The Long Version

Retired broadcast journalist. Blogging helps scratch the itch. Recovering exRepublican – Sober and still Conservative.

Posts Tagged ‘gun control

Is it Time for Civil Disobedience?

with one comment

Civil Disobedience is the act of disobeying a law on grounds of moral or political principle. The classic treatise on this topic is Henry David Thoreau’s “On the Duty of Civil Disobedience,” which states that when a person’s conscience and the laws clash, that person must follow his or her conscience.

The U.S. Bill of Rights asserts that the authority of a government is derived from the consent of the governed, and whenever any form of government becomes destructive, it is the right and duty of the people to alter or abolish it.

Civil disobedience is often an effective means of changing laws and protecting liberties. It also embodies an important moral concept that there are times when law and justice do not coincide and that to obey the law at such times can be an abdication of ethical responsibility. The choice of civil disobedience and non-cooperation is not for everyone. We all choose to do what feels right to us personally.

I share former congressman Allen West’s opinion on the recent executive orders issued by President Obama with regard to gun control. I deem them unconstitutional and an attempt to circumvent the 2nd amendment incrementally. To set the stage for future liberal progressive ideologues to eventually disarm the populace.

Those in favor of the president’s actions claim his executive orders are innocuous and simply strengthen current gun laws. I suggest those making such claims study these orders in detail. Such study will perhaps awaken them to the big picture.

So I endorse and share this open letter to President Barack Obama penned by Mr. West and encourage all who read it to consider where they stand.

President Obama, before you try that gun grab, I have a WARNING for you

allen-west-confirmation-logoPresident Barack Hussein Obama, on behalf of true Americans, I want to inform you that we will not follow your unconstitutional executive order.

We the American people have no other recourse than to resort to civil disobedience. We have no representatives in Washington DC who will stand and the Supreme Court has failed us as well.

You have embraced violent protest movements in America such as Occupy Wall Street and Black Lives Matter. We are not lowering ourselves to that despicable progressive socialist “rules for radicals” model.

We, the people, are just telling you “No.” We will now be sending you emails and social media posts as well as calling OUR White House to say one word, “No.”

And if you persist and take the same course of action as Xerxes, we will give you a two-word response, Molon Labe.

This is your final year as president of the United States so let us come to an agreement: you leave us alone and we, the American people, will let you stay and finish your term.

Heed these words of counsel. Our American blood is descended from men and women who rejected tyranny — so shall we honor their memory.

If you do not wish to honor your oath to the Constitution and protect us, we shall protect ourselves. And NEVER forget the oath we American Warriors take is to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign, and domestic.

I beseech you, do not come down on the wrong side of American history. Do not come out into the East Room and issue these executive orders, which you know very well are not constitutional. America is a Constitutional Republic, not a constitutional monarchy, and we are not ruled by edict.

We have a system of checks and balances, separation of powers, and coequal branches of government. If you cannot govern this Nation according to its principles and established laws, then tell us so, and kindly vacate the office.

Nothing you are proposing by this executive action has any relevance to recent incidents. You have released countless criminals and now you wish to restrict law-abiding citizens’ rights to keep and bear arms.

Go to your hometown in Chicago, take a walk this evening in Washington DC, or drive up to Baltimore if you want to rectify “gun violence.”

But as a proud gun owner, husband, dad of two daughters, the third of four generations of American combat veterans, a former Member of the US Congress, and an American, I am telling you simply, “Stand down.”

Allen West, January 5, 2016

Advertisements

The New York Times is the Paper of Advocacy

leave a comment »

If anyone was still arguing whether the New York Times was fully vested in the Liberal mantra and political ideology, you need only look at the front page of Saturday’s edition, December 5, 2015.

An editorial on gun control.

Not since 1920 has the times run an editorial on page one.

In the past 95 years not a single page one editorial on Nazism, Communism, Pearl Harbor, Japanese internment camps, segregation, JFK’s assassination, or 9/11 to name a few noteworthy exceptions.

No, the Times feels gun control is the most important issue of the past century…

But this isn’t about the article. If you want to wade into the depthless and mundane here is a link to the editorial. 

This is about blatant, open, in-your-face, advocacy by major news media. The paper of record is the paper of activism. Journalistic objectivity and integrity be damned. They’ve chosen sides.

