Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Once again, The Salt Lake Tribune offers editorial trash.

  1. #1
    State Researcher Kevin Jensen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Santaquin, Utah, USA
    Posts
    2,313

    Post imported post

    http://www.sltrib.com/ci_10930181

    Assault weapons

    Tribune Editorial

    Article Launched:11/07/2008 07:47:00 PM MST

    Utah gun shops have been doing a brisk business in assault weapons. The reason appears to be that customers worry that president-elect Barack Obama will support a new version of the federal assault weapons ban, which was in force between 1994 and 2004.

    Here's hoping the worried gun buyers are right.

    Not that we are against all guns or the 2nd Amendment. Sporting firearms? Fine. Handguns for self-defense? No problem. We just think that the private arms race should be stopped short of military-style, semi-automatic firearms with large-capacity magazines that are specifically designed to kill a lot of people quickly.

    That's the kind of weapon that Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris used to shoot up Columbine High School. The kind of weapon that some trigger-happy paranoid in South Carolina used the other day to pump 29 rounds through his closed front door and walls, killing a 12-year-old trick-or-treater on the shooter's front porch. The shooter says he thought he was being robbed.

    Some people would point out, rightly, that the victim would be just as dead if he had been killed by a single shotgun blast. It's the action of the shooter, not the action of the gun, that's the problem.

    That's right, as far as it goes. But by that thinking there would be no reason to withhold grenade launchers and artillery pieces from civilians. Society should draw the line on how much firepower it is willing to put into one person's hands. Police officers and the mililtary should be exceptions.

    Critics of the previous ban claim it was ineffectual because it outlawed certain features of guns whose action was identical to that of legal hunting rifles. They were right about that, too. It banned 19 specific guns plus certain combinations of military-style features, such as folding stocks and detachable magazines. But the ban wasn't more effective because the National Rifle Association worked hard to make sure it wasn't, and it was easy for manufacturers to evade it.

    A new law should focus on accomplishing the intent of the original, banning military-style, semi-automatic weapons with large-capacity magazines that fire many rounds in quick succession.

    This isn't about disarming licensed hunters or law-abiding citizens. It's about taking off the market products with a terrible capacity for mayhem.

    vanderson@sltrib.com

    "An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life." Robert A. Heinlein

  2. #2
    State Researcher Kevin Jensen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Santaquin, Utah, USA
    Posts
    2,313

    Post imported post

    After reading this article, hit the comments section and let them know how you feel about their Anti-American stance.

    Vern Anderson is the editor of The Salt Lake Tribunes editorial page, so let him know how you feel as well. vanderson@sltrib.com
    "An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life." Robert A. Heinlein

  3. #3
    Guest

    Post imported post


  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
    Posts
    800

    Post imported post

    Of course he didn't mention that the whack-job in SC that offed the 12-year-old was a convict and in possesion of the gun illegally -- an AWB would obviously work in that case...

    Dumbass...

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Saratoga Springs, Utah, USA
    Posts
    1,221

    Post imported post

    SGT Jensen wrote:
    http://www.sltrib.com/ci_10930181

    ....We just think that the private arms race should be stopped short of military-style, semi-automatic firearms with large-capacity magazines that are specifically designed to kill a lot of people quickly....
    How does owning an Assault Rifle equate to you "wanting to kill a lot of people quickly"???? Never mind that we are already limited to semi-autos (unless you get your tax stamp), at least one could argue the "killing a lot and Quickly" point; would be a key feature of an Automatic, this just shows what a bad spin ANY gun gets, regardless of the facts or design.
    This columnist wasn't a friend of yours, ThoughPolice, per chance??? j/k

    A new law should focus on accomplishing the intent of the original, banning military-style, semi-automatic weapons with large-capacity magazines that fire many rounds in quick succession.
    Right. they was to get rid of Semi-Auto-Everything! The ONLY way to eliminate the possibility to "firing many rounds in succession" is to go to bolt action, or freakin' muzzle loaders. So aggravating...

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    The south land
    Posts
    1,230

    Post imported post

    Every time I read about "assault weapons" I just want to throw up. I get so sick of hearing the term "assault weapon"--any weapon can be classified an "assault weapon" from the 1911 you carry on your hip to the ball bat that sits along with your mitt and ball ready for a game of baseball. You would think reporters could have more to do than try and fearmonger.

    Fear mongers are part of what has this society on edge right now. As a society we are generally afraid of our own shadow--and it is the fear mongering newspapers and government which is responsible for it--but that is I think by design..

  7. #7
    Guest

    Post imported post


  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Saratoga Springs, Utah, USA
    Posts
    1,221

    Post imported post

    thoughtpolice wrote:
    ProtectedBy9mm wrote:
    This columnist wasn't a friend of yours, ThoughPolice, per chance??? j/k
    ....... Nope, I heard he was the friend of a guy who buried all his @#$% in his backyard because the military was conducting training exercises close to his house...wait a minute.... paranoid much??:P:P
    Pssshhhh......
    ..like I'd be stupid enough to do THAT..bury it in my own backyard. Even IF there is any fact to that story; the burial location would most certainly have been at a pre-determined 'bug-out' location, preferably 4wheel access only.... Pshhh...

  9. #9
    Regular Member LovesHisXD45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , Utah, USA
    Posts
    580

    Post imported post

    ScottyT wrote:
    Of course he didn't mention that the whack-job in SC that offed the 12-year-old was a convict and in possesion of the gun illegally -- an AWB would obviously work in that case...

    Dumbass...
    Hell yeah! You tell em Scotty! I also wrote that editor an e-mail letting him know what an ignoramus he really is.

    Kevin
    If it isn't broke, then don't fix it, or you'll fix it until it's broke.

  10. #10
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795

    Post imported post

    They claim they are not against "all guns" and even make concessions about hand guns for self defense in this editorial.

    But ask them for a list of places they think you should not be allowed to carry and see how it gets. Then ask for a list of places where you should be allowed to carry and see how short it is.

    Ask them what other guns should be banned and watch that list grow as they include cheap guns, small guns, larger powerful guns, high powered guns suitable for sniping, and so on and so forth.

    Or even ask them to give a working definition of these so-called "assault rifles." Semi-automatic and large capacity magazines describe a LOT of firearms. What they really mean is "scary looking guns." Which to them is most all guns owned by private citizens.
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Provo, Utah, USA
    Posts
    110

    Post imported post

    utbagpiper wrote:
    They claim they are not against "all guns" and even make concessions about hand guns for self defense in this editorial.

    But ask them for a list of places they think you should not be allowed to carry and see how it gets. Then ask for a list of places where you should be allowed to carry and see how short it is.

    Ask them what other guns should be banned and watch that list grow as they include cheap guns, small guns, larger powerful guns, high powered guns suitable for sniping, and so on and so forth.

    Or even ask them to give a working definition of these so-called "assault rifles." Semi-automatic and large capacity magazines describe a LOT of firearms. What they really mean is "scary looking guns." Which to them is most all guns owned by private citizens.
    it starts with those scary guns, then what shall they oppose? wrist rockets?

    my stunning good looks?

    But there also is an excess of silly people out there that in my view should be put in rubber rooms that do have guns.

    I dont know for sure what the RIGHT answers are. I dont think taking guns fromlevel headedpeople is the answer.

    I dont think the answer is going to be found soon.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •