And the Antis say the problem is with the “gun culture”

Excuse me if I find it a little hard to believe –

Witness Anecdote #1

SAGINAW, Mich. (AP) – Police in Michigan say a 45-year-old woman with a cocaine habit let a 67-year-old man have sex with a 10-year-old girl she was caring for in exchange for the drug.

Angela A. Blackwell of Saginaw Township is charged with first-degree criminal sexual conduct and pandering.

Police are searching for Johnnie L. Griffin on first- and second-degree criminal sexual conduct and firearms charges.

Now, do you think that owning a firearm lead to drug charges or that the drug use/sale lead to the firearm charges?

This low life thug had sex with a 10 year old gir in exchange for drugs. And a woman who should have been watching out for the little girl sold her for a few hits.

This isn’t a “gun culture” problem, it is a problem with liberty. When you give people the freedom to choose, some of them will make wrong decisions. That is why we have the criminal code – It is my fervent hope that if these people are guilty, they get a very long stay in jail.

Then Witness Anecdote #2.

A Dallas mother is in custody after putting her baby’s life at risk in an attempt to prevent her car from being repossessed, police said.

As the repo man, Luke Ross, was backing out of the driveway, Gardner tossed her 1-year-old child through an open window into the back seat of the moving sport utility vehicle, according to police reports. State law prevents vehicles from being repossessed if someone is inside.

Now let the Red Curtain of Rage at a mother treating her child in such a manner subside.
Okay?

Now, As I see it there are 3 possibilities here.

1. She knew the car was being stolen/taken by someone she knew.
2. She knew the car was being stolen by someone she didn’t know.
3 . She knew the car was being repossessed.

In any case, what type of mother would treat her child that way over a car.

Now ask yourself just exactly how she knew about that law? Could be this isn’t her first brush with a Repo Man?

Could it be that she valued the SUV more then the life of her child?

Of course, there is more to the story.

When Ross saw the infant in the back seat, he immediately put the car in park and began to get out, the reports say. Then, police say, a 15-year-old boy armed with a 12-gauge shotgun came out of the house and fired one round into the air and another at Ross, striking him in the leg.

Ross, who ultimately repossessed the vehicle, suffered minor injuries in the shooting.

Police arrived at the scene shortly after and arrested Gardner and the teen, who was identified as Jessie Reyna. Both were charged with aggravated assault.

Texas State law is fairly clear on firearm laws

§ 42.12.  DISCHARGE OF FIREARM IN CERTAIN MUNICIPALITIES.
(a)  A person commits an offense if the person recklessly discharges a firearm inside the corporate limits of a municipality having a population of 100,000 or more.

So, that is one violation of the law

§ 46.13.  MAKING A FIREARM ACCESSIBLE TO A CHILD.
(a)  In this section:
(1)  “Child” means a person younger than 17 years of age.
(2)  “Readily dischargeable firearm” means a firearm that is loaded with ammunition, whether or not a round is in the chamber.
(3)  “Secure” means to take steps that a reasonable person would take to prevent the access to a readily dischargeable firearm by a child, including but not limited to placing a firearm in a locked container or temporarily rendering the firearm inoperable by a trigger lock or other means.
(b)  A person commits an offense if a child gains access to a readily dischargeable firearm and the person with criminal negligence:
(1)  failed to secure the firearm;  or
(2)  left the firearm in a place to which the person knew or should have known the child would gain access.
(c)  It is an affirmative defense to prosecution under this section that the child’s access to the firearm:
(1)  was supervised by a person older than 18 years of age and was for hunting, sporting, or other lawful purposes;
(2)  consisted of lawful defense by the child of people or property;

There is another violation of the law.

I’ll leave it to the imagination of my  readers (all 5 of you) to figure out why a 28 year old woman had an apparently unrelated 15 year old male minor in her house.

Time and time again when we look into “firearm related” crimes, we find other issues that are more correlated and causative then the firearm.

This also isn’t a problem with the “gun culture” is it a problem with liberty. This woman had the freedom to choose and she deliberately, knowingly and willfully endangered the life of her child.

It is the price we pay for freedom

There is no other way to express it. As much as it outrages us (some of us at least– others try to excuse the criminal behavior), we have to have the freedom to choose.

What is the alternative folks? To take away our liberty, our rights, our ability to choose until we can only do the good things?

That way lies tyranny and I, for one, don’t want to go down that path.

Please join the discussion.

Update — On our Baby Throwing Mama

A Dallas mother accused of tossing her infant baby into the back seat of a vehicle to keep it from being repossessed, has been transferred to the Kaufman County Jail to face outstanding charges there.

Krystal Gardner, 28, faces multiple traffic-related warrants in Kaufman County.

Here is a part that will make you go WTF??

The status and whereabouts of Gardner’s baby are not known. Child Protective Services said they did not take custody of the child and had no comment about the case.

CPS didn’t take custody of the child????

Why the Heck Not?

Update # 2

Thanks for the Link Tam

If you’ve came from View from the Porch, a quick comparison of our takes on the story will show why she is the Queen of Snark and I’m barely the Squire of Snooze.

Look around folks, feel free to comment — thanks for stopping by.

2 Responses to this post.

  1. Posted by Weer'd Beard on 25.03.10 at 6:26 AM

    Also interesting fact is that all suspects are charged and awaiting trial.

    Yep, crimes were committed and people were harmed, but this is how the laws work. Laws don’t prevent crime at all. (You’ll note the people who might feel that the above stories are political hay to be made to restrict sales and possession of firearms won’t make any beefs about our current drug, sex, endangerment, or assault laws. Those laws didn’t prevent the more serious crimes in this case which was the rape of a child, the endangerment of another child, or the assault on a repo man.)

    What they DO do is allow punishment of bad behavior which is being dealt. Of course there are failings in that system:
    http://stuckinmassachusetts.blogspot.com/2010/03/more-ma-justice.html

    And failings in actual apprehension:
    http://3bxsofbs.infamousanime.net/?p=763

    But this is how we solve the problems that both the pro-freedom and the anti-freedom sides BOTH have a problem with.

    Just our solution will work, theirs is proven not to.

  2. Posted by Linoge on 25.03.10 at 6:26 AM

    Snooze or not, scoring a link from Tam means you must have done something relatively close to “right” ;).

    Unfortunately, there will always be those who will use whatever liberties they have to do whatever they want, regardless of what the laws and rules of their society dictate – in the first example, nearly every damned thing those adults did was illegal, and yet they went ahead and did it, sipmly because they could. They were physically capable of doing it, so they did. And yet halfwitted morons would claim that more laws, and more regulations, and more restrictions, and more legislation would have somehow stopped those scumbags from doing what they did.

    Bulldren.

    But try not to tell them that, much less with examples like this – it tends to threaten their worldview bubbles, and that only leads to Very Bad Things (TM).

Respond to this post

*


Switch to our mobile site