San Francisco: No Guns/Military (Except That Guy from The Village People)

In an apparent effort to not only prevent citizens in San Francisco from protecting themselves individually, but also discourage citizens from volunteering to protect our nation by enlisting in the military...

Voters approved ballot measures to ban handguns in San Francisco and urge the city's public high schools and college campuses to keep out military recruiters.

The gun ban prohibits the manufacture and sale of all firearms and ammunition in the city, and makes it illegal for residents to keep handguns in their homes or businesses.

The last time I checked, the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution says this:

"A well-regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State,the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed."

The NewsMax article notes that only Washington, D.C. and Chicago have gun laws that go as far as this measure.

Living in Chicago myself, I checked out what the state laws here have to say on the matter:

Subject only to the police power, the right of the individual citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Illinois Constitution Article I, Section 22

It seems pretty clear to me. Here's the deal. I don't give a flying #$@! if someone does not wish to own a gun. I think such a person would be up in arms (pun intended) if I tried to get a law passed requiring them to own a gun. So why feel the need to take away my right (given by both my country and my state) to protect myself?

I have repeatedly observed crime from my kitchen window. I've seen the cops come. I've seen the cops go. I've taken pictures, delivered them to the local police precinct, and been made to wait 45 minutes to have them taken off my hands with a disinterest that would rival that of a pedophile in a nursing home. I've crossed paths around the neighborhood on a very regular basis with people I've watched commit these crimes with my very own eyes.

I DON'T TRUST THE POLICE TO WATCH OUT FOR MY ASS. Can you blame me? Yet my city government has said SCREW YOU, and so have the people of San Francisco.

As for the military recruitment...

The measure, dubbed "College Not Combat," opposes the presence of military recruiters at public high schools and colleges. However, it would not ban the armed forces from seeking enlistees at city campuses, since that would put schools at risk of losing federal funding.

It encourages city officials and university administrators to exclude recruiters and create scholarships and training programs that would reduce the military's appeal to young adults.

What freakin' right do they have to try to limit the options of their young citizens? If you think a 17-year-old girl is old enough to decide to have a fetus slashed out of her womb without notifying her parents, surely she is capable and HAS THE RIGHT to weigh her career options, including joining the military?

"We now have the moral weight of the city behind us, and it's definitely a valuable asset to have in our corner," said Bob Matthews, an activist for the proposition.

The moral weight? THE MORAL WEIGHT? If this is all about morals, then why not ban military recruitment from the city campuses as well? Federal funding, schmederal funding! Who needs the federal government's money when you've got MORAL WEIGHT?

You wouldn't know moral weight if you were lying on a bed trying to squeeze it into your weak, self-important, liberal jeans.


Linked @
The Political Teen
Stop The ACLU
MacStansbury
The Big Dog
basil's blog
.5
TMH's Bacon Bits
Don Surber
Jo's Cafe
Wizbang
bRight & Early
Stuck On Stupid
Crazy Rants Of Samantha Burns
Conservative Cat
Something & Half Of Something
Choose Life
Adam's Blog
3rd World County
Uncooperative Blogger
Cao's Blog (we love Cao!)