Last night, 1210 am's 6-9 pm program was hosted by Lindsay (forget last name), with studio guest Larry Kane. I was a (brief) participant in the discussion.
They were discussing the "arsenal" found in the boy's house yesterday, and used it as a platform to attack the PA legislature for prohibiting Philly from passing stricter local gun laws. (PA's constitution holds that no municipality may have its own laws; the state gun laws are applied equally everywhere in the state) There is a contingent of rural Dem and Rep representatives that are preventing the big city mayors and governor Rendell from changing the PA state law.
They had hoped the program would be about how the law could be changed, who needed to be pressured at the state level, etc. But what they got was a board full of calls from pro-gun listeners.
Lindsay was clearly ignorant, stating at different times during the show "we're not trying to take away your right to hunt, or fish, or hike" and "the 2nd amendment was written during the time of single-shot muzzle-loaders. I'm all for people being able to carry single-shot muzzle loaders, because I'll be able to run away after the first shot."
Larry was somewhat more balanced in his thinking, but still strongly anti-gun.
When I called in....
Larry had just quoted Michael Nutter (the shoe-in next mayor of Philly) as having said "The gun people want their right to bear arms. I want the right not to be shot!" (haha, etc, etc, by the hosts) That prompted me to call-n.
I can't remember the call verbatim, but it went something like this:
Pleasantries exchanged
Me: Larry just quoted Michael Nutter as having said "I have the right not to be shot." I agree with that sentiment. I also agree that my family has the right not to be shot. I want to be able to protect them.
Lindsay: But do you really need a gun to do that? Aren't there other ways to protect them without using a gun?
Me: When it comes to life and death, a gun is by far the most effective means of self defense. I don't have the training a cop has, I can't go toe to toe with an assailant larger than myself. A 90-lb woman can't defend herself from a 200 lb rapist with her bare hands. (or something to this affect)
Larry chimes in: No one's arguing that guns are an effective means of self defense, and no one wants to take away your right to defend yourself or your family. It's clear that guns are extremely effective tools.
Cross talk, the hosts kind of step on each other's words, and all I can make out is Lindsay saying that it was a good point about weaker individuals needing to defend themselves.
There's a few moments of silence at this point, and I'm a little flustered, and the only thing that comes to mind is...
Me: There's an old saying: God created men, Sam Colt made them equal.
Pleasantries are exchanged, and they move onto the next caller
Whenever I listed to callers, I always think "Why don't you say this? Why did you say that? Come on, man, there are better ways to argue our side!"
But when you're actually on the air, and the hosts take the call in an unexpected direction, or respond in an unexpected way, it can be difficult to think clearly and make your points eloquently. I'm not sure I should have dropped the Sam Colt line, but it seemed logical at the time.
Anyway, it was an interesting experience.
They were discussing the "arsenal" found in the boy's house yesterday, and used it as a platform to attack the PA legislature for prohibiting Philly from passing stricter local gun laws. (PA's constitution holds that no municipality may have its own laws; the state gun laws are applied equally everywhere in the state) There is a contingent of rural Dem and Rep representatives that are preventing the big city mayors and governor Rendell from changing the PA state law.
They had hoped the program would be about how the law could be changed, who needed to be pressured at the state level, etc. But what they got was a board full of calls from pro-gun listeners.
Lindsay was clearly ignorant, stating at different times during the show "we're not trying to take away your right to hunt, or fish, or hike" and "the 2nd amendment was written during the time of single-shot muzzle-loaders. I'm all for people being able to carry single-shot muzzle loaders, because I'll be able to run away after the first shot."
Larry was somewhat more balanced in his thinking, but still strongly anti-gun.
When I called in....
Larry had just quoted Michael Nutter (the shoe-in next mayor of Philly) as having said "The gun people want their right to bear arms. I want the right not to be shot!" (haha, etc, etc, by the hosts) That prompted me to call-n.
I can't remember the call verbatim, but it went something like this:
Pleasantries exchanged
Me: Larry just quoted Michael Nutter as having said "I have the right not to be shot." I agree with that sentiment. I also agree that my family has the right not to be shot. I want to be able to protect them.
Lindsay: But do you really need a gun to do that? Aren't there other ways to protect them without using a gun?
Me: When it comes to life and death, a gun is by far the most effective means of self defense. I don't have the training a cop has, I can't go toe to toe with an assailant larger than myself. A 90-lb woman can't defend herself from a 200 lb rapist with her bare hands. (or something to this affect)
Larry chimes in: No one's arguing that guns are an effective means of self defense, and no one wants to take away your right to defend yourself or your family. It's clear that guns are extremely effective tools.
Cross talk, the hosts kind of step on each other's words, and all I can make out is Lindsay saying that it was a good point about weaker individuals needing to defend themselves.
There's a few moments of silence at this point, and I'm a little flustered, and the only thing that comes to mind is...
Me: There's an old saying: God created men, Sam Colt made them equal.
Pleasantries are exchanged, and they move onto the next caller
Whenever I listed to callers, I always think "Why don't you say this? Why did you say that? Come on, man, there are better ways to argue our side!"
But when you're actually on the air, and the hosts take the call in an unexpected direction, or respond in an unexpected way, it can be difficult to think clearly and make your points eloquently. I'm not sure I should have dropped the Sam Colt line, but it seemed logical at the time.
Anyway, it was an interesting experience.
Last edited:
