Gun Grabbers Don’t Quit: Philly Paper Thinks Shooting Is Prefect Opportunity To Turn The Tide

They don’t ever stop trying to disarm law abiding citizens, eh? Not one thing that they propose would have stopped a hardened criminal with a long rap sheet, who really should have still been in prison except for soft on crime Democrats, from obtaining his weapons illegally and using them against police officers. Maurice Hill’s long rap sheet wasn’t mentioned, nor that he was barred from having a firearm in the first place, in this Philly Inquirer piece

Philadelphia police standoff is an opportunity to turn the tide on gun control | Editorial

Wednesday’s prolonged shootout in North Philadelphia that injured six police officers may be the opportunity to turn the tide on gun control.

A narcotics warrant turned into a 7 ½-hour standoff between police and Maurice Hill, who was barricaded in a Tioga rowhouse with a hand gun and an AR-15. None of the officers’ injuries were life-threatening. Around midnight, the gunman surrendered, a testament to the professionalism of the Philadelphia Police Department.

Once again, the availability of firearms made a bad situation worse, and only by miracle, not deadly.

Philly is top ten, again, in the nation for cities with the most firearms restrictions, which, again, mostly only effect law abiding citizens.

So what should we expect to see from the General Assembly, which has a history both of inaction and of preempting cities from passing their own laws? Not much, despite the fact that a majority of Pennsylvania voters and a majority of gun owners support measures such as universal background checks and banning assault weapons.

None of this would have stopped Hill, who was in possession unlawfully, which is a felony, and surely did not obtain them through an NICS background check.

Gun violence in Philadelphia is an epidemic and demands unity, attention, and action. Every stakeholder in the city — from the police union to the mayor and DA and even the U.S. attorney — needs to send a unified message to Harrisburg: The safety of our people, and our police, is not negotiable.

So, even with all that gun control in place in Philly, gun violence is an epidemic? It’s almost like criminals do not follow the law. But, law abiding citizens do. Which leaves them disarmed.

Super-squishy GOP Senator Susan Collins made an interesting point

“I think the difference this time is we had three incidents so close together. Then look at what happened in Philadelphia as well. And we have the president saying that he is on board. And so my hope is that the Democrats truly want a solution and some progress and that they’re not going to play political games with this issue,” Collins said.

But, that’s all they want to do. They want to disarm law abiding citizens. Nothing that the mayor of Philly nor the Inquirer editorial board suggests would cause any issues for the very same criminals that they are soft on to start with.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

7 Responses to “Gun Grabbers Don’t Quit: Philly Paper Thinks Shooting Is Prefect Opportunity To Turn The Tide”

  1. Kye says:

    Yet they are playing political games with the gun control issue since Philly already has every law in place regarding gun control. I know, I lived there and I had a concealed carry permit for years. It was both difficult and expensive to obtain. And that was 35 years ago. Today it’s almost impossible to get. Hell, it’s almost impossible just to get a registered gun let alone a carry permit in Philly. And the guy who shot the cops is a felon to begin with and a full time criminal who just didn’t obey any laws. That’s what criminals do. Which means the incident has nothing at all to do with gun control laws since he broke every one of them.

    There have always been guns in the country but mass shootings of innocents were rare until the 1960’s.

    “Given the same ubiquity of guns, wouldn’t the most productive question be what, if anything has changed since the 1960s and ’70s? Of course it would. And a great deal has changed. America is much more ethnically diverse, much less religious. Boys have far fewer male role models in their lives. Fewer men marry, and normal boy behavior is largely held in contempt by their feminist teachers, principals and therapists. Do any or all of those factors matter more than the availability of guns??” (I’m sorry I can’t recall where I got this quote).

    I’m pretty sure the nasty 24/7 political speech has something to do with it also. And the fact that the left has made everything political from sex to sports and from straws to advertising. When you have divided people into victim groups sooner or later they will take to the streets.

  2. John says:

    Gun grabbers think that 100 round magazines on AR 15 type pistols should be banned !
    How extreme !!
    Everyone knows our Founding Fathers would want us to have those

    • Kye says:

      The Founding Fathers wanted us to be able to defend ourselves against the government, the Indians and foreign invaders. We can’t do that with slingshots. A Kentucky/Pennsylvania long rifle or a Brown Bess were the “assault weapons” of their time and they expected every able bodied man to have and know how to use one.

      There are no “AR-15 type pistols” since AR-15’s are rifles. You really are so ignorant about firearms you should just keep your mouth shut.

      Just so you know the second amendment does not say “…The right of the People to Keep and Bear arms shall not be infringed except for 100 round magazines”.

      • Elwood P. Dowd says:

        Your buddy, formwiz, claims the 2nd Amendment was intended for militias only, not for citizens. Read Federalist paper 29. Do you agree with him?

        He claims the 9th Amendment gives Americans unfettered access to weapons, systems and accessories.

        2A: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

        9A: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

        Our religious and free speech rights, right to assemble are not absolute, are they?

        • Bill589 says:

          The 2nd Amendment is about shooting Tyrants and keeping DC scared.
          “When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.” – Thomas Jefferson

        • Dana says:

          Federalist #29 was published on January 9, 1788, before the Second Amendment was even proposed.

  3. Dana says:

    Maurice Hill was a convicted felon, legally barred from possessing any firearms, yet, shockingly enough, he disobeyed the law.

    But the real reason that Mr Hill was able to shoot up his neighborhood in not-so-Nicetown/Tioga is that he should have already been in jail, but wasn’t, because prosecutors and judges treated him too leniently.

    In 2013, already the proud owner of a lengthy rap sheet, some idiot judge sentenced Mr Hill to seven years probation on a perjury charge. Then, when Mr Hill was brought against the bar for violation of that parole, Judge Rayford Means could have sent him to the big house to finish serving that sentence, but didn’t. Had Judge Means done his duty, Mr Hill would have been in jail until next year.

    The best way to keep guns out of the hands of criminals is to keep the criminals locked up for the maximum time allowed under the law.

Pirate's Cove