Thursday, June 24, 2010

Even The Bad States Aren't....Them

Turk Turon points out a court case in Massachusetts where enforcement of their "safe storage" law went a bit nutty -- owner had his Glock in a portable icebox...locked up in its original box... and the junior jackboots upstanding servants of the people didn't think it was locked enough; appeals court ruled otherwise and Innocent Gunowner is exonerated.

Meanwhile, in that funny place from where the British Empire used to rule the world, the attention of 'er Majesty's various and sundry Governments is turned instead to making George Orwell look like a pathetic little optimist skipping through the flowers: beseems a woman had kept her father's little .32 pistol for the 29 years since his death (out of sentiment, she wasn't pullin' bank jobs on weekends or anything) and police found it while investigating another matter. She, innocent in deed and intent, will be going up the river for five years simply for possessing that underpowered memento.

Some States of this overly-close Union do indeed and verily stink upon the ice for firearm ownership; I shall not mention them by name but IL, NY, CA and the other infringers are well known. But by golly, they're not the United -spit- Kingdom; and that's another reason you should give sincerest thanks to every single American who fought or supported our troops in the American Revolution and the War of 1812.

England, where Blackstone once had writ, "In these several articles consist the rights, or, as they are frequently termed, the liberties of vindicate these rights, when actually violated or attacked, the subjects of England are entitled, in the first place, to the regular administration and free course of justice in the courts of law; next to the right of petitioning the king and parliament for redress of grievances; and lastly to the right of having and using arms for self-preservation and defense." Sadly, he continued, "And all these rights and liberties it is our birthright to enjoy entire; unless where the laws of our country have laid them under necessary restraints. Restraints in themselves so gentle and moderate, as will appear upon farther enquiry, that no man of sense or probity would wish to see them slackened."

So gentle, so moderate, that they will be sending a 53-year-old mother to prison for five years. My heavens, what person of sense or probity could possibly object to that?

The more I see of the world, the more I love the Bill of Rights.


MO Bro said...

Is it just me, or does it seem like the more we love something, the more some other people want to take it away?

John Peddie (Toronto) said...

Zero tolerance laws are universally stupid. What else could get a child expelled from school for having a plastic replica, with a red muzzle plug?

Offended the urban sensibilies of Suzie Soccermom, did we?

Said Suzie prolly thinks steak comes from a supermarket in a white styrofoam package, with a mini-diaper to soak up the... er... fluids.

George said...

I see this zero tolerance ... erm ... crap all over the place. In John Peddle's town, there used to be a sign on a major thoroughfare advising motorists that the zero tolerance policy on drinking and driving would be enforced.

How could a reasonable someone possibly believe that? If the police allowed one single driver. with one single drink inside him/herself drive by this sign, the whole thing gets thrown out.

Set reasonable limits on dangerous, even potentially dangerous activities. Posit, assess, evaluate, reposit. It's not rocket science.

But ... zero tolerance? Only politicians and police chiefs think that's a solution.