VERLYN KLINKENBORG
The face of generic, uninformed liberal hysteria.
The term is "shall-issue." The reporter is an ignoramus.
If it was a requirement to have a gun with you at all times, then crime could be reduced (if applied only to stable noncriminals).
And the halls echo with the laughter of my black conservative heart. MAWAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAH
She really needs some mental help, I mean spending all that time worrying about who might be carrying a gun?
I have news for this "lady". Criminals carry guns no matter what the law says.
A person carrying a concealed weapon cannot be banned from a public building, even if it’s a library full of kids
Proof that a common criminals is quicker to grasp reality than this reporter.
(No more Olmert! No more Kadima! No more Oslo! )
Oh my god! People are exercising their rights! How offensive!
(/sarcasm)
But did she come out alive? She forgot to tell us. Sounds lke she was in pretty bad condition going in.
'requiring every citizen to carry a gun'
----
What an idiot to think that is a goal of anyone.
"I asked one of the state coalitions opposed to these laws whether it would attack them in the Legislature this year. The answer was no. It is too busy trying to defeat a “shoot first” bill, which would give gun owners the right to fire away instead of trying to avoid a confrontation. The way I see it, Minnesota is only one step away from requiring every citizen to carry a gun and use it when provoked."
This guy is working slower than a crackhead with a jonesing.
So that no one misses the point, the Legislature has also turned Minnesota into what is called a “shall require” state.
The author AND his editors are ignoramuses.
The way I see it, Minnesota is only one step away from requiring every citizen to carry a gun and use it when provoked.
This man's mental confusion, as evidenced by his following thought "The criminals know they’re not supposed to have them but find them easy to get" is the definition of cultural victimhood.
A person carrying a concealed weapon cannot be banned from a public building, even if it’s a library full of kids.
Accepting the fact that criminials can get their hands on guns, including nutjobs intent on Dunblane style massacres in libraries full of kids and bunnywabbits, he doesn't believe the parents of the kids should be able to shoot the nutjob befoer the kids are the victims and the parents mourners.
Yet it isn’t possible for a member of the public to find out who has received a permit and may, in fact, be packing heat.
This "man" accepts the fact that criminals will know where to find guns illegally, goes on to blame the NRA for criminals acquiring guns, then demands the necessary solution is an internet searchable database of every CCW gun in the state. Maybe he believes "members of the public" and "criminals" are mutually exclusive classifications?
But Minnesota? I grew up thinking of Minnesota as a socially progressive state. After all, it was home of the D.F.L. — the Democratic Farmer Labor Party — and a place where local control and common sense had strong roots.
1. this man equates socially progressive political parties as centralized bureaucracies that keep the citizenry defenseless, and calls this local control. His common sense, as he explicitly states, is a stripping of the individual the right to self defense in the name of the common good. "A nation is formed by the willingness of each of us to share in the responsibility for upholding the common good." Congresswoman Barbara Jordan
Every concealed weapon, with very few exceptions, is a blow against the public safety. The new gun laws in Minnesota take away local discretion over concealed-weapon permits, and they cost the local authorities plenty too.
Mr. Lott has proven this oft repeated notion false. John Lott doesn't have a column in the NYTimes, so he actually doesn't exist.
The last three paragraphs are some wild eyed speculation. It's a really sad piece, the "shall require" mistake sets the tone, the ignorant preaching to the dwindling number of adherents to the victimhood cult of the "socially progressive" state.
Conceal carry with "must issue." That sounds like PROGRESS to me. Progressive? Sure.
VERLYN KLINKENBORG
The face of generic, uninformed liberal hysteria.
I am smiling right now just thinking of how upset Garrison Keillor must be about this. Bwahahahaha!
Let me see, if I were a armed robber which business would I set my sights on? The one with a sign stating "Firearms banned on these premises" or the one without a sign? Hmmmm.
-b-
Oh jeeze. If only we all lived in states where the government needs no reason to withold your freedoms. What bliss that would be!
It didn't take the author of the article long to get to the "it's for the children" arguement.
Perhaps there should be a corollary to Godwin's Law stating that a premise becomes invalid when "it's for the children" is invoked.
Clearly the author believes the state of Minnesota should be a fiefdom of the American Liberal Establishment, like every place else on the national map, and governed according to the collectivist diktats of the self-styled "elite."
Just as clearly, he has never heard of the Second Amendment, and believs that constitutional freedoms should only be allowed us proles to the extent they suit the whims of our "educated betters" - the country's rightful commissars.