Daily Digest: Crime and Punishment Edition

Becky Sarwate photo courtesy iwpa.org

Becky Sarwate thinks Wayne LaPierre is a criminal. She claims he and the NRA are “directly responsible for [the] ricin letters sent to gun control leaders” last week.  “Wayne LaPierre is an accessory to each and every one of these ricin crimes. He may not have supplied the chemicals, but he and his group continue to dish out motive in dangerous, irresponsible bucketfuls” She thinks they should “[h]aul him to the precinct, turn on the hot lights and file some charges. I’m serious. If it’s illegal to yell ‘Fire!’ in a public place and incite a riot, there should be no distinction between trumping up an imagined threat to the Second Amendment and standing smugly aside as violence ensues.” In that case, then, if someone is killed in a home invasion or raped because they can’t own the arms they need to protect themselves properly, can we haul the Becky and the other gun control lemmings in and treat them the same way? And now, on to some real criminals . . .

A Hotchkiss, Colorado, man could get up to 20 years after he pled guilty to assorted charges including possession of stolen firearms and possession of a “machine gun.” He stole SWAT gear including a fully automatic rifle, a handgun, ammunition and tactical gear from a sheriff’s deputy’s basement and then was stupid enough to ride around with some of it in his pickup. There was evidence he had fired the automatic rifle, a .223 caliber Colt M4 Commando.

In Pinal County, Arizona, a couple of suspects took off after being stopped for routine traffic violations. They abandoned their vehicle shortly after, in which LEOs found a “High-Point 9mm rifle” in the car with a round loaded in the chamber and a full magazine, along with a bag of cocaine. The two suspects are still at large, but if they want to claim their property, they’re holding it for them at the Pinal County Sheriff’s Department.

Also from Arizona comes a report that a Tucson man has been given one year probation for pointing a wooden rifle stock at a Pima County Sheriff’s deputy. The deputy fired two shots in return, but didn’t hit him.  The report didn’t say if the stock was one of those adjustable assault stocks, or if it had an actual shoulder thing that goes up.

Yes, as RF pointed out earlier today, you can bring a knife to a gunfight. But a pointy stick? Not so much. In Seattle, someone tried robbing a store using a “pointy metal stick.” Unfortunately for him the store’s owner was carrying a pistol. When police arrived the suspect was handcuffed on the floor and the store owner was standing with his foot on him. The suspect was hauled off to jail, the police made sure the owner’s CCW was up to date and the antis have to choke on yet another DGU that was completed without anyone firing a shot.

And in nearby Edmonds, Washington, a group of kids have been suspended for playing with Nerf guns after a teacher told them it was OK to bring them to school. They were studying probability and were going to shoot the guns 100 times to see what would happen, statistically speaking. After they decided to “try out” the guns before school, they were hauled into the principal’s office where they were treated like criminals and suspended. “…It’s a matter of safety and it’s of the utmost importance. So even if it’s a toy, we take it seriously,” said school district spokeswoman Amanda Ralston. The parents are appealing the decision.

And no discussion of criminal activities would be complete without taking a look at what’s going on in politics. In Connecticut legislators approved a package of revisions for their recently-enacted draconian gun control measures. The revisions further tighten the stranglehold they have on the Second Amendment but they managed to toss a few sops to gun owners: they’re excluding Olympic target pistols,  curios and relics from the assault weapon ban. And anyone who bought a modern sporting rifle before the ban went into effect but didn’t receive it until afterward can now legally possess their own property. The changes are going to Governor Dannel Malloy, who of course will rubber-stamp them all.

If you’ve been thinking that the Senate shifting their focus to immigration means they’ll lay off gun control, you’re sadly mistaken. Senator Richard Blumenthal from — you guessed it — Connecticut is “seriously considering” reopening the issue as part of the proposed immigration legislation. His plan is to try to tack on amendments which would limit immigrants’ access to firearms, calling them “common-sense, gun violence control measures that apply very logically and reasonably to the immigration bill.”

