Skip to main content

One gun-related murder negates any reason for strengthening gun laws

Just this morning, I read the following post on Facebook from a Tea Partier:

"Nikko Jenkins was released from prison on July 30th for a ten-year stint for felony assault and burglary. Now he's in custody for the murder of a young mother... He had guns and ammo....Tell me again how gun laws protect people? ..."

First thing's first - based on the minimal information provided in the post, it's virtually impossible to put forth a strong argument for or against stronger gun laws based on this one case. However, if we just look at things from a surface-value standpoint, this post sounds ridiculous.

"He had guns and ammo.... Tell me again how gun laws protect people?"

Let's see here - if we had stronger gun laws, it would have been more difficult for him to obtain guns and ammo, correct?

If a person who once had a suspended license got into an accident which killed somebody, would this individual then say, "Tell me again how traffic laws protect people?" 

Tea Partiers are sounding more and more anti-law and pro-anarchy. If one person breaks any law, that law is pointless, because it punishes law-abiding citizens in their minds. However, without these laws, how could such citizens then be labeled as law-abiding?

Immediately after reading this person's post, I researched the matter - largely because a few questions had sprung to mind, such as: 1) How did this felon obtain guns and ammo?; 2) Were they obtained legally?, 3) Were they stolen?, and 4) If they weren't purchased by him, who purchased them and did he or she have a record?

Well, after researching the matter, it appears as if a friend of Jenkins lent a helping hand in buying two boxes of Brenneke Classic Magnum 12-gauge ammunition at Canfield's Sporting Goods. Jenkins' friend is also a felon, so how in the world was she able to purchase ammunition?

"Tell me again how gun laws protect people?"

What gun laws? When a felon is able to purchase ammunition at a sporting goods store for another felon, it seems to me that our gun laws are weaker than a jello shot void of alcohol. 

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun...
2 comments
Read more

Mentioned on Crooks and Liars and Hinterland Gazette!

Due to some tweets of mine, I got mentioned on the following two sites (all my tweets can be viewed here -  https://twitter.com/CraigRozniecki ): https://crooksandliars.com/2019/04/trump-gives-stupid-advice-george https://hinterlandgazette.com/2019/03/istandwithschiff-is-trending-after-donald-trump-led-gop-attack-on-adam-schiff-backfires-spectacularly.html
Post a Comment
Read more

Face guarding is legal in college football and the NFL

I just wanted to remind fans and announcers especially, that face guarding is legal in both college football and the NFL. It all comes down to contact. So long as a defender doesn't make contact with an intended receiver, he doesn't have to turn around to play the ball. I can't tell you how many times every week I hear announcers talk about face guarding being a penalty. It's not. I even heard one announcer yesterday state, "If the defender doesn't turn around and play the ball, the ref will call pass interference every time." That's simply not true. Courtesy of referee Bill LeMonnier, he says this with regard to the rule at the college level (answered on 8/12/13): "NCAA rules on pass interference require the face guarding to have contact to be a foul. No contact, no foul by NCAA rules." In the NFL rule book, this is written:  "Actions that constitute defensive pass interference include but are not limited to: (a) Contact by a ...
2 comments
Read more