn't really feared. If it had been, we would quite happily be living WITHOUT the graces confired on us all by the Gun Control Act of 1968, among other unwanted/unneeded legislative "benefits"."

That's overly simplistic. The NRA doesn't have, and never had, a magic wand to wave. It takes work to fight the antis and there have been setbacks. Just because the antis fear and respect the NRA doesn't mean they are going to roll over and quit trying to disarm us. We're lucky the GCA of '68 wasn't worse than it is.

John

 

[Firethorn]

Isn't that contradictory? Guns being purchased "on the street" implies illegal firearms which aren't regulated by the one-a-month law because the dealers and buyers aren't following the law to begin with.

The idea that the liberals have is that some portion of these guns come from straw purchasers, who buy multiple guns for 'personal' use, then sell them to a streat dealer who caters to the criminals.

Nevermind that all indications are that the majority of crime guns were removed from 'legitimate ownership' by theft, not illegal dealing.

Nevermind that once those guns started showing up in police traces in mass that they can track down the strawman rather easily, with the current systems on the books.

 

[JesseJames]

NRA is feared?
Sure any lobbying group wants to further its interests.
As for considering NRA members on a individual basis, most of the ones I've met have been extremely sensible, concerned, and nice folks. I am proud to know them.

Address the real issues that face your cities. People who lack self-control and discipline. Generational irresponsibility. Lack of opportunity. An at best education system that sets them up for failure, at worst has staggeringly low expectations.

 

[69Chevy]

If that pissed you off, check out todays(sunday) paper. I guess there is a bill similar to floridas 'stand your ground' law in the house and of course the paper puts its liberal slant on it.

 

[mordechaianiliewicz]

The gaul, and hypocrisy here is rediculous. Many of the same people as this woman who believe campaign finance and corporate lobbying influence have gotten out of hand say, "We the people need to take back this power."

What a load of crap.

The NRA is one of only a handfull of lobbying groups (right or left) which survives based upon small contributions from members, and massive voter weight.

Could it be ma'am, that you only like the power of the voter when those voters agree with you, hmmmm?

This lady is the worst type of hypocrite. I bet she has no problem with what the AARP does, (which is about the same tactics as the NRA).

Yeah, you know a lot of politicians would vote against the people in the AARP if they could.

You either want representative democracy or not.

If you don't like the fact some of us like guns, and plan to keep them... screw you!

Hypocrites.

OK, rant off.

 

[alan]

JohnBT quoted my post with:

"To bad that the NRA wasn't really feared. If it had been, we would quite happily be living WITHOUT the graces confired on us all by the Gun Control Act of 1968, among other unwanted/unneeded legislative "benefits".

He also added the folowing:

That's overly simplistic. The NRA doesn't have, and never had, a magic wand to wave. It takes work to fight the antis and there have been setbacks. Just because the antis fear and respect the NRA doesn't mean they are going to roll over and quit trying to disarm us. We're lucky the GCA of '68 wasn't worse than it is.
------------

I never claimed that the NRA had any sort of Magic Wand, however I submit that the NRA did not fight the GCA as it should have. As I remember, those were the days when NRA was big on being "gentlemanly" and "reasonable". Such was the drivel mouthed by Woodson Scott, in the course of his testimoy before the NYC City Council, supposedly opposing the 1967 enactment of legislation stipulating the registration Of LONG GUNS owned by city residents, who were so bold as to keep items of legally owned personal property at their residences. I testified against this stupidity, it was enacted, and shortly thereafter I removed myself from NYC, permanently.

In any event, given the attitude of the NRA, at that time, I will agree with John regarding our good fortune in that the GCA, bad as it is, wasn't worse. That being as it may, the NRA blew that, as it has blown other things too, magic wands or the lack thereof being beside the point.

In some respects at least, the NRA appears to have learned something from the debacle of 1968, at least one hopes so.