“But it’s an editorial” you shout at your computer screen! “It’s opinion! It’s not the same as news!” Unfortunately in today’s “new media” the lines have been so blurred, that argument is becoming tougher to win.

The Times editorial, poorly written and shallow as it is, hit the Leftist talking points with shameless consistency, including a jab at Republican congressional leaders who “offer prayers for gun victims and then, callously and without fear of consequence, reject the most basic restrictions on weapons of mass killing, as they did on Thursday.”

What happened on Thursday?

“Every Senate Republican except Mark Kirk of Illinois voted against legislation to prevent people on the F.B.I.’s consolidated terrorist watch list from purchasing guns or explosives” and this has the Times editorial board on fire with righteous indignation aplenty!

How dare those hateful Republicans vote to allow over 700,000 people (up from 47,000 at the end of the Bush presidency) any form of due process or right to be considered innocent until proven guilty? How dare they consider the fact that these lists are about as arbitrary as any “Top 10 Best” lists you’ve ever seen, in the wake of these shootings?!?

Now Rewind to 2014 and two “New York Times” editorials. This was the Times’ stand on the terrorist watch lists just ONE YEAR AGO.

No Fly List is Unconstitutional!

Terror Watch Lists run amok!

The intellectual gymnastics being preformed by the Times would make any side-show contortionist proud.

This is what happens when you practice agenda driven journalism. Consistency goes out the window. Journalistic standards must be ignored or abolished altogether and before long you find yourself struggling to remain off par with the publications on the grocery store tabloid rack at the checkout stand.

It’s embarrassing to watch journalists become overzealous converts to a political ideology they are meant to watch and cover with skepticism, ever questioning, never endorsing, always neutral.

With the exception of editorials of course. Sure, whatever.

Written by DCL

December 7, 2015 at 1:14 pm

The Gun Control Letter Sent to Obama You Won’t See On Mainstream Media

leave a comment »

The gun control debate is accelerating.

On one side historical background, statistical evidence, and an amendment to the constitution of the United States.

On the other side raw emotion.

Evan Todd, a survivor of the Columbine school shooting in 1999, penned a letter to President Obama outlining in great detail his thoughts on gun control and how they were shaped by his experience.  Todd was shot by one of the gunmen that day and watched as 12 of his fellow students and a teacher were murdered.  His letter covers key aspects of the current gun control debate and why the arguments coming from the left are ineffective and dangerous to the rights of all American citizens.

Here is the letter.  Don’t expect to read, see, or hear about it in any major news publication or network and don’t expect to see a reply from the President.  This simply doesn’t comply with the narrative they have put forward about guns and gun control.  It would derail their propaganda machine.

Mr. President,

As a student who was shot and wounded during the Columbine massacre, I have a few thoughts on the current gun debate. In regards to your gun control initiatives:

Universal Background Checks

First, a universal background check will have many devastating effects. It will arguably have the opposite impact of what you propose. If adopted, criminals will know that they can not pass a background check legally, so they will resort to other avenues. With the conditions being set by this initiative, it will create a large black market for weapons and will support more criminal activity and funnel additional money into the hands of thugs, criminals, and people who will do harm to American citizens.

Second, universal background checks will create a huge bureaucracy that will cost an enormous amount of tax payers dollars and will straddle us with more debt. We cannot afford it now, let alone create another function of government that will have a huge monthly bill attached to it.

Third, is a universal background check system possible without universal gun registration? If so, please define it for us. Universal registration can easily be used for universal confiscation. I am not at all implying that you, sir, would try such a measure, but we do need to think about our actions through the lens of time.

It is not impossible to think that a tyrant, to the likes of Mao, Castro, Che, Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, and others, could possibly rise to power in America. It could be five, ten, twenty, or one hundred years from now — but future generations have the natural right to protect themselves from tyrannical government just as much as we currently do. It is safe to assume that this liberty that our forefathers secured has been a thorn in the side of would-be tyrants ever since the Second Amendment was adopted.

Ban on Military-Style Assault Weapons

The evidence is very clear pertaining to the inadequacies of the assault weapons ban. It had little to no effect when it was in place from 1994 until 2004. It was during this time that I personally witnessed two fellow students murder twelve of my classmates and one teacher. The assault weapons ban did not deter these two murderers, nor did the other thirty-something laws that they broke.

