Shooting Reported in Neston Heights
Easton police say two men shot, hospitalized Sunday afternoon.
Photos
Two men were shot Sunday afternoon in Easton's Neston Heights neighborhood, police said.
According to WFMZ, the men were shot at the intersection of Ann and East Bird streets. After the shooting, they knocked on a nearby door and got a woman to drive them to Easton Hospital. From there they were flown to Lehigh Valley Hospital, where they were listed in serious condition.
According to Lt. Matthew Gerould, the shooting appears to have stemmed from a fight.
Neston Heights is the city's newest housing development. City officials have said they're determined not to let the development go the way of its predecessor, Delaware Terrace. Residents must also undergo a criminal background check, and face eviction if police file more than three written reports about calls to their homes.
It was unclear whether the shooting was related to an earlier report on the Breaking News Network of a multiple shooting.
Ronnie DelBacco
10:40 am on Monday, March 26, 2012
"Cleaner and Safer"?
The mayor was shown on the news proudly to announcing 2 years ago that even law abiding citizens are forbidden from keeping a gun in their homes (in Neston Heights).
New residents there can't even protect themselves in this "cleaner and safer" community now. This restriction infringes on the second amendment rights of law abiding citizens in Neston Heights and our democratic leadership downtown is more than happy to admit it.
Which of them will stand up for the constitution they swore to uphold and stop rubber stamping everything that comes across the mayors desk? If Mr. Panto's argument is going to be that 'he didn't make those rules', then perhaps he should lead the charge to uphold these citizens' constitutional rights so they can protect themselves and their families.
Katja Kruppe
11:06 am on Monday, March 26, 2012
How does it infringe on your rights if you chose to live there? If you feel that strongly about it, don't move to (and buy a house in) that neighborhood. There is a Boys and Girls Club right between these houses, safety should be a big concern. No other country in the world acts like guns are the only answer to protecting yourself and your rights and your family.
And in fact, guns used for crimes of any kind are generally not registered legal guns of law abiding citizen.
Ronnie DelBacco
8:15 am on Tuesday, March 27, 2012
Thank you for making my point. Illegal guns and illegal use are the problem. So restricting law abiding citizens from keeping them for home and personal defense lets the bad guys know that their victims will be unarmed. Just plain stupid, and what happened in Australia is a perfect example. Gun violence and gun crime went up 44% after Australia disarmed it's citizens.
As for "no other country"...do you homework better.
Switzerland, I believe, issues each citizen a home defense rifle and teaches them how to use it.
You are correct about people having the choice to move in there or not once they find out the restrictions, but that does not make it right that their 2nd amendment rights are being infringed. Either way, this is, and always will be a controversial issue which the bad guys are counting on.
Gun laws are only obeyed by law abiding citizens, not criminals. That means that guns restrictions will always benefit the bad guys and disarm the innocent.
Pamela Porter
10:12 am on Tuesday, March 27, 2012
In October 2007, the Swiss Federal Council decided that the distribution of ammunition to soldiers shall stop and that all previously issued ammo shall be returned. By March 2011, more than 99% of the ammo has been received. Only special rapid deployment units and the military police still have ammunition stored at home today.[5]
When their period of service has ended, militiamen have the choice of keeping their personal weapon and other selected items of their equipment. In this case of retention, the rifle is sent to the weapons factory where the fully automatic function is removed; the rifle is then returned to the discharged owner. The rifle is then a semi-automatic or self-loading rifle.
The Swiss government doesn't issue guns to every citizen.
Pamela
Pamela Porter
10:12 am on Tuesday, March 27, 2012
Ronnie:
Not quite. Here's what Wikipedia (I know...I know) says:
The Swiss army has long been a militia trained and structured to rapidly respond against foreign aggression. Swiss males grow up expecting to undergo basic military training, usually at age 20 in the Rekrutenschule (German for "recruit school"), the initial boot camp, after which Swiss men remain part of the "militia" in reserve capacity until age 30 (age 34 for officers). Each such individual is required to keep his army-issued personal weapon (the 5.56x45mm Sig 550 rifle for enlisted personnel and/or the 9mm SIG-Sauer P220 semi-automatic pistol for officers, medical and postal personnel) at home. Up until October 2007, a specified personal retention quantity of government-issued personal ammunition (50 rounds 5.56 mm / 48 rounds 9mm) was issued as well, which was sealed and inspected regularly to ensure that no unauthorized use had taken place.[4] The ammunition was intended for use while traveling to the army barracks in case of invasion.
Katja Kruppe
9:36 am on Tuesday, March 27, 2012
"do your homework". That makes me laugh. I have lived in Europe for most of my life, longer than I have lived here, that's for sure. In fact; my brother in law makes his living selling guns for over 20 years now. The mindset of the people is different. There is no "constitutional amendment" they hide behind and act like their rights are taken away when they can't get a gun because of certain laws and restrictions.
A constitution does not make for morals, neither do religion or laws.
Ronnie DelBacco
1:42 pm on Tuesday, March 27, 2012
Thank you Ms. Porter for the information. I wasn't sure of the details but I knew there was something more to it, and that there IS a country arming it's citizens. (I did say "I believe")
Katja, I guess you told me, huh.lol
I'm not trying to pick a fight with you...I didn't search it fully either before I posted, but I knew there was something there about the Swiss that was more gun friendly.
Was your brother in law selling guns there or here?.
Not sure what your second comment meant, "...There is no "constitutional amendment" they hide behind and act like their rights are taken away..."
They who?
I simply believe that NO law abiding citizen should be forced to disarm or restricted from owning a gun because of a residential ordinance. It is our constitutional right to "keep and bear arms". That's all I'm saying.
Katja Kruppe
1:51 pm on Tuesday, March 27, 2012
They weren't forced to "disarm". They chose to move and buy a home in a neighborhood with restrictions. It's not like the city came in and removed all guns and gun permits from these families.
And I find it ironic that you first state to do your homework when in fact you are just throwing out vague facts you may or may not have heard about in the past.
My brother in law is in Germany and still runs a gun shop. He sells country wide.
When it comes to gun friendly, the US is very gun friendly and I have yet to come across a nation that is as serious about their right to bear arms.
I am not trying to pick a fight here either, but your "outrage" about the restrictions to that neighborhood just seems misplaced.
Ronnie DelBacco
2:13 pm on Tuesday, March 27, 2012
Outrage?? Just deep concern.
Disarmed?? Not Neston Heights, Australia.
Didn't do my homework?? Guilty. I even said so myself. I said, ".I didn't search it fully either before I posted....".
Misplaced?? Perhaps. After all, I am a republican in a very, very democratic town.:)
Have a nice day.