Posted on 09/10/2011 1:45:54 PM PDT by marktwain
Gilbert, AZ --(Ammoland.com)- On Thursday, September 8, 2011, the Public Safety Committee of the Boston City Council held a public hearing concerning the potential licensing of businesses that sell knives.
According to the supporters of the proposed license, the action is needed as a means to address the “ever increasing knife violence in Boston.”
Knife Rights was represented by Jim Wallace, Executive Director of Gun Owners’ Action League, who was also representing his own organization.
The politicians attending were clearly firm in their conviction that action must be taken, some scapegoat must be found. There were grieving parents and their genuine heart wrenching stories of lost loved ones. Public safety officials offered supportive testimony for the proposal.
For anyone who attended the infamous Gun Control hearings here a decade ago, the only difference was that the word “guns” was replaced with “knives.”
The testimony and statements during the public hearing were frighteningly reminiscent of past gun control hearings.
“Why would we allow any corner store to sell these dangerous weapons (knives).” “Selling knives does not support families.” “We must do everything we can to restrict access to these dangerous weapons.” “Why would anyone need a knife with a blade more than two inches long.”"Knives are fine if you need them for work, but employers should require they be left on the job.”
To anyone who has been involved in the Second Amendment battle in the last few decades it sends a shiver up your spine, because this is exactly how gun control efforts were initiated. To make matters more frightening, law enforcement officials testified that “the modern way of approaching these issues is to go after the source of the items rather than the criminals themselves.”
Wallace urged the City Council to take careful and meaningful steps in addressing the problem of violent crime.
“I urge the City Council to review what it is about to do and reflect on the failures of gun control,” said Wallace.“Over a decade ago I had to testify before committees in the state house with grieving families in the background. Now I sit before you a decade later with grieving families behind me again. If you proceed down this path and get it wrong again, ten years from now we will likely repeat this scene yet again.”
Wallace also reminded the councilors that these stores are already licensed by the city, for which they pay a fee and are subject to city oversight as to their compliance with the law, and that there is already an ordinance on the books that makes it illegal to sell a knife with a blade two inches or longer to anyone under age 18. He reiterated that there is no need for new regulation.
Even in high security of prisons rudimentary knives (shivs) are readily available, which shows the futility of trying to control the source of a such an easy to make weapon, as opposed to penalizing law-abiding citizens and making it more difficult for them to obtain the versatile tools used by millions every day at work, home and while recreating.
The City Council took no action on the matter during the hearing. It is likely that it will be some weeks before a draft ordinance is presented to the City Council as a whole.
In the meantime, we will work to try to ensure that history does not repeat itself. We have an unusual advantage in this situation to know what the future will bring if we follow this path of knife control proposed by Boston. We know without any doubt that citizens’ rights will be trampled. Most certainly grieving families will still be burying loved ones because politicians would appear to prefer going after the source of an inanimate object rather than the human criminal element – the source of the crime. The solution offered up today is no solution at all.
If you are a Boston citizen, here is a link to the councilors’ webpages where you can find a link to contact them and POLITELY express your outrage: http://www.cityofboston.gov/citycouncil/councillors
We urge all Boston area Knife Rights members to contact the Boston City Council and express their opposition to this measure.
Your membership and support allows Knife Rights to oppose efforts such as this to restrict our freedoms. If you are not yet a member, please join Knife Rights and encourage your friends to join today!
About: Knife Rights (www.KnifeRights.org) is America’s Grassroots Knife Owners Organization, working towards a Sharper Future for all knife owners. Knife Rights is dedicated to providing knife owners an effective voice in public policy. Become a Knife Rights member and make a contribution to support the fight for your knife rights. Visit www.kniferights.org
It is an interesting suggestion. I do not know if it has been considered, and what the downsides might be. Here is the link to Knife Rights, a 501c(4):
http://www.kniferights.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=40&Itemid=135
Somewhere, I have a book that has that newspaper ad from the antebellum abolition movement in it. I picked it up about 1983.
Thank you for posting it. It shows that the “liberal” mindset has been around for quite a while.
If I had to pay for the steak, I would have got my money’s worth for their stupidity. A little dinner theater would have brought fun to the occasion: I would have picked that steak up with my hands, chomped into it with the appropriate dog growls and slobbering sounds; and dripped steak juices all over the table and carpet. Then I would have feigned a chocking sound making sure it sounded identical to someone in the act of throwing up. If the table was free standing I would have dropped on the ground and continued to writhe on the floor, chocking like a hog and knocking the table over. Then for the coup d’ grace, I would have spat a well chewed piece of steak out in the air, hoping it fell onto the maitre d’ head.
Of course, I would never be so over the top, but it would be tempting.
I’ve got a hell of an ideà for you. Have you ever seen these 5 inch long glue-on ghetto nails urban ladies wear? Those are sharp blades masquerading as harmless fashion accessories...declare that if they’re over two inches long, the owners should be hauled in too. The NAACP and Al Sharpton and the Black Panthers would be all over them like white on racist rice.
Here is the part that makes fighting socialism difficult. The socialists don't care about spending public funds in law suits. It's your money they are spending not theirs.
Here is the part that makes fighting socialism difficult. The socialists don't care about spending public funds in law suits. It's your money they are spending not theirs.
I understand about socialists/marxists, but they’re also cowards. When THEY are named personally and THEY have to spend their own money to defend themselves or try to get themselves severed from the lawsuit, after a while they would be having second thoughts about passing these stupid laws.
Just taking a page from the libtard/socialist playbook like they did against Sarah Palin. Two hundred frivolous ethics “complaints”. Well, how about two hundred citizens filing separate lawsuits against individual council members? Two should be able to play that game.
Also, I’d think that after a while, the council members would find that just because your only tool is a hammer, not all problems are nails. One size doesn’t fit all. They’d realize that “passing a law” should take some thought and maybe some understanding of “the law” and their city/state/US Constitution- which they took an oath to uphold. Maybe they’d start to give some thought to the unintended consequences first.
Seems like the eviroweenies have the lawsuit thing down pat and they’re winning through sheer numbers and attrition. Whey shouldn’t law abiding, stand up citizens use the same tactics back on them?
I’m just saying that Ammoland, GOA, JPFO, NRA or some national RKBA organization (hell, even some law school students) could have the legal papers drawn up quite readily and numerous citizens could then file sets of them, naming different council members. Possibly slightly different causes of action so some liberal judge won’t lump them all together for “judicial economy”. Just an idea. The left does it all the time. I say, turn about’s fair play. Take a page from their playbook and listen to them scream.
I have no problem seeing most all councils or legislative bodies frozen with fear about passing some law. We’re the safest when they’re not able to pass laws. This was known even before Christ’s time when Marcus Tullius Ciceroca in 42 BC, wrote: More laws, less justice. Tacitus, in 93 AD, echoed it: “When society is most corrupt, then are laws most increased.”
And our own wit, Mark Twain added his twist in 1866: “No man’s life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session.” It obviously hasn’t gotten any better recently.
I’m getting more and more convinced of the truth that “When the people fear the government you have tyranny; when the government fears the people, you have liberty.” Isn’t it about time that the people start instilling some fear?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.