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

Skip to comments.

SL Tribune editorial: LEOs need ability to kill large #s of people
Salt Lake Tribune ^ | January 24, 2013 | Salt Lake Tribune editorial

Posted on 01/25/2013 2:05:02 PM PST by kiryandil

Sheriffs vs feds
Grandstanding is useless exercise

First Published Jan 24 2013 01:01 am • Last Updated Jan 24 2013 01:01 am

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/opinion/55677972-82/law-constitution-federal-gun.html.csp


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Editorial; Front Page News; News/Current Events; US: Utah; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: banglist; donutwatch; fascism; guncontrol; leo; liberalmedia; secondamendment; slc; tyranny
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061 next last
To: kiryandil
1. "Why Are You Opposed To Ending Violence?" Those governments that have banned guns have then executed many of their citizens.

2. Those demanding gun bans are demanding victims be disarmed so bad guys don't have to work so hard to kill them.

3. Those demanding gun bans do so claiming there is so much violence warranting it somehow, yet, anyone wanting a gun to defend themselves from such violence is just being "paranoid".

4. Liberals have the mind of a 7 year old: They yell, "Daddy, Daddy! Fix it!", and believe gun bans will solve violence, not understanding guns are not the only tools of violence and gun don't kill people, people kill people.

5. Liberals believe anyone with a gun is a violent murderer waiting to happen, so I guess just because a liberal woman is equipped to be a prostitute means she is one.

6. To liberals, police officers, who qualify with their duty weapons once or twice a year, have some special Jedi-like mastery over handguns that private citizens can never hope to obtain.

7. To liberals, police operate with backup which is why they need larger capacity pistol magazines than do "civilians", who must face criminals alone and, therefore, need less ammunition

8. To liberals, citizens don't need to carry a gun for personal protection, but police chiefs, who are desk-bound administrators that work in a building filled with cops, need a gun.

9. To liberals, "assault weapons" have no purpose other than to kill large numbers of people, which is why the police need them to kill large numbers of people…for some reason.

10. To liberals, private citizens don't need a gun for self-protection because the police are there to protect them even though the Supreme Court says the police are not responsible for their protection.

11. To liberals, private citizens don't need a gun for self-protection because the police are the professional gun slingers…even if they take longer to arrive than the bad guy needs to kill their victims.

12. To liberals, trigger locks do not interfere with the ability to use a gun for defensive purposes, which is why you don’t see police officers with one on their duty weapon.

13. Banning guns works, which is why New York, DC, and Chicago cops need guns and those cities have the highest murder and violence rates. Again, We the People are only being paranoid if we want a gun to defend ourselves from that violence.

14. Washington DC’s low murder rate of 69 per 100,000 is due to strict gun control, and Indianapolis’ high murder rate of 9 per 100,000 is due to the lack of gun control. Wait, huh?

15. To a liberal, the more helpless you are the safer you are from criminals.

16. Liberals claim other devices like oven spray or bear spray will better deter a criminal because an intruder can be incapacitated by tear gas or oven spray but if shot with a .357 Magnum will get angry and kill you.

17. To a liberal, a woman raped and strangled is morally superior to a woman with a smoking gun and a dead rapist at her feet.

18. The New England Journal of Medicine is filled with expert advice about guns; just like Guns and Ammo has some excellent treatises on heart surgery.

19. To a liberal, these phrases,

"right of the people peaceably to assemble,"
"right of the people to be secure in their homes,"
"enumeration's herein of certain rights shall not be construed to disparage others retained by the people,"
"The powers not delegated herein are reserved to the states respectively, and to the people,"

all refer to individuals, but "the right of the people to keep and bear arms" refers only to the State.

20. To a liberal, guns are so complex that special training is necessary to use them properly but so simple to use that they make murder easy.

21. To a liberal, ordinary people in the presence of a gun turn into slaughtering butchers but revert to normal when the weapon is removed, so we should ban guns.