Gun ownership is at an all time high. And although tragedies like Columbine and Newtown are exploited by ideologues and special-interest lobbying groups, crime is at an all time low. The people have spoken. Gun store shelves have been emptied. Gun shows are breaking attendance records. Gun manufacturers are sold out and back ordered. Shortages on ammo and firearms are countrywide. The American people have spoken and are telling you that our Second Amendment shall not be infringed.

10-Round Limit for Magazines

Virginia Tech was the site of the deadliest school shooting in U.S. history. Seung-Hui Cho used two of the smallest caliber hand guns manufactured and a handful of ten round magazines. There are no substantial facts that prove that limited magazines would make any difference at all.
Second, this is just another law that endangers law-abiding citizens. I’ve heard you ask, “why does someone need 30 bullets to kill a deer?”

Let me ask you this: Why would you prefer criminals to have the ability to out-gun law-abiding citizens? Under this policy, criminals will still have their 30-round magazines, but the average American will not. Whose side are you on?

Lastly, when did they government get into the business of regulating “needs?” This is yet another example of government overreaching and straying from its intended purpose.

Selling to Criminals

Mr. President, these are your words: “And finally, Congress needs to help, rather than hinder, law enforcement as it does its job. We should get tougher on people who buy guns with the express purpose of turning around and selling them to criminals. And we should severely punish anybody who helps them do this.”

Why don’t we start with Eric Holder and thoroughly investigate the Fast and Furious program?

Furthermore, the vast majority of these mass murderers bought their weapons legally and jumped through all the hoops —  because they were determined to murder. Adding more hoops and red tape will not stop these types of people. It doesn’t now — so what makes you think it will in the future? Criminals who cannot buy guns legally just resort to the black market.

Criminals and murderers will always find a way.

Critical Examination

Mr. President, in theory, your initiatives and proposals sound warm and fuzzy — but in reality they are far from what we need. Your initiatives seem to punish law-abiding American citizens and enable the murderers, thugs, and other lowlifes who wish to do harm to others.

Let me be clear: These ideas are the worst possible initiatives if you seriously care about saving lives and also upholding your oath of office. There is no dictate, law, or regulation that will stop bad things from happening — and you know that. Yet you continue to push the rhetoric. Why?

You said, “If we can save just one person it is worth it.” Well here are a few ideas that will save more that one individual:

First, forget all of your current initiatives and 23 purposed executive orders. They will do nothing more than impede law-abiding citizens and breach the intent of the Constitution. Each initiative steals freedom, grants more power to an already-overreaching government, and empowers and enables criminals to run amok.

Second, press Congress to repeal the “Gun Free Zone Act.” Don’t allow America’s teachers and students to be endangered one-day more. These parents and teachers have the natural right to defend themselves and not be looked at as criminals. There is no reason teachers must disarm themselves to perform their jobs. There is also no reason a parent or volunteer should be disarmed when they cross the school line.

This is your chance to correct history and restore liberty. This simple act of restoring freedom will deter would-be murderers and for those who try, they will be met with resistance.

Mr. President, do the right thing, restore freedom, and save lives. Show the American people that you stand with them and not with thugs and criminals.

Respectfully,

Severely Concerned Citizen, Evan M. Todd

When You Treat Only the Symptoms and Ignore the Cause

with one comment

When it comes to our health we’re taught not to ignore symptoms of illness and get them treated quickly so they don’t develop into something more serious later.  If we visit a doctor he or she will attempt to learn the cause of the symptoms we are experiencing, find the root of the problem, diagnose and treat.

Done right, we get well and our symptoms disappear.

However, if the diagnosis only treats the symptoms in an attempt to only relieve pain or discomfort, the root cause will get worse and if left untreated can result with far worse or even fatal results.

Using this analogy, our nation has been suffering with painful symptoms of corruption, crime, debauchery, to name a few, for decades. Some will argue these problems have plagued our country in all generations, but I would suggest not at the magnitude or frequency we see today.

hippocratic-oath-medicineThe doctors in this analogy are our civic leaders, elected to govern, to prevent societal ills if possible and treat them when discovered and to provide laws and regulations that work but are not overreaching or infringe upon the rights established in the constitution.  Like a doctor, our leaders should have the knowledge and skill to diagnose the root cause of a problem and attack it with the proven methods to solve it. The doctor uses medicine, the politician uses principles.  Without these tools the prognosis of a cure in either case is bleak at best.

