Criminals Break Laws - Who Knew?
This latest installment of "Massachusetts Gun Control Success Stories" comes from the Boston Herald:
Rather than lead off with my usual rant on how stories like this exemplify the utter failure of Massachusetts' gun control laws, which only result in a population of unarmed, defenseless victims, I'm going to ask one question?
What kind of man, when awoken by a bunch of strangers banging on his door at 2:00 in the morning, sends his girlfriend to answer the door?
Now if this event were to unfold at the Du Toit household, Kim and the Mrs. would most likely argue over who's turn it was to answer the door, and who was to provide cover.
We now return you to your regularly scheduled program (DHBA* activated). Let's recap, shall we? I'm no legal expert, but I think I got all these right.
Home Invasion - illegal
Possession of a handgun by a minor - illegal
Possession of a silencer - illegal
Assault with a deadly weapon - illegal
Assault and battery - illegal
Armed robbery - illegal
Sensing a pattern yet? Massachusetts politicians are always touting the "fact" that we have the most sensible and effective gun control (oh, sorry, gun SAFETY) laws in the country. Kurt Massey and his girlfriend might beg to differ on that one.
Remember, to own a gun in Massachusetts, you have to demonstrate a "need" to do so. So, all Mr. Massey had to do was to ask these nice young men if they wouldn't mind coming back in 60 days or so. That would allow him the time to take a firearms safety course, explain the situation at this apartment to the police while applying for his gun license, and purchase a firearm suitable for home defense. And that's IF the chief of police in Dedham determined he had sufficient "need".
Note: these standards NEVER apply to criminals who are the only class of people in the state that has a constitutionally protected right to bear arms.
Common sense, right?
* Dead Horse Beating Alert
Invading teen gang robs pair at gunpoint
A gang of teens looking for "easy money" robbed a young couple at gunpoint in the middle of the night during a frightening home invasion, one victim said.
"I was terrified, scared for my life when I saw the silencer," said 22-year-old Kurt Massey, who woke to five men [remember: no one NEEDS "high capacity" firearms] pounding on the door of his Dedham apartment.
One of the semiautomatic pistols had a silencer, he said, adding that he thought that meant they were going to kill him. Two men had guns and one had a baseball bat.
Massey said his girlfriend answered the door about 2 a.m. and was "thrown across the room," and started screaming before he could get there.
Rather than lead off with my usual rant on how stories like this exemplify the utter failure of Massachusetts' gun control laws, which only result in a population of unarmed, defenseless victims, I'm going to ask one question?
What kind of man, when awoken by a bunch of strangers banging on his door at 2:00 in the morning, sends his girlfriend to answer the door?
Now if this event were to unfold at the Du Toit household, Kim and the Mrs. would most likely argue over who's turn it was to answer the door, and who was to provide cover.
We now return you to your regularly scheduled program (DHBA* activated). Let's recap, shall we? I'm no legal expert, but I think I got all these right.
Home Invasion - illegal
Possession of a handgun by a minor - illegal
Possession of a silencer - illegal
Assault with a deadly weapon - illegal
Assault and battery - illegal
Armed robbery - illegal
Sensing a pattern yet? Massachusetts politicians are always touting the "fact" that we have the most sensible and effective gun control (oh, sorry, gun SAFETY) laws in the country. Kurt Massey and his girlfriend might beg to differ on that one.
Remember, to own a gun in Massachusetts, you have to demonstrate a "need" to do so. So, all Mr. Massey had to do was to ask these nice young men if they wouldn't mind coming back in 60 days or so. That would allow him the time to take a firearms safety course, explain the situation at this apartment to the police while applying for his gun license, and purchase a firearm suitable for home defense. And that's IF the chief of police in Dedham determined he had sufficient "need".
Note: these standards NEVER apply to criminals who are the only class of people in the state that has a constitutionally protected right to bear arms.
Common sense, right?
* Dead Horse Beating Alert