22. To a liberal, guns cause violence, which is why there are so many mass killings at gun shows and police stations.

23. To a liberal, a majority of the population supports gun control so we should do it, just like a majority of the population once supported owning slaves.

24. To a liberal, most people can't be trusted with a gun so we should have laws banning guns, which most people will abide by because they can be trusted.

25. To a liberal, the 2nd Amendment was written during a time when muskets were the norm, but they do not agree that the 1st amendment should only pertain to yelling in the town square and printing using quill pens and manual printing presses.

26. To a liberal, we should ban "Saturday Night Specials" and other inexpensive guns because it's not fair that poor people have access to guns too.

27. To a liberal, having a gun in case if violence is stupid and paranoid, yet, a person is more likely to encounter violence against them than a fire but fire extinguishers are everywhere.

Liberals know so much don’t they. They are just so right about everything, so let’s show a few of their perfectly stupid statements of the past.

"It is already too late to avoid mass starvation." Dennis Hayes, chief organizer--Earth Day 1, 1970

"At least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years." Paul Ehrlich, Earth Day 1, 1970

"By the year 2000, thirty years from now, the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America, and Australia, will be in famine." Prof. Peter Gunter, North Texas State University, 1970

"In a decade, urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution... by 1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half..." `Life' Magazine, January 1970

"Air pollution... is certainly going to take hundreds of thousands of lives in the next few years alone." Paul Ehrlich, Earth Day 1, 1970

"By the year 2000... there won't be any more crude oil." Ecologist Kenneth Watt

"In 25 years, somewhere between 75 and 80 percent of all the species of living animals will be extinct." Dr. S. Dillon Ripley, secretary, Smithsonian Institute, Earth Day 1, 1970

"The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years... the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age." Kenneth Watt

"In the 1970s and 1980s, hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash program embarked upon now." Paul Ehrlich, "The Population Bomb" (1968)

21 posted on 01/25/2013 2:54:37 PM PST by CodeToad (Liberals are bloodsucking ticks. We need to light the matchstick to burn them off.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kiryandil

the Supremacy Clause, it says the “Constitution, and the Laws of the United States … shall be the supreme Law of the Land.” It means that the federal government, in exercising any of the powers in the Constitution, takes precedence over any conflicting state law or exercise of power.”

These morons don’t understand their own scribblings. Legislating the 2nd amendment out of existence via the Congress or executive order is not “exercising any of the powers of the Constitution.”

It’s treason by making war against the American people. Period.

Perfect stupidity is a hallmark of the neo-Nazi propagandists hiding behind the 1st amendment.


22 posted on 01/25/2013 2:55:27 PM PST by sergeantdave (The FBI has declared war on the Marine Corps)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kiryandil
Large capacity magazines are only designed for one thing;
defending yourself from multiple attackers.
23 posted on 01/25/2013 2:55:38 PM PST by TigersEye (The irresponsible should not be leading the responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
OK, they're designed for two things;
defending yourself from a well-armed attacker.
24 posted on 01/25/2013 2:58:44 PM PST by TigersEye (The irresponsible should not be leading the responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

OK, they're designed for three things;
giving yourself an advantage over any attacker.
25 posted on 01/25/2013 3:01:22 PM PST by TigersEye (The irresponsible should not be leading the responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye

Or one attacker who’s so hopped up on bath salts that the first ten shots aren’t enough of a hint to him that he’s dead.


26 posted on 01/25/2013 3:02:51 PM PST by Slings and Arrows (You can't have IngSoc without an Emmanuel Goldstein.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Slings and Arrows

OK, four things.


27 posted on 01/25/2013 3:03:46 PM PST by TigersEye (The irresponsible should not be leading the responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: CodeToad

“Ruth made a grave mistake when he gave up pitching. Working once a week he might have lasted a long time and become a great star.” - Tris Speaker (1919)


28 posted on 01/25/2013 3:08:57 PM PST by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: kiryandil

29 posted on 01/25/2013 3:10:03 PM PST by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sergeantdave
Stupidity is right. Your post made me go to the link and actually read the thing. You clipped out the best part.


Finally, the Fourteenth Amendment — just as much a part of the Constitution as the Second Amendment — was added to clarify the relationship between federal law and state law. Known as the Supremacy Clause, it says the "Constitution, and the Laws of the United States … shall be the supreme Law of the Land."

The Supremacy Clause is in Article VI, not the 14th amendment!

They must have the 14th on the brain, because that's what they're trying to use to let Obama override Congress on the debt limit.

-PJ

30 posted on 01/25/2013 3:13:37 PM PST by Political Junkie Too (If you are the Posterity of We the People, then you are a Natural Born Citizen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: CodeToad

I’m “borrowing” your post to send to my e-mail list and I’m sure they will also borrow it.


31 posted on 01/25/2013 3:15:11 PM PST by duffee (NO poll tax, NO tax on firearms, ammunition or gun safes. NO gun free zones)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Sirius Lee

“The 1938 parallels are all too accurate and the bloodlust of the statists is reaching the boiling point. “

Problem is most of Obamas cabinet and people that are supporting this are Jewish communists. Makes you wonder if these were the people Hitler wanted dead and my family was collateral damage.


32 posted on 01/25/2013 3:16:48 PM PST by EQAndyBuzz (I own a weapon to protect my family from those wanting to take that weapon away.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: kiryandil

Forgotten in all the rhetoric is the USSC decision in Miller that ties the 2nd amendment to “military” style weapons, saying that intent of the 2nd was to protect possesion of military style weapons by the people (militia).


33 posted on 01/25/2013 3:17:05 PM PST by Forty-Niner (The barely bare berry bear formerly known as Ursus Arctos Horribilis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: onyx

34 posted on 01/25/2013 3:25:16 PM PST by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: 17th Miss Regt

35 posted on 01/25/2013 3:27:11 PM PST by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: GraceG

I disagree. I could complain about cops for hours without tiring the subject, but do beloved in the justice of their existence. The point of having a police force is that they can do certain things denied to regular people. Their powers aren’t restricted to mere defense, and shouldn’t be. Whereas I can shoot someone breaking into my home, for instance (so long as there is a reasonable threat of death or severe bodily harm; at least here in MN you can’t kill to protect property), I cannot chase them down the street. Cops can. They have the power of pursuit, because they may not only defend themselves but arrest and detain wrongdoers.

Likewise, as I said, we empower them to execute warrants, resolve hostage situations, and keep the peace, which contain an element of but easily go beyond self-defense. The latter is often abused, but I feel rather indispensable if you are going to have a police force.


36 posted on 01/25/2013 3:39:53 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: kiryandil

Civilians have the resources to KILL a lot of LEOS also.


37 posted on 01/25/2013 3:42:33 PM PST by Renegade
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Forty-Niner

That decision has been superceded. If the “military style” portion is still in effect, well, take a look at any war fought in part by irregular forces, which is pretty much every war, and you’ll soon find basically any weapon has its use. Think of Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto or Iraqi insurgents. And you can’t say it only applies to regular forces like the various branches of the U.S. armed forces. Because what is a militia, after all? Not the U.S. military, whatever it is.

Besides, Miller was bogus. I don’t even think the government was opposed at the bar. Their reasoning was beside the point, also, because the weapon in question, short-barelled shotguns, were in use by the U.S. military, even though SCOTUS ruled in favor of the state.


38 posted on 01/25/2013 3:49:31 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: GraceG

beloved = believe


39 posted on 01/25/2013 3:50:37 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Political Junkie Too

The 14th, by the way, does have the privileges and immunities clause, which clears up any confusion as to whether restrictions in the Bill of Rights apply to the states. Some say the due process clause does the same, but it doesn’t. At least not in the way they think, though judicial review may be part of the “process.”


40 posted on 01/25/2013 3:55:27 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061 next last

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