published Thursday, July 16th, 2009

No guns in local parks

Although a majority of the members of the Tennessee Legislature did not have the good judgment to know why licensed gun-toters should not be permitted to carry guns in bars or in Tennessee parks, the nine members of the Chattanooga City Council fortunately did have the good judgment to take advantage of the provision of law that allows local governments to ban carrying guns in local parks.

There obviously is no "need" to have armed civilians in local parks.

There can be obvious dangers when legal or illegal gun-toters mix with crowds anywhere.

This isn't and must not be a time for a return to the old-time "wild West."

Oddly, the gun issue is a heated one -- but should not be an issue at all.

20
Comments do not represent the opinions of the Chattanooga Times Free Press, nor does it review every comment. Profanities, slurs and libelous remarks are prohibited. For more information you can view our Terms & Conditions and/or Ethics policy.
nucanuck said...

Hand guns in parks are simply a subset of hand guns anywhere.The more hand guns that exist,the more unfortunate incidents will occur.You don't have to be a statistician to accept that bit of logic,and yet,this is widely rejected by gun owners,who cannot imagine a society where we strive to eliminate hand guns,legal and illegal.

To me,it's a failure to dream of a better condition,and giving in to our baser instincts.

July 16, 2009 at 2:09 a.m.
streetsmart said...

I cannot imagine anyone who would be so naive as to think Illegal weapons of any kind could be eliminated. A society without oxygen would be more realistic. We could however eliminate legal weapons. Hitler did it.

July 16, 2009 at 10:58 a.m.
nucanuck said...

Streetsmart

Develope your imagination a little further.Such a place already exists.After many decades in Chattanooga,my family moved to a city of the same size,but without hand guns.I have only noted three gun incidents in two years.There are,at times,that many in Chattanooga in one day.

As I said,it's a failure to dream of a better condition.

July 16, 2009 at 12:09 p.m.
Sailorman said...

Pray tell where is this heaven on earth?

July 16, 2009 at 12:36 p.m.
streetsmart said...

Did these three incidents involve legal or illegal guns? My money would be on illegal. Making my point valid.

July 16, 2009 at 5:10 p.m.
nucanuck said...

Sailorman and streetsmart

Handguns are illegal in Victoria BC and and that has strong support throughout the citizenry.

July 16, 2009 at 8:46 p.m.
streetsmart said...

Thank you for provong my point . Only illegal guns were involved.

July 16, 2009 at 9:17 p.m.
SCOTTYM said...

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2009/02/13/bc-new-police-gang-gun-crackdown.html

Slightly dated (5 months old). Some of the comments are priceless! Quite a few fly in the face of the above comment about citizen support for anti-gun laws.

Apparently nucanuck is not paying attention. All the anti-gun laws in Canada have done is disarm the law abiding citizens.

July 16, 2009 at 10:23 p.m.
nucanuck said...

I can only comment about where I am,and here handgun control works extremely well.The people support it,and gun violence really isn't an issue.

The key is the popular support.If Chattanoogans would line up against handguns, it would take a while,but you could set an example for other cities.It takes a strong will,and that is certainly not evident from most of what I read on this site.Handguns aren't part of the answer to anything, but they are so ingrained in the culture that we can't think or imagine past them.

Ask yourselves,would you describe progress as more or fewer handguns in circulation?

July 16, 2009 at 11:27 p.m.
Sailorman said...

Scotty - thanks for posting that link - interesting reading. I particularly enjoyed some of the comments. The Arctic prisons suggestion isn't bad. Fully automatic AR-15's, and AK-47's smuggled in from the states - who knew? I thought all of those were going to Mexico. It's comforting, in an odd way, to know ignorance of the subject and misinformation aren't solely the province of our own anti-gun contingent everywhere.

More depressing, it clearly illustrates how big a problem the drug business and political shenanigans are.

July 16, 2009 at 11:34 p.m.
SCOTTYM said...

nucanuck wrote, "Ask yourselves,would you describe progress as more or fewer handguns in circulation?"

Well, it sort of depends upon what one considers progress.

In my opinion, any move in a direction opposite to the idea of self-defense, and destructive of Constitutionally enumerated rights, would be regression, i.e. the opposite of progress.

Even if one could make all firearm ownership illegal, the criminals will still have them. See the posted article above, or check-out Chicago, they are having a bit of trouble up there as well.

Sailorman, Your welcome, and yes I agree, ignorance and misinformation abound.

July 16, 2009 at 11:48 p.m.
SCOTTYM said...

From the OpEd, "There obviously is no "need" to have armed civilians in local parks."

Well then, there obviously is no "need" for you to write ignorant clap-trap online so that people can see it.

How's them apples?

July 16, 2009 at 11:50 p.m.
streetsmart said...

Go get em Scotty.Seems as if nucanuck & the OPED have a personal agenda to serve. That article you posted refutes all these two represent.

July 17, 2009 at 1:41 a.m.
legallyarmed said...

A good example of progress is when criminals quit attacking defensless people in parks in fear of getting their head made into a canoe. Or, criminals who suddenly feel a draft in their gut while trying to car jack me at O'Charleys. Personally, I dont't look at it as progress - I see it as threat elimination.

July 17, 2009 at 8:25 a.m.
SCOTTYM said...

legallyarmed,

I like the way you think.

streetsmart,

I'm given er all she's got capt'n.

July 17, 2009 at 8:32 a.m.
streetsmart said...

This gal has some interesting thoughts on the subject of going unarmed. Too bad her article got shifted down and out of sight before it got the exposure it deserved.This article followed one that came out of left field accusing the pro gun people of using fear to make money in the pretence of going armed. 7/14/2009 - Patricia's Porch Talk: Without An Ounce of Protection - Happenings - Chattanoogan.com

July 17, 2009 at 9:11 a.m.
SCOTTYM said...

http://chattanoogan.com/articles/article_154877.asp

Direct link.

Thanks SS. I love a little sarcasm in the morning. Especially at the expense of morons.

July 17, 2009 at 9:26 a.m.
SCOTTYM said...

From way outside the sphere of normal, off-topic for guns, but on-topic for self-protection, check out http://hosted.ap.timesfreepress.com/dynamic/stories/U/US_MOUNTAIN_LION_ATTACK?SITE=TNCHA&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

Holy smoke! I wonder how well a chainsaw would work on two-legged predators? Of course a chainsaw would be pretty hard to conceal without some mighty big pants, and you'd need to get too close for my taste.

July 17, 2009 at 9:47 a.m.
legallyarmed said...

nucanuck: Here is another article proving that banning handguns does not reduce gun violence. The UK has experienced this firts hand.

http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=3083618&page=1

July 17, 2009 at 1:03 p.m.
streetsmart said...

The second response to this article is dead on http://chattanoogan.com/articles/article_155031.asp

July 17, 2009 at 4:05 p.m.
please login to post a comment

videos »         

photos »         

e-edition »

advertisement
advertisement

Find a Business

400 East 11th St., Chattanooga, TN 37403
General Information (423) 756-6900
Copyright, Permissions, Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy, Ethics policy - Copyright ©2014, Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without the express written permission of Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc.