Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | All Access e-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Hunters Silenced in Gun Debate Editorial?

March 3, 2013

To the Readers’ Forum: You have to be joking! The debate has to do with our rights under the Constitution of The United States representing all American citizens....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(69)

50s4ever

Mar-09-13 10:32 AM

riderr it's always the same. Gay marriage or race baiting. They don't have much else...but the worn out party talking points of the day.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

50s4ever

Mar-08-13 1:04 PM

Paul what did the gay, internet, phone and religion have to do with gun control?

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

50s4ever

Mar-08-13 1:01 PM

Guns make safe anyone who is smaller, weaker, less brutal than their assailant. Read a NRA magazine for the number of self defense instances. You seldom see them on the news. You probably don't watch Fox.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

PhD1960

Mar-08-13 8:42 AM

"agreed. Last resort. Start with mass civil disobedience." That philosphy worked to end America's involvement in Viet Nam.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

pauljs

Mar-07-13 7:57 PM

People's rights stop when they infringe or endanger other's right. simple examples, speeding, littering. public intoxication, disturbing the peace etc. Now add a dangerous weapon and it's not just my rights but my life that is endangered so yes I say guns like cars are a privilege that can be taken away.

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

pauljs

Mar-07-13 7:48 PM

In most states gays can't marry whom they choose. My freedom of privacy has been lost not to the gov't but to big business that tracks everything I buy, All phone and internet usage to share with marketers.Try being publicly religious if you're a non-christian. 80% of gunshot victims are not criminals so who do guns make safer?

0 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

50s4ever

Mar-07-13 4:56 PM

Explain please paul.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

pauljs

Mar-07-13 10:52 AM

People seem to forget that individuals must be willing to give up some opinions and wants "freedoms" for the good of society as a whole.

0 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

50s4ever

Mar-06-13 6:41 PM

If I was into conspiracy theory, I would think HS is planning to arm their own national police force to do what they suspect soldiers would balk at.

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

50s4ever

Mar-06-13 6:38 PM

agreed. Last resort. Start with mass civil disobedience.

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

formerlyphil

Mar-06-13 12:14 AM

i'm gonna be inclined to agree with the framers of the preamble to the declaration of independence, & john locke as well, in terms of rebellion (against absolute despotism, tyranny. not what we have now) being not only a right, but a duty.

5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

formerlyphil

Mar-05-13 11:57 PM

...But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."

5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

formerlyphil

Mar-05-13 11:57 PM

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly 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..."

5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

formerlyphil

Mar-05-13 11:55 PM

dave i never advocated violent rebellion. myself & 20,000 friends would be no match for the u.s. military. 2 obvious statements.

allow me to expound on my original, although (obviously) borrowed thesis....

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

50s4ever

Mar-05-13 10:18 PM

pssssst.....va.....try five million.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

50s4ever

Mar-05-13 10:17 PM

I know of lots who won't participate.

Every nazi said they were just following orders. As much as I admire our military.....they never fare well against indigenous guerilla foces.

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Badnewsbear

Mar-05-13 9:36 PM

Dave, IF the s$@t ever did hit the fan, don't forget that a huge percentage of police agencies across the country have come out on our side in the gun debate, as it affects them also. You can bet that, as has happened in the past, you would see those in the military split as well. I am not predicting this, I am just saying that I think you underestimate the fury rising over the continued push to strip away our rights and where people's loyalties might fall if push ever did come to shove. And, before you call me paranoid, this is based on a comment recently made by my brother's friend who is currently active in the military.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

DavidVA

Mar-05-13 9:14 PM

@formerlyphil - If rebellion is something you want to try, don't let me stop you. Just be prepared for a long stay in the Hard Time Hilton, because you and any 5,000 of your closest friends are no match for the US military.

1 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

50s4ever

Mar-05-13 6:47 PM

evos I would like to see the states do what has never been done. Run through an amendment. Then I'd like to see some fed judges fired. Put the people back in the driver's seat.

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

50s4ever

Mar-05-13 5:41 PM

The system is so cumbersom it makes it impossible to change once it reaches a certain point of self perpetuating corruption. Something akin to revolution must occur to affect the desired change. The politicians won't fire each other.

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

formerlyphil

Mar-05-13 11:44 AM

dave in VA i disagree with your sentiment that there is no right to rebel. if the ruling party does not legislate to the demands of the general populace & refuses to then it is the right (more importantly, the duty) of the people to change said gov't. & if that cannot be done peaceably then, yes, as a last resort, you know the rest..

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

PhD1960

Mar-05-13 9:53 AM

Hey, it worked!

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

PhD1960

Mar-05-13 9:52 AM

(Let's see if I can sneak this in. It got bleeped.) f*a*r*t*s.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

PhD1960

Mar-05-13 9:51 AM

Duckster, what do Wednesday, Thursday and Friday (WTF) have to do with the topic at hand? Or were you referring to Wet Taco *****?

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Badnewsbear

Mar-05-13 12:57 AM

Nope, you're not allowed to mention the King or Queen, or even Prince "Dirty Harry" and Princess Nancy, Duchess of Botox. Especially, do NOT compare them with any historical figures, as that's a major no-no.

5 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 69 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web