Argument in favor of SF gun ban Prop. H  

redmustang91 57M  
8809 posts
11/14/2005 8:56 am

Last Read:
3/5/2006 9:27 pm

Argument in favor of SF gun ban Prop. H


This is the argument of the successful proponents of SF gun ban:

Argument by the Sponsor of Proposition H

How Many More?
Yes on H to Limit Handguns

How many more? On November 27, 1978 Dan White assassinated Mayor George Moscone and Supervisor Harvey Milk. On May 9, 2005 a disgruntled ex-employee walked into a South of Market nonprofit and killed a hardworking father of two with a handgun. Every day, neighbors live in fear that someone they love could be murdered. By December 2004, 56 of 87 San Francisco homicides that year involved handguns.

Easy access to handguns can transform heated exchanges or emotional moments into lifelong injury or death. The New England Journal of Medicine found that a handgun in the home makes it 43 times more likely that a friend, family member or acquaintance will be killed than an intruder. In addition, suicide mortality increases fivefold with a handgun.

Proposition H takes two meaningful steps to reduce handguns in San Francisco. It limits handgun possession to those who protect us, and ends firearms sales. Proposition H is substantially different from the measure signed by Mayor Dianne Feinstein in the 1980s that was defeated in court.

For years the National Rifle Association and its front groups have spent millions to spread misinformation and rig the political process. When the NRA can't buy politicians, then try legal challenges, scare tactics, and even blacklisting . Proposition H is San Francisco's chance to speak up.

No single strategy will solve San Francisco's epidemic of violence. We need new investments in education, community development and jobs as well as meaningful gun reform. Fewer handguns in the flow of commerce will make it more difficult to obtain one.

Become a member to create a blog