Chicgo still struggling to understand common sense

Got this link from a friend. Chicago hosted a CCW town hall in the Austin neighborhood recently.


People still don't get it, and a big part of the problem is "PC" speech that warps the meaning of words.

++++++++++++++++++++++

9/7/2011 10:00:00 PM

Email this article • Print this article

Gun rights and wrong: Garrett Evans, who survived the mass shooting at Virginia Tech, said there should be more programs to prevent gun violence instead of making it easier to arm citizens. Photos by LA RISA LYNCH/Contributor Above: Annette Nance-Holt opposed drafting legislation to allow conceal carry laws. Nance-Holt lost her son, Blair Holt, in 2007 to gun violence when a teen opened fire on a crowded CTA bus.  Divided on 'conceal and carry' Town hall attendees mostly in favor of citizens carrying firearms By LA RISA LYNCH AustinTalks.org Annette Nance-Holt was in the minority. The mother of a slain 16-year-old teen, Nance-Holt was among a handful of people last week speaking out against carrying a concealed handgun during a West Side town hall meeting.  She lost her son, Blair, to gun violence in May 2007 when a teen fired shots into a crowded CTA bus. Blair Holt was killed while four others were wounded. At an Aug. 31, town hall hosted by state Rep. LaShawn Ford (D-8), Nance-Holt said greater access to guns does not equal increased safety. "Had everyone had a gun on the bus that day, there would have been a whole lot more people dead besides my son," she said. "So I understand that people are scared...but I lost everything, and I still don't want a gun." ++++++++++++++++++++++ She has the absolute right to not own a gun, of course. This is supposed to be a free country, and the government never forces us to purchase things we don't want, don't need, or find morally offensive. Oops - this is supposed to be about words and the warping thereof. The left has coined the phrase "gun violence" and reporters have been trained to parrot this catch phrase whenever someone gets shot or a criminal uses a gun. "Gun violence" takes a step back from the true perpetrator of the crime and transfers responsibility for the violent act to an inanimate object, rather than resting full responsibility on the human being that used a tool to aid in committing a crime. Honesty in reporting requires the reporter to use terms like "alleged" "suspect" and "charged" rather than naming the person(s) responsible directly as such. Using the term "gun violence" takes this literally correct avoidance of directly accusing the perpetrator to a whole new level - the perp is now just another victim of "gun violence". Let's get real. How likely is a gangbanger to pull a gun in an area where he or she KNOWS that there are possibly a few dozen armed responders? Looking at the numbers from all the other states with citizens allowed self-defense tools shows unequivocally that more guns DOES equate to less violence, Brady Bunch propaganda and lies aside. Greater access to guns may not translate into increased safety, but denying the people their unalienable right to defend themselves definitely causes less safety and enables more violence. "Programs to prevent gun violence" - even if such a phenomenon existed, I dare someone to show me ONE governmental program that actually prevented any crime ever in the recorded history of humanity. Governmental programs at best educate people about danger and how to avoid it. Most of them simply waste money and provide employment for people who would otherwise be unemployable or on welfare. I would rather such folk continue to take welfare rather than build up the bureaucracy needed to give them jobs in the "program". Get over it, Chicago. The Second Amendment means what it says, and by arguing otherwise, you are directly enabling more violence in your city. Update - put this comment up at the link: Why does every news story that involves someone shooting or getting shot include the phrase "gun violence"? Guns are not violent. They are tools that can be used or misused, and the responsibility for this murder rests solely on the person pulling the trigger. "Had everyone had a gun on the bus that day, there would have been a whole lot more people dead besides my son," she said. I am sorry for her loss, but what do you think the chances of that attack happening would have been if the shooter had the knowledge that many of the other passengers might have been armed? Even the most rabid gang-bangers are not so stupid as to open fire where they know they are likely to be shot themselves. Armed riders might have been enough of a deterrent that he son might be alive today.