The skilled physician who is altruistic in his approach can diagnose and treat disease with high levels of accuracy and success and with permanency.  The not-so-skilled doctor or the doctor who may be less concerned about the patient than the pay, may only treat the symptoms prescribing treatment to provide temporary relief but certain to require return visits and more prescriptions. Regardless of intent this is not an uncommon occurrence in the medical practice today. president-barack-obama-takes-oath-office

The skilled politician who is altruistic in his approach and true to his oath of public service will look to long-standing principles that have worked to the benefit of all segments of society throughout history to diagnose and treat the ills described and attack the problem at its source through legislation that is enforceable, fair, and specific.  The politician who seeks office for reason of fame, fortune, power, or anything outside the core values of public service will too often treat only the symptoms through appeasement, redistribution, giveaways, cronyism, deficit spending, inequitable taxation, and a litany of procedures to distract the public from the root cause and thereby avoid the more difficult task of actually solving the problem.  Regardless of intent this is not an uncommon practice of political leaders in government today.

For an example we need only look at the current gun control debate.  Too many elected officials are focused on a symptom, guns, when regarding the problem of violent crime specifically that of mass public shootings amplified by the recent school shooting in New Town, Connecticut where 26 people were shot by a mentally deranged man, 20 of those killed were children under age 7.

Indeed, guns are used to kill people, which is abhorrent to nearly every human being and because it is such a horrible thought it incites an immediate and powerful emotional response.  But decisions made in the heat of emotion are almost always wrong.  History, crime statistics, gun crime statistics, and common sense overwhelmingly discredits the current political diagnosis and prescribed treatment of the problem of violent crime in this country.  Yet the emotional response being pushed by politicians and media is to ban entirely the weapons used in the commission of these crimes which infringes upon the rights of all people not just the criminals who voluntarily abdicate their rights the moment they commit a crime.

Emotion doesn’t recognize logic and emotion is driving the debate.  Imagine your doctor making every decision on your behalf based on his or her emotional attachment to your malady. It doesn’t work in either case.

Until our elected officials recognize the root cause of most or our societal ills, moral decay and the blurring line between right and wrong, the disease will get worse and at some point it will become fatal.

I’ll punctuate my argument by sharing a video from the ongoing public hearings in Hartford, Connecticut concerning gun control, where Henson Ong issued a passionate defense of the Second Amendment with irrefutable facts and historical data. Exclamation point.

When the Media Gets It Wrong…Intentionally.

leave a comment »

The major news media in the United States has failed its purpose and can no longer be trusted as a source of reliable, thorough, and objective information.

big3The Big 3 as they are known, ABC, CBS, and NBC, once a staple of the news and information diet of this nation have, by their own action or perhaps better stated inaction, alienated viewers and cast a shadow of doubt on the continuing freedom of this nation.

“Without a free press there can be no free society. That is axiomatic. However, freedom of the press is not an end in itself but a means to the end of a free society. The scope and nature of the constitutional guarantee of the freedom of the press are to be viewed and applied in that light.” – Felix Frankfurter, New York Times, November 28, 1954

Thomas Jefferson said, “I deplore… the putrid state into which our newspapers have passed and the malignity, the vulgarity, and mendacious spirit of those who write for them… These ordures are rapidly depraving the public taste and lessening its relish for sound food. As vehicles of information and a curb on our funtionaries, they have rendered themselves useless by forfeiting all title to belief… This has, in a great degree, been produced by the violence and malignity of party spirit.”

“The press is impotent when it abandons itself to falsehood.”

The power of the word in the hands of those viewed, read, or listened to by millions is immeasurable and when abused can have abhorrent consequences.

I believe our major news outlets are engaged in that abuse. Whether in ignorance  by coercion, or as a willful accessory the Big 3 and many of the cable news networks and new media are not providing the citizens of this country with the information they need to make important social, political, and personal decisions.

The most recent glaring example comes in a report from the recent gun control hearings before a General Assembly task force in Hartford, CT where over 600 people, including many of the parents of the children killed in the Sandy Hook school shooting in December, were invited to share their thoughts and feelings on gun control and what might be done to curb the violence and prevent another Sandy Hook from happening again.

