Constitutionally Right

The only way to predict the future is to create it.

Location: Yardley, PA (Bucks County), United States

Wednesday, September 27, 2006

Defending Pennsylvania - Intelligencer October 1, 2006

In response to the violent crime that's plaguing Philadelphia, politicians and anti-gun zealots are strategizing in Harrisburg to take guns away from those who pose no threat. Bryan Miller of CeasefireNJ, for example, is committed to encouraging New Jersey-style gun control in Pennsylvania.
The rules of simple economics reveal that the black market increases in direct correlation to increases in gun control. The gun ban crowd has, in effect, created the black market that puts guns in the hands of criminals (and not "weak laws that encourage illegal trafficing" as some suggest). A better plan might be to punish those who commit crimes and not those who obey the law.
The gun control that's being discussed disarms the law-abiding thereby giving greater predatory confidence to criminals. This only makes the job of law enforcement that much more difficult.
Criminal laws against murder, rape, robbery and all other violent crimes are laws that already impose appropriate restrictions on the use of any weapon. It's as if ineffective politicians distrust citizens more than they fear rapists and murderers (as they attempt to hide their failed policies behind additional gun control measures).
If the "civilized" elite truly wishes to make the streets safer they'll focus more on fact and logic and stop trying to impose their superior wisdom and virtue on others (in pursuit of dangerous utopian delusions). Gun owners are the single most law-abiding segment of society and no one detests violence and cherishes life more than those who take personal responsibility for their own safety.
In Pennsylvania our rights are not dependent upon the behavior of criminals nor are they negotiable.


Anonymous Bryan Miller said...


Thanks for keeping me amused, with your pathetically self-important and humorless blog and your hilarious letters to the editor. I hope you're gaining some idea of how crucial your reactionary rants are by the nearly non-existent comments posted on your blog homepage. Nonetheless, I doubt you'll post this one. Criticism never appeals to you right-wing fanatics, secure in your warped worldview.

But, just in case you have the nerve, below is my response to your recent letter printed in the SJ Inquirer.

Keep those cards and letters coming! Ha!

Bryan Miller
Executive Director
Ceasefire NJ

Philadelphia Inquirer

Posted on Thurs, October 5, 2006

Letters / Glocks at the Mall?

I usually get a kick out of reading Cory Steiner's irrational pro-gun rants ("A gun ban would only increase gun violence," letter, Sept. 11). His assertions are amusingly whacky. But, his latest went too far.

It wasn't his series of whoppers that got to me.

How seriously can one take such nonsense as the idea that gun laws cause gun violence? That's like saying that highway safety laws cause car wrecks. Or, that it's a "natural right" of all citizens to carry concealed handguns in public? That means that life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness and carrying a Glock at the mall are inalienable rights. Or, that 40 percent of Bucks County adults have permits to do so? Jersey folks may want to rethink that New Hope visit.

It was Steiner's supremely insensitive and dismissive comment that my only brother, FBI Special Agent Mike Miller, was shot and killed because he "was in the wrong place at the wrong time" that got to me.

No, Mike and his two colleagues were doing their duty and honoring the badges they carried, when they were killed by a man wielding a concealed illegal assault pistol.

Honoring Mike is what I try to do
every day, by seeking to reduce illegal handgun carnage.

Honor. You'd think that Steiner, a former Marine, would know what it means.

Beyond his personal affront, two of Steiner's contentions demand correction, namely, that the gun violence prevention movement wants to "disarm the law-abiding" and that one cannot both support law enforcement and seek stronger gun laws. Hogwash.

My colleagues and I are not concerned about the guns owned by Steiner and his pals. Keep 'em.

No, we seek to make it harder for felons, violent teens and the mentally ill to get illegal handguns. Limiting individuals to the purchase of 12 handguns a year is a burden only on gun traffickers and their criminal customers.

Furthermore, Ceasefire NJ has often enjoyed strong support from the New Jersey State Association of Chiefs of Police for our efforts. The Philadelphia Fraternal Order of Police stood with us and dozens of other organizations recently in calling for a rally in Harrisburg to urge the strengthening of Pennsylvania's gun laws.

Despite the obnoxiousness of his latest, I look forward to Steiner's next pro-gun manifesto. We can all use a good laugh.

Bryan Miller
Executive Director
Ceasefire NJ

8:05 AM  
Blogger Cory Steiner said...

Dear Bryan:
Thank you for visiting. I published your post since I honor the Constitution in its entirety. I appreciate your comments and your response. Without it there'd be little or no real debate.
If you don't mind me saying - we're both fundamentally on the same side. On a side note. I find your sense of humor encouraging and I'm always available to discuss anything.
Thanks again.


PS Breakfast at Ponzio's is on me.

8:17 AM  
Anonymous CCW saves lives said...

It really is a shame that some people have to ply their political agendas based on the deaths of their loved ones. Cindy Sheehan is simply the exhalted leader of this strange branch of American political discourse.

Mr. Miller accuses Cory of being a right-wing reactionary fanatic, yet the only fanaticism in this debate comes from those who would choose to disarm, ironically at the point of a gun, law-abiding citizens.

If Ceasefire NJ is anything like Ceasefire MD, gun owners in this country have nothing to fear from these people.

The MD chapter routinely gets itself caught in a web of lies (1 in 5, Texas CCW, etc) and so thoroughly embarasses theirselves in front of the General Assembly that they have absolutely no credibility left whatsoever.

