• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Shameful support of ‘pro-gun’ laws in state legislature.

Repeater

Repeater

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
2,498
Location
Richmond, Virginia, USA
imported post

Ric in Richmond wrote:
Joe support by Industry Sector

$26,250 Organized Labor
$16,450 Health Care
$16,275 Law
$10,374 Business - Retail, Services
$9,770 Energy, Natural Resources
$6,250 Real Estate/Construction
$4,500 Transportation
$3,250 Finance, Insurance
$3,150 Undetermined
$3,000 Public Employees
$2,650 Technology, Communication
$2,250 Agriculture
$1,600 Political
$1,175 Miscellaneous
$500 Manufacturing
$-2,250 Candidate Self-Financing
Click to expand...
You noticed! So where are the grassroots donations? Individual donations?

Hmmmmm.
 
T Dubya

T Dubya

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Feb 11, 2008
Messages
914
Location
Richmond, Va, ,
imported post

An interesting LTE I found today.

[align=left]Re: Your news story, “Mayor: No need for guns,” Dec. 17-19 edition:[/align]
[align=left]Mayor Dwight C. Jones said having armed persons attend a meeting was “unsettling.” I am sure people exercising their rights often have unsettled some people. Maybe Mayor Jones would explain which rights we should give up to avoid unsettling others, and how many unsettled people it takes to negate a right.[/align]
[align=left]Mayor Jones might have noticed that the gun owners did not appear out of thin air or disappear into it. That would imply that they traveled to and from the meeting through the city that he is quoted as describing as “afflicted by gun violence.” Did the mayor consider that those citizens may have been legally carrying guns to avoid becoming victims of that violence?[/align]
[align=left]As for Mr. Lazarus’ journalistic approach, in one other article on this topic, Mr. Lazarus described how City Council members found citizens wearing guns “dismaying,” creating “anxiety” in the council chambers. The reporter further stated that the weapons caused “worry,” though he did not attribute that description to anyone.He never got around to quizzing the people who expressed those feelings as to why lawabiding citizens participating in legal activity made them feel that way. [/align]
[align=left]Maybe it was because those citizens were, according to Mr. Lazarus, “glowering” and “brazenly showing weapons.” These are rather subjective terms for a journalist, but maybe Mr. Lazarus is especially perceptive, or maybe he was just being brazen in inserting his own opinions into his “news” piece.[/align]
[align=left]H. MAXWELL PADON[/align]
Great Falls
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top