Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Columbus City Council Is Ban-Happy
The Ohio State Sentinel ^ | July 23, 2005 | Antonio Ciaccia

Posted on 07/23/2005 9:41:29 AM PDT by Antonio Ciaccia

Columbus City Council to Iraqi Government: "Ban Suicide Bombers!": A satirical look at Columbus City Council's latest legislation

This week, in a shocking turn of events, Columbus City Council voted unanimously to ban suicide bombers within city limits. After most council members arrived over an hour late to the meeting, they announced that after Aug. 11th, that all suicide bombers would be outlawed.

All current suicide bombers will have 90 days from Monday night to register themselves with Columbus' Department of Public Safety or face a first-degree misdemeanor charge.

Columbus City Councilman, Michael Mentel, seemed optimistic that this piece of legislation will prevent suicide bombings in the great city of Columbus.

"The laws on the books were not enough,” said Mentel, “We had to do something; to sit and do nothing was not an option. I can’t believe nobody ever thought of just banning the bombers. All politicians should know that banning stuff is the first and best option for dealing with any problem."

When asked what he was going to do in light of the new ban, Kyle McCrazy -- a man with dreams of becoming a suicide bomber -- said, “Um, still blow myself up. I’m a criminal, I break laws anyways.”

The ban is reminiscent of the 1998 “mask ban” than effectively banned all scary masks because they could frighten children.

In 1998, Mentel proclaimed that, “In the interest of the common good, the right to wear masks is hereby prohibited. After all, no right is absolute! And while we’re at it, no more free speech either! Who needs free speech in order to speak freely anyway?”

Concerned citizen, Ralph McRandom, was disappointed in 1998 and he’s disappointed again.

“I had the scariest mask of all time- it had fangs and everything. I used that mask to scare away criminals and Jehovah’s witnesses. After I turned in my mask in ’98 like every other law-abiding citizen, my family was mask less and defenseless. Just like that ’98 ban, now only law abiding citizens won’t blow themselves up. The criminals have us out-bombed.”

Mentel is optimistic about his latest ban. Many are calling this ban the most provocative piece of legislation since the 1996 ban on horror films. Even though many citizens complained about being labeled criminals for simply watching horror films, the Council stands behind the legislation as “sending a strong message that Columbus would not tolerate frightened citizens in their streets.”

About the new suicide-bomber ban, Mental said, “The Iraqi government should take notice,” he went on to say, “They may have laws on the books against suicide bombing, but how many more laws have they passed since those ones? Have they banned masks? Have they banned boots? Have they banned beards? These are all tell-tale signs of a suicide bomber. Criminals may not respect our laws, but they will respect more laws… That, my friends is how you stop crime.”

Councilwoman Tavares added, “Today, I cast my vote for the 180,000 children of Columbus… as well as our great city’s 20,000 cute puppy dogs and furry little kittens… and for the great game of baseball… and Oprah.”

Council had capitalized on its past couch bans, smoking bans, and assault weapon bans in passing newer legislation like house bans, walking bans, and now, suicide bomber bans. Next week, Council seeks to act again, this time with its most anticipated ban of all -- the people ban. If passed, all citizens will be jailed to cut down crime. It is said that an alarming 100% of all crimes are committed by people, and Council seeks to do something about it.


TOPICS: Political Humor/Cartoons; US: Ohio
KEYWORDS: assaultweaponban; citycouncil; columbus

1 posted on 07/23/2005 9:41:30 AM PDT by Antonio Ciaccia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Antonio Ciaccia

Hey, this will be as effective as the bag checks in NYC subways. Kudos!!!!! I feel safer already.


2 posted on 07/23/2005 9:43:00 AM PDT by Stu Cohen (Press '1' for English)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Antonio Ciaccia

LOL


3 posted on 07/23/2005 9:44:29 AM PDT by bigsigh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Antonio Ciaccia

I think this law is over-reaching and racist. It should be restricted to white people under 10 and over 80, just like the airlines do.


4 posted on 07/23/2005 9:47:18 AM PDT by randog (What the....?!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Antonio Ciaccia

5 posted on 07/23/2005 9:54:40 AM PDT by alancarp (When does it cease to be "Freedom of the Press" and become outright SEDITION?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Antonio Ciaccia

I get it. Owners of ugly semi-automatic rifles are no better than suicide bombers to these tyrants in a tea pot.


6 posted on 07/23/2005 9:55:02 AM PDT by John Filson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #7 Removed by Moderator

To: Uhhuh35

Sorry, not interested.


8 posted on 07/23/2005 9:59:36 AM PDT by OSHA (I've got a hole in my head too, but that's beside the point.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Antonio Ciaccia

The only problem with trying to parody the left like this, is that one week after you write the piece the left actually does something radically more far out and loony than the hyperbole you used to charicature them in the first place. The far left is just beyond parody.


9 posted on 07/23/2005 10:14:36 AM PDT by joebuck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Uhhuh35
how about some laser-imprinted serial numbers on each terrorist?
better yet, a 25% tax on each one - that ought to keep them away!
10 posted on 07/23/2005 10:32:16 AM PDT by castlebrew (true gun control is hitting where you're aiming!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Uhhuh35
You know, make some rules about how they can be safer,,

Columbus is discriminating against the bombers !

Everyone knows you ban the bombs, then sue the explosives manufacturer and never profile a bomber.

The PC way of doing nothing to solve a problem. (/sarm)

11 posted on 07/23/2005 10:33:10 AM PDT by TYVets (God so loved the world he didn't send a committee)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Antonio Ciaccia

golly,guess I will have to unpack my backpack now.


12 posted on 07/23/2005 10:41:43 AM PDT by bikerman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Antonio Ciaccia
The ban is reminiscent of the 1998 “mask ban” than effectively banned all scary masks because they could frighten children.

As a side note,
Helen Thomas was quietly asked to never come to town.
Something about interpretation.

13 posted on 07/23/2005 10:57:07 AM PDT by Vinnie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Antonio Ciaccia

Isn't it already illegal to bomb people, or to carry explosives about on your person? Typical political mind set. I hope I am never as stupid as a politican.


14 posted on 07/23/2005 11:27:13 AM PDT by calex59 (If you have to take me apart to get me there, then I don't want to go!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson