From: [Matt Giwer] at [f326.n3603.z1.FIDONET.ORG] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Royko on guns
Date: Sun, 08 Aug 93 22:14:00 PDT
* Forwarded by MATT GIWER from the f-Politics conference.
* Original from CRACKPOT to ALL on 08-06-93.
Mike Royko used to be practically a crusader for gun control.
According to his August 6 Chicago Tribune column (titled "Anti-gun
leadership keeps firing blanks"):
"Back in the early 1960s, ... I wrote my first gun-control column.
And over the next 20 or so years, I wrote enough columns on the
subject to fill a book.
I probably wrote more columns on the issue of the availability of
handguns than any columnist in the United States."
However, even Mike Royko, a man of strong opinions on practically every
subject, can learn some things:
"Finally, I noticed something else. Strict gun laws are about as
effective as strict drug laws. The drugs flow and so does the
supply of weapons. It pains me to say this, but the NRA seems
to be right: The cities and states that have the toughest gun
laws have the most murder and mayhem. Just as junkies find
drugs, criminals find weapons. And I haven't the faintest idea
how to prevent it.
And we've now reached the point where most law-abiding gun owners
believe that they need their guns because of all the artillery
that is in the hands of the loonies. They are against
unilateral disarmament."
Yes, Mike Royko, who practically crusaded for gun control for many
years, has realized that gun control just won't work. How long
will it take the rest of the gun-control crusaders to take a
good long look at reality?
R P
C A K O
C T
=== msgedsq 2.0.5
-- SPEED 1.30 >01<: Hill Nixes Hil's Pix, Bill perplixed. Variety
--
Internet: [Matt Giwer] at [f326.n3603.z1.FIDONET.ORG]
UUCP: ...!myrddin!mechanic!326!Matt.Giwer
Note: mechanic is a Fidonet<>USENET gate for TAMPA BAY,FL.
The opinions stated in this post are only my own!
Article 57018 of talk.politics.guns:
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Path: teetot.acusd.edu!network.ucsd.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!usc!math.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!csn!teal.csn.org!lgibes
From: [l--ib--s] at [teal.csn.org] (Lawrence R. Gibes)
Subject: Mike Royko, on gun laws
Message-ID: <[C B x 98 q IL] at [csn.org]>
Sender: [n--s] at [csn.org] (news)
Nntp-Posting-Host: teal.csn.org
Organization: Colorado SuperNet, Inc.
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1993 21:05:13 GMT
Lines: 101
Anti-gun leadership keeps firing blanks
Chicago Tribune (CT) - FRIDAY August 6, 1993
By: Mike Royko
[ stuff deleted about an investment banker complaning about a
drive-by shooting]
But he'll be disappointed by my answers to his two questions.
Question 1: "What are you prepared to do about this?"
Answer: Not a damned thing.
See, I am not the police chief nor the mayor of Chicago. And even
if I were, I couldn't do any more than they have to get rid of guns.
Oh, I suppose if I were mayor I could boldly declare that I was
going to hire 2,000 more cops and use them as a massive anti-gang task
force. They would then overwhelm the violent neighborhoods, roust the
gang members on sight and seize their weapons.
But it would be a awful lie. There's no money to hire 2,000 cops.
Or a 1,000. Or 500. To raise the cash, I'd have to hike real estate
taxes and that would cause an uproar and I'd be tossed out of office.
And even if it could be done, the cops couldn't harass the gangs
because lawyers would rush to court-as they've done in the past-and a
judge would order the cops to stop violating the constitutional rights
of gang members to be social menaces.
So all I can do is write columns expressing outrage that gang thugs
are shooting each other and innocent non-combatants who stray into the
line of fire.
But that doesn't accomplish anything. The gang-bangers don't read
newspaper columns. And if they did, they wouldn't be impressed.
Question 2: "When will you assert leadership in taking guns away
from our children."
Our children? Sorry, but I accept responsibility for my own four
children only. I'm happy to say none packs a gun.
If all parents kept guns away from their kids, the problem would
almost disappear. But we all know that the parents of today's
gang-bangers won't be mistaken for Ozzie and Harriett.
Actually, I did try to assert leadership on this issue. Back in
the early 1960s, when Mr. Wottrich was a high school student in Ohio,
I wrote my first gun-control column.
And over the next 20 or so years, I wrote enough columns on the
subject to fill a book.
I probably wrote more columns on the issue of the availability of
handguns than any columnist in the United States.
But as far as I can tell, the columns accomplished one thing: I
increased revenue for the postal service. Every time I wrote on the
subject, the sale of postage stamps would go up as members of the
National Rifle Association sent thousands of letters telling me I was
a boob.
Then I realized they were right. I was a boob. Not because I was
against gangs and other criminals from having guns. But because I
thought that writing about guns did anything but attract angry mail.
I think that realization hit me after President Reagan was shot and
almost killed, but almost immediately declared his loyalty to the NRA
and the free flow of guns. I figured that if the president of the
United States didn't mind being plugged, who was I to beef?
True, his press secretary received a terrible wound and the Brady
Bill became a rallying point for the anti-gun crusaders. But where
was James Brady before he caught a slug? I'll tell you where:
Shoulder to shoulder with the pro-gun lobby. And if he hadn't been
shot, that's where he'd be today.
And I finally noticed something else. When it comes to guns, the
Congress of the United States has no guts; presidents have no guts;
and most of our state legislatures have no guts.
So why was I wasting space and boring readers by repeating myself
when powerful leaders ducked the issue? (Not that I don't waste space
on a regular basis. But I prefer wasting space on subjects I enjoy
more than death and destruction.)
Finally, I noticed something else. Strict gun laws are about as
effective as strict drug laws. The drugs flow and so does the supply
of weapons. It pains me to say this, but the NRA seems to be right:
The cities and states that have the toughest gun laws have the most
murder and mayhem. Just as junkies find drugs, criminals find
weapons. And I haven't the faintest idea how to prevent it.
And we've now reached the point where most law-abiding gun owners
believe that they need their guns because of all the artillery that is
in the hands of the loonies. They are against unilateral disarmament.
So you be a leader, Mr. Wottrich. Tell those bad lads in your
neighborhood to turn over their weapons, or else.
Then duck.