interesting.............................

[rattler]

Run-in changes lawmaker's stance
Tuesday, May 15, 2007
Phillip Morris
Plain Dealer Columnist

It's funny how a gun can instantly change your perspective on things, make you wish you could rewrite history.

State Rep. Michael DeBose, a southside Cleveland Democrat, discovered this lesson the night of May 1, when he thought he was going to die. That's the night he wished he had that gun vote back.

DeBose, who had just returned from Columbus, where he had spent the day in committee hearings, decided to take a short walk up Holly Hill, the street where he has lived with his wife for the past 27 years.

It was late, but DeBose, 51, was restless. The ordained Baptist minister knew his Lee-Harvard neighborhood was changing, but he wasn't scared. The idle, young men who sometimes hang out on his and adjacent streets didn't threaten him.

He is a big man and, besides, he had run the same streets before he found Jesus - and a wife. That night, he just needed a walk.

The loud muffler on a car that slowly passed as he was finishing the walk caught his attention, though. When the car stopped directly in front of his house - three houses from where he stood - he knew there was going to be a problem.

"There was a tall one and a short one," DeBose said, sipping on a McDonald's milkshake and recounting the experience Friday.

"The tall one reached in his pocket and pulled out a silver gun. And they both started running towards me."

"At first I just backed up, but then I turned around and started running and screaming."

"When I started running, the short boy stopped chasing and went back to the car. But the tall boy with the gun kept following me. I ran to the corner house and started banging on Mrs. Jones' door."

It was at that point that the would-be robbers realized that their prey wasn't worth the trouble. Besides, Cheryl, DeBose's wife, and a daughter had heard his screams and had raced out to investigate. Other porch lights began to flicker on.

The loud muffler sped off, and DeBose started rethinking his gun vote.

DeBose twice voted against a measure to allow Ohioans to carry concealed weapons. It became law in 2004.

DeBose voted his conscience. He feared that CCW permits would lead to a massive influx of new guns in the streets and a jump in gun violence. He feared that Cleveland would become the O.K. Corral, patrolled by legions of freshly minted permit holders.

"I was wrong," he said Friday.

"I'm going to get a permit and so is my wife.

"I've changed my mind. You need a way to protect yourself and your family.

"I don't want to hurt anyone. But I never again want to be in the position where I'm approached by someone with a gun and I don't have one."

DeBose said he knows that a gun doesn't solve Cleveland's violence problem; it's merely a street equalizer.

"There are too many people who are just evil and mean-spirited. They will hurt you for no reason. If more people were packing guns, it might serve as a deterrent.

"But there obviously are far deeper problems that we need to address," he added, as he suddenly seemed to realize he sounded like a gun enthusiast.

They say the definition of a conservative is a liberal who has been mugged. DeBose's CCW application will bear some witness to that notion.

To reach Phillip Morris:

pfmorris@plaind.com, 216-999-5086

Previous columns online:

cleveland.com/columns


© 2007 The Plain Dealer
© 2007 cleveland.com All Rights Reserved.

 

[Lauderdale]

Funny how an experience like that will change a person's mind about gun control.
I think that experience parallels, "I never met an atheist in a foxhole."

 

[droseraguy]

I'm surprised he didn't want to get all guns banned. You would think a guy that voted against concealed carry twice wouldn't want them around at all. Now if we could get the Illinois folks to allow concealed carry that would be sweet. Too many votes against in the State of Chicago including Herr Dailey.

 

[PlantAKiss]

Guns....AGAIN?? Man, y'all love those things.

 

[adnedarn]

I think what he realized that night... is passing those laws only keeps guns away from law abiding citizens. Which are the same people that won't carry the gun to cause trouble. A "no gun" law (or other restriction of all most any form) only helps the "bad guy" by making sure the good people he's victimizing don't have protection.

 

[Clint]

Crank and heroin are illegal, that does not stop them from getting to anyone who wants it. Same with guns.

Murder is illegal. Doesn't stop it from happening.

Gambling is illegal in some places, people still do it

Prostitution is illegal, people do it ...err... them... err it happens.

Stealing someones liver, leaving them in a cheap Vegas hotel after they've bought crank, killed someone, played slots and found a hooker, priceless.

Sorry guys, I just woke up ^_^ <-----cute anime smiley makes things better
I think my point was that LOTS of things are illegal and that doesn't stop people from doing it. It doesn't mean SQUAT and gang bangers, coke barons, and crazy people with a mental problem don't care about the law. They aren't going to say "Ohhhh that's illegal, I better not do that! I could go to jail!". No. They shoot you. When someone is about to shoot you, I say you should shoot them back. I support MAXIMUM freedom, and owning a gun is a freedom. I say control guns, sure. Want a concealed weapon? Get a concealed-weapons permit. Want a gun? Agree to a background check. Wait three days. It's just three days. Let's keep them in the hands of the responsible people because the gangsters and crack dealers and crazy hillbillies will still have guns no matter WHAT the law says.

 

[technoracer]

hmmm... weird. having just purchased my first firearm, i'm a little confused. i live in ohio. we have ccw classes and ccw permits. when did ohio not allow ccw? or is it just cleveland that has banned ccw? any ideas?

peace,
tech...

 

[vft guy in SJ]

And if he had had that gun that night.. We would probably be commenting on his obituary rather than his flip flop.

 

[rattler]

techno..................guessing just Cleveland if you have permits on the state level.....

 

[rattler]

And if he had had that gun that night.. We would probably be commenting on his obituary rather than his flip flop.

prolly not cause if he had any sense at all he would attend classes and learn how to use it........most gang banger types cant hit much past 6 foot hence the reason so many innocents get hit by stray bullets................