Comments came from all sides of this debate. More than 1500 people attended. The mood was somber as parents of lost children spoke. Some in favor of more gun control others against it. But it was the comments of one father, Neil Heslin, and reactive comments from some members of the audience that have been thrust into the forefront of the debate and are now being used to “prove” the insensitivity and coarseness of the argument on the right.

At one point during his comments Mr. Heslin turns and questions the audience, “I ask if there’s anybody in this room that can give me one reason or challenge this question … why anybody in this room needs to have one of these assault-style weapons or military weapons or high-capacity clips.” At this point Mr. Heslin pauses and looks around him as if awaiting an answer, when none came he said, “Not one person can answer that question.”

That’s when you hear several voices say, “The 2nd Amendment”. The few who answered did it respectfully. There was no shouting or hint of anger in the voices heard. Yet it has been widely reported that Mr. Heslin was “heckled” by the crowd. MSNBC aired a clip of the Mr. Heslin’s comment and the reaction to his question, however, they curiously edited out the part where Mr. Heslin pauses, looks for an answer, and then makes his statement that there is no answer.  This selective editing (which NBC has now become infamous for with Andrea Mitchell’s doctored Mitt Romney clips and selectively editing the George Zimmerman police tapes) makes it look like Mr. Heslin indeed was being heckled. However, when you view the full video including Mr. Heslin’s question it becomes self-evident that no “heckling” occurred at all.

I’ve included the unedited video of Mr. Heslin’s comments so you can be the judge. Forward to about the 15 minute mark to hear the relevant comments.

Unfortunately, those who watch MSNBC or read articles posted in The Daily Beast, Slate (updated), The Huffington Post, Gawker or even Hearst Communications CT Post, a Connecticut newspaper, were provided a biased and incorrect perception of what actually occurred. Andrew Kaczynski of BuzzFeed Politics, CNN’s Piers Morgan, David Frum of the Daily Beast, Eric Boehlert of Media Matters, Michael Skolnik of the Global Grind, Democrat Congressman Jim Himes, Talking Point Memo’s Josh Marshall, and Vanity Fair’s Kurt Eichenwald all chimed in on their twitter feeds condemning the “gun nuts”, “gunners”, and “right wingers” for being soulless, horrible, uncivil human beings.

Here is the “edited” version shown at MSNBC’s website. Note the verbiage used in the URL string.

http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/01/29/emotional-father-of-sandy-hook-victim-heckled-by-gun-nuts/

Piers Morgan, the former tabloid chief and talent show judge, who now has his own “News Show” on CNN tweeted this gem after going to his unbiased objective news source Huffington Post.

Piers Morgan Tweet

Will any of these “news resources” admit their mistake, retract their false reports, and apologize for smearing decent people who happen to believe the 2nd Amendment is as relevant today as it was 235 years ago?

Don’t hold your breath.

It’s time for all Americans to demand the media return to its founding principles and begin reporting the truth. Until they change, we the people, can take our eyes and ears away from them. Be proactive. Contact the media networks. Make your voice heard. It makes a difference. They will notice.

Editor’s note: Slate has updated their story and is now saying it wasn’t heckling. Kudos to Slate for the correction.  David Frum of theDailyBeast has also recanted his initial remarks on twitter but with a heavy helping of aspersion to go with it.

Written by DCL

January 29, 2013 at 4:44 pm

Your Little Book!

with one comment

From the Washington Post:

“Piers Morgan dismissed gun-rights advocate John Lott by scoffing at him.
Piers Morgan dismissed gun-rights advocate Larry Pratt by insulting him.
Piers Morgan dismissed gun-rights advocate Alex Jones by saying nothing.

And Piers Morgan struggled to find the appropriate strategy for dismissing Ben Shapiro, editor-at-large of Breitbart.com and a foe of extraordinary polemical agility.”

When it comes to the topic of gun control, Piers Morgan continues to show himself to be little more than a vernacular illusionist.  Like the guy who sits at the table with 3 cups and 1 ball fooling and frustrating each passerby with his smooth and tricky sleight of hand, Morgan used his well honed skills of aversion and confusion to make Lott, Pratt, and Jones look silly and ill-prepared.  In Jones’ case victory was handed over on a silver platter when Jones became a tad agitated (understatement intended).

But Ben Shapiro, Editor-at-Large at Breitbart.com, came to his interview on CNN’s Piers Morgan Tonight, knowing the trick and by knowing, picked the right cup every time.

Shapiro was concise, confident, and most of all capable of putting Morgan on his heels, sending his straw men flying in the storm of facts Shapiro brought to the discussion. Including the bold accusation that Morgan was using the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting as a club to bully anyone who disagrees with his restrictive gun control stance.

Morgan, visibly taken back by the statement, could only reply with how dare you!  “How dare you accuse me of standing on the graves of children that died there, how dare you?” To which Shapiro replied, “ I’ve seen you do it repeatedly, Piers…What you do, and I’ve seen you do it on your program, is you keep saying to folks if they disagree with you politically, then somehow this is a violation of what happened in Sandy Hook.”  Morgan quickly switched the subject.’

At another point of the discussion Shapiro reached into his coat pocket and pulled out a miniature addition of the Constitution of the United States handing it to Morgan and encouraging him to read it, specifically the 2nd amendment.  Morgan later in a huff would call it, “your little book”.

In a last ditch effort to save face and his crumbling argument, Morgan tried to turn the tables by accusing Shapiro of being the bully.  Shapiro’s reply?  “I call it punching back twice as hard”.

Which indeed is how you stop a bully.  Ben Shapiro hit back at Piers Morgan and his baseless argument about guns in America with a powerful, knowledgeable, and fact-filled counter punch last night, the knock-out blow coming in “that little book”.

Well done, Mr. Shapiro. Well done.

Guns and the Hearts of Men and Women

leave a comment »

CNN’s British political pundit Piers Morgan has been making a case for gun control in the US and by so doing has been making statistical claims and comparisons between Great Britain and the USA to bolster his argument.

This week on Piers Morgan Tonight, his weekly program on CNN the Cable News Network, Morgan invited talk radio host and conspiracy theory icon Alex Jones onto the program to discuss gun control.  The word discuss however would be an incredibly inaccurate definition of the dialogue that took place between Jones and Morgan.  The colloquy that ensued must have had Morgan twisting and turning, jumping and shouting with glee on the inside, though you wouldn’t notice it on his calm and determined face.

Jones on the other hand came unhinged.

Regardless of whether you agree with Piers Morgan or Alex Jones or land somewhere in between, it’s important that facts be wielded correctly and in context.  Neither Morgan nor Jones did that during this spectacle but Morgan has been peddling numbers and making statistical comparisons that simply don’t exist in fact.  Jones facts got lost in the hysterical outburst that ensued where we were all left “rubber necking as if witnessing a terrible accident on the freeway.

FBI crime statistics which have recently come out  for 2011 refute Piers Morgan’s argument, show his numbers to be low and incorrect, and more importantly show incontestably that guns do not cause violent crime, unstable people with evil and violent intentions use guns or any other weapon as tools to inflict their evil intentions.

Ben Swann, a broadcast journalist at Fox 19 WXIX in Cincinnati, Ohio,  took Morgan to task on his numbers, comparisons, and insinuations on his Reality Check segment during a recent local newscast.

The numbers don’t lie but they can be cherry picked and used to mislead.  Whether by intent, lazy fact checking, or ignorance, Piers Morgan is misleading his audience and bolstering an argument that isn’t based in fact.  I don’t have a problem with Morgan’s opinion that some weapons should be banned.  I do have a problem when he or anyone else misleads their audience and continually pegs the BS meter with false information.

Whether we, as US citizens, should support a ban on certain guns and/or gun accessories is a debate worth having but it must be won on its merits with all evidence laid out for all to see, digest, and then fall on a side.  I believe in that scenario and when done with integrity the anti-gun argument falls apart and its non-solution position becomes self-evident.

The reasons for ratification of the second amendment of the United States constitution have not gone away.  They are as valid today as they were the day it was ratified.  A nation of citizens who cannot defend themselves are ripe for government overthrow and enslavement by tyrants.  History has proven it over and over again.  An armed citizenry does give pause to those who would consider such action and I believe prevents it from occurring.

Until all evil is eradicated from the face of the earth, the gun will be the determining factor as to whether men and women will remain free or lose their liberties and be ruled by an iron fist.

As Mr. Swann concluded in his report, “Violent crime is not the result of a gun or any tool, it is the result of the heart of men and women.”

Amen!

Written by DCL

January 9, 2013 at 12:49 pm