In fact, their recently resigned Executive Director couldn't even decide what she wanted her name to be since it changed so often. We were all very sad to see the Gail Gunn creature go since her shreaking was so helpful to our message, but the lies and deceptions of Michelle Pierce are equally entertaining.

5:08 AM  
Anonymous Bryan Miller said...


Well, I must admit to surprise that you posted my comment.

And, thanks for the breakfast invitation, but...I'm busy. I've wasted way too much time over the last decade trying to have reasoned discussions with pro-gunners. It hasn't proven possible, given the lack of humility and humor (and willingness to play fast and loose with the truth) among you folks. Thanks anyway.


11:14 AM  
Blogger Cory Steiner said...

Dear Bryan:
I don't care what anyone says; I think that you and I are developing a kismet. The problem might be that you haven't wasted enough time with the "right" pro-gunners (and we vastly outnumber the "wrong" ones).
Like I've said and I'll say it throughout - you and I are fundamentally on the same exact side. The trick is to make it difficult for the other side (who's making it difficult for us) and, in fact, the only way to do that is to work together on it. Let's beat them up and not each other.
The offer always stands. We can certainly do a quick baklava and coffee if time's short. I loved your response in the paper, by the way, and I will never take offense to your opinion.
And you don't even have to admit that you voted for me. No one will ever know.


1:37 PM  
Anonymous Oleg said...

Humor may be appropriate, but Cory is giving a serious topic its due. Here's the summary of issue with gun control:

-- It violates the rights to ownership of existing property
-- It violates the right to self-preservation by removing vital tools
-- It violates the right to self-determination

All those things are done to people innocent of any wrong-doing, a fundamentally wrong approach! Gun control also causes certain perverse incentives:

-- Trafficing in illegal guns is thus encouraged, both for criminal and for non-criminal purposes (self-protection)
-- People who can afford to move away generally do, reducing the affluence and the general law-abiding character of the area
-- People who would be prosecuted equally for a pistol and an automatic rifle have little to lose by upping the ante (see UK and Russian experiences)

Gun control is also, in practice if not by design, very discriminatory. Criminal and politially connected persons can get around them rules, but most of the law-abiding citizens would not.

I will note an observation about practitioners of all martial arts, including fencing, archery, karate, shooting, wrestling and others: they tend to be well educated in the ethical, legal and practical aspects of using force. As such, they tend to be peaceful people who evade conflict and who de-escalate confrontations. Gun control proposals are generally designed to confront this peaceful but formidable part of the population -- to what end!?

4:49 PM  
Anonymous Mark54g said...

I must say I agree with Cory, on this issue. Yes, there are people who should never own a gun. They are those who would be unsafe with it, or anything that could potentially be a weapon.
However, that being said, there are reasons to carry a concealed handgun. There are reasons to own a firearma and restricting the right to bear arms makes us less safe. Visiting New Hope is safe. Going to the mall is safe. Leaving a movie at night is safe...until it isn't. That one time out of many, you will place your life, and those around you in the hands of someone who has already shown disdain for the law. You will beg for mercy from someone who now owns the right to your life, for even a brief moment, because you are helpless.
People like this are not law abiding. Adding another law to stop them will not make them care any more for yet another broken statute. Taking guns away from, or making them difficult to obtain serve to make the ones who would make illicit use of them stronger. It is as misguided as moving a "Deer X-ing" sign down the road because you wish the deer to cross there instead. I am sorry for anybody who has lost a loved one due to the disregard for life that some humans fortunately have. For others, you subject them to similar fates. Remove the ability to defend oneself and you do not have justice for the dead. You have more dead to keep them company.
The same people would not declaw a cat for fear of removing its ability to protect itself. Humans have no claws, no fangs, and we are not fast enough, nor agile enough to avoid those who make us prey. The world is dangerous. We already have checks in place, such as instant national searches when buying firearms. Making it difficult will not stop criminals from buying legitimately. They WILL go underground. They will continue to be criminals. Burglars do not stop when they see a lock. They continue. Criminals, seeing a block on getting a legitimate gun that could be traced to them easily will avoid such a method. Our rights exist for a reason. To remove them, without cautiously examining that reason is dangerous.

6:24 AM  
Blogger E. David Quammen said...

Wonder if Mr. Miller is aware of what "inalienable" Rights are? It certainly seems that he is not.

Mr. Miller, are you aware that the basis for forming our Constitution was "the trancendent laws of nature and of natures God"? (Federalist #43). And, that our God-given Right was secured even before being enumerated into the Bill of Rights? To Wit;

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

"This may be considered as the true palladium of liberty....The right of self-defense is the first law of nature..."

- St. George Tucker, Blackstone's Commentaries

"The First Law of Nature is that every man ought to endeavour peace, as far as he has hope of obtaining it; and when he cannot obtain it, that he may seek and use all helps and advantages of war."

Do you even realize that the object you are working towards, is perverting the laws of nature and of natures God?
That you are, indeed, espousing the overthrow of the U.S. Constitution?

Men died to secure us these rights. They fought off a despotic and tyrannical government that was subverting our liberties, (England). And yet you, a supposed American, are working to effect the same type rule again. You sir, should be ashamed of yourself......

Cory is plainly in the right. Where does that leave you?

9:05 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home