Thursday, January 7, 2010

Indianapolis Star's Editors Accuse Gun Rights Activists of "Shooting Blanks"; Star Ignores Its Own Reporting of Mayor Ballard's Hositlity to Gunowners

This morning the Indianapolis Star's editors accuse "gun enthusiasts" ("enthusiast" apparently is a term for someone who supports following the law) of "shooting blanks" for their concerns about Public Safety appointee Frank Straub who is up for confirmation by the Indianapolis City-County Council on February 1st. In the editorial, the Star notes a few comments of Indianapolis Mayor Greg allard suggesting he supports legal gunowners' rights and that he is only interested in targeting those illegally possess guns.

Apparently the editors don't read their own reporting. Let's examine statements and various positions taken by Mayor Ballard.
  • During a media interview, Mayor Ballard has expressed admiration for New York City-style gun registration and suggested that it is a policy Indianapolis should look at.
  • Mayor Ballard has zealously defended Indianapolis' gun return policy, which, as reported by the Indianapolis Star, is one of the most restrictive of any city in the Midwest. Here, even if the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department improperly seize a gun you legally possess in your own home, the City's policy is that the gun will not be returned until you undergo fingerprinting (fingerprinting is not a requirement under either Indiana or federal law to possess a gun in your own home) and the gun is submitted to ballistics testing.
  • Mayor Ballard has taken the position that the City does not have to comply with the 2nd Amendment.

If Mayor Ballard were a strong supporter of gun rights, I would agree that the concern over Straub's appointment would be misplaced. However, Mayor Ballard has a long track record of hostility to the rights of legal gunowners. People who support the right to own and possess a gun have every reason to be concerned about this appointment.


Downtown Indy said...

I'd like to see a list of all the people legally permitted to carry or possess firearms who committed a gun-related crime. A short list, no doubt.

I already can go to the Indiana Department of Corrections and get a list of the tens of thousands who committed a gun-related crime while illegally in posession of a firearm.

Anonymous said...

Restriction of gun ownership is an existential threat to individual liberty. To deny that reality is to deny the historical record, as supported by figures including Aristotle, Cicero, John Locke, and Machiavelli.

Support for gun control is an example of a poor education. And there's a difference between a poor education and being uneducated. A PhD scientist might be not be uneducated, although he/she may be poorly educated. Another way to say it is that a person may be very well indoctrinated, but poorly educated.

If you read Aquinas, he very wisely states that a perfect education requires the elimination of all convention, all prejudice, and all superstition. Using history as a measuring stick, I see gun control advocates suffering from all three of these afflictions.

Cato said...

Shorebreak, further complicating the problem is the nasty situation in which gun owners support only one right, and that only tepidly, while being openly hostile to the ACLU's mission and the other inalienable rights in our suite of natural rights.

The gun crowd is frequently anti-intellectual and supportive of the most pernicious persons and freedom-stripping policies ever visited on the world.

Paul K. Ogden said...


You complain about gun owners only supporting one right, but in fact that is exactly the problem with the ACLU - it picks and chooses which constitutional rights it will fight for. It also cherry picks legal interpretations of those rights it likes.

If the ACLU were consistent with their support of constitutional rights you'd find Libertarians totally supportive of the ACLU. You don't see that though because Libertarians know that the ACLU is hypocritical in its support for rights.

I've never