 

[vft guy in SJ]

prolly not cause if he had any sense at all he would attend classes and learn how to use it........most gang banger types cant hit much past 6 foot hence the reason so many innocents get hit by stray bullets................

The kid had the gun IN HIS HAND from the moment he got out of the car.. by the time the other guy could have reached around, grabbed his gun, aimed and fired.. he would have been dead.

 

[rattler]

not likely if the intent to kill was there he would have shot him in the back............besides they never expect a person to be armed, if they did they wouldnt do this crap........if you know how and are prepared it takes minimal effort to draw a gun.......however if you dont practice its clumsy as heck and they will know what your doing. ive said since the begining if your going to carry know what your doing

 

[vft guy in SJ]

I have no desire to argue this with you.. Nothing I will say will change your opinion on guns and thats fine with me. I have nothing against guns. My moms husband is a former police officer and owns many guns and I completely support his and your right to do so honestly and safely. But don't feed me this propaganda drivel about how carrying a conceled weapon would have done anything to truely protect this guy, because it is simply not true.

 

[quogue]

How do you know? Are you God? You say it like it's fact.
Chances are, if he pulled out a pistol, homeboy's woulda thought twice and left quickly.
And these folks usually don't know how to shoot, waving the guns around while they're yankin the trigger. Safest place is probly where they're pointing the thing (cause they ain't aiming)
Trust me, a disciplined shooter can take out a carload of steet thugs.
It's not just about being a big shot with a gun, it's about safety, discipline, skill and most important, responsibilty. He probly wouldn't even have to have fired a shot.
Not looking for an ugly arguement, just sharing my thoughts.

 

[Ozzy]

hmmm... weird. having just purchased my first firearm, i'm a little confused. i live in ohio. we have ccw classes and ccw permits. when did ohio not allow ccw? or is it just cleveland that has banned ccw? any ideas?

peace,
tech...

I can probably answer this question. Ohio legalized ccw about 3 or 4 years ago. The problem Ohio has is that it's one of the few states that does not have a statewide gun law. It lets all the cities and towns make up their own laws. So unless you know all the laws of every town that you'll be in, you never know if you're breaking the law. It's really an easy way to get a felony charge. What's legal in the town you live in may be a felony in the next town over.

 

[Clint]

How do you know? Are you God? You say it like it's fact.
Chances are, if he pulled out a pistol, homeboy's woulda thought twice and left quickly.
And these folks usually don't know how to shoot, waving the guns around while they're yankin the trigger. Safest place is probly where they're pointing the thing (cause they ain't aiming)
Trust me, a disciplined shooter can take out a carload of steet thugs.
It's not just about being a big shot with a gun, it's about safety, discipline, skill and most important, responsibilty. He probly wouldn't even have to have fired a shot.
Not looking for an ugly arguement, just sharing my thoughts.

Most of them hold it sideways too because they think it looks cool lmao!

 

[Lauderdale]

This statement is not quite correct.

The kid had the gun IN HIS HAND from the moment he got out of the car.. by the time the other guy could have reached around, grabbed his gun, aimed and fired.. he would have been dead.

State Rep. Michael DeBose states in the story:

The loud muffler on a car that slowly passed as he was finishing the walk caught his attention, though. When the car stopped directly in front of his house - three houses from where he stood - he knew there was going to be a problem.

Clearly Mr DeBose was aware he could be in trouble. If he had been carrying and properly trained, he would have had the safety strap off his weapon and his hand on the grip the moment he suspected trouble. The split second they came out of the car his weapon should have been drawn, safety off and pointing at the men. The moment one of them flashed his weapon, DeBose should have fired.
As quogue put it,

Trust me, a disciplined shooter can take out a carload of steet thugs.

I posted a story last this week about a jeweler who had two customers walk in his store, pull a gun and shoot at him. He managed to pull his own gun and hit one between the eyes and severely wound the other. One has since died and the other is still in the hospital. He is now well enough to be formally charged with capital murder by Fort Lauderdale Police. That is a case of carrying a firearm not only protected the business owner but taking two vicious thugs off the street.

 

[rattler]

see its not just my loony mind that thinks he would have faired just as well armed.........

 

[vft guy in SJ]

I notice one thing that never seems to get mentioned in any of these discussions.. Do ANY of you realize the world of S*** you will be in if you ever fire your weapon at a person?

True story... My parents own a 26 acre ranch in southern Oregon. One day my moms husband, who is a retired police officer and is extremely well trained and able to posess and use a firearm, found an unknown man trespassing on his property. He, with the same mindset as you all about needing his gun for protection, grabbed his gun and started off to approch the unknown tresspasser. After several attempts to get the guys attention failed, he fired 2 shots into the ground.. NOWHERE near the tresspasser. 9 months later.. he is STILL facing criminal attempted murder charges for firing his weapon. He didn't hit anyone.. didn't even come close.. and was on his own personal property.. but the law is not interested in justice.. they want your money. The best part is.. even if hes found innocent at his jury trial which begins in July.. he will STILL be liable in civil court over this and he may lose his home, all of his property and everything else along with it.

Sure.. a gun may save your life someday.. but consider the costs VERY carefully people.

Steve

 

[herenorthere]

Too many people go OCD about property. How could he think it was a good idea to shoot into the ground to get someone's attention? 26 acres isn't a ranch; it's little more than 1,000 feet on a side if square and no one should be surprised if someone walks through it sometimes.