And bringing up the rear, as is his wont, there’s Rep. Charles Rangel of Noo Yawk. He’s pushing for “common-sense reforms in this legislation would allow the ATF to consolidate and centralize gun dealer records so that when a crime is committed or when gun trafficking is discovered, the ATF and other government agencies can quickly trace the gun’s purchase history and identify the criminals involved and the mistakes that may have been made in the approval of purchases. ” In other words, he wants to create a central database of gun ownership records, administered by the ATF. That’s the same agency that brought you the “Fast & Furious” debacle and which works for AG Eric Holder who wipes his feet on the Constitution daily. What could possibly go wrong?

comments

  1. avatar anon@anon.com says:

    She has one hell of a manjaw!

    1. avatar Pat says:

      That should be powdered with a Ball-Peen Hammer.
      Stupid, evil libtards.

      1. avatar csmallo says:

        You are suggesting doing violence to a woman, yet you call other people “stupid, evil”. Hypocrite much?

        1. avatar Chuck Pelto says:

          I guess you don’t support the concept of Equal Rights for women.

          This woman looks to support the idea that she’s equal to men. Therefore, she should be ready to accept the consequences of men getting ‘irritated’ with her.

      2. avatar Chuck Pelto says:

        TO: All
        RE: Heh

        That [manjaw] should be powdered with a Ball-Peen Hammer. Stupid, evil libtards.

        I’ll wager dollars against donuts that if someone assaulted her with a ball-peen hammer, she’d like to have a .45 cal ACP at hand.

        Regards,

        Chuck(le)
        [Only a fool would bring bare-hands to a hammer fight.]

  2. avatar Ropingdown says:

    “If it’s illegal to yell ‘Fire!’ in a public place and incite a riot, there should be no distinction between trumping up an imagined threat to the Second Amendment and standing smugly aside as violence ensues.”

    If there weren’t obvious and public attempts every week in our legislatures to neuter the 2nd Am., she could call sensible NRA campaigns “trumped up.” Instead LaPierre’s words are the equivalent of yelling “fire” in time to save the unawares people in the burning building.

    1. avatar Totenglocke says:

      True, but they are guilty of exaggerating things on a regular basis (not saying that they are at this particular point in time though).

      1. avatar Sammy says:

        Her chin looks like a golf tee, for some reason.

        1. avatar Lucas D. says:

          And that isn’t even why I want to smack it with a five-iron.

    2. avatar Chris says:

      A lifetime ago I took a journalism degree and worked for a wire service for a couple of years. For 25 years after undergrad I belonged to the ACLU.

      There is always an irony when anti-Second Amendment people invoke the quote about shouting ‘fire’ in a crowded movie theater. In the context of the Bill of Rights that example was not in a case about someone in a theater, nor was in a case about inciting imminent lawless violence — it was made in affirming a limit on political speech.

      That very un-American law (the Espionage/Sedition Act) lasted from 1919 to 1969, was designed and used to stifle speech against wars.

      The assertion abut yelling fire was made by the government in defense of a tyrannical law and self interested limit on dissident political speech.

      Every time we hear ‘fire in a crowed theater’ invoked , it should speak volumes to us about the legitimacy of slippery slope concerns, and actual tyrannical impulses by own government in its modern history.

      1. avatar Don says:

        Cool comment!

        1. avatar Ardent says:

          Thank you Chris! Ever the cynic however, I must point out that nothing of the factual or logical has ever given those in the civil disarmament crowd pause for thought. Still, an interesting fact and worthy of further citation and use.

      2. avatar PeterZ in West Tennessee says:

        Banning guns is not akin to prohibiting you from yelling fire in a theater. Banning guns is akin to me ducttaping your mouth on your way into the theater, on the assumption that because you can speak you will yell fire.

        [Paraphrased from Unintended Consequences]

  3. avatar CarlosT says:

    Imagined threats. I see. So I imagined it when Feinstein proposed legislation that would have been slow motion confiscation, by making it illegal to transfer certain guns to anyone but the government. I imagined it when state legislators here in Washington proposed warrantless searches with their AWB. I imagined Cuomo saying confiscation is not off the table.

    I guess I’m like Han Solo, I can imagine a lot.

    1. avatar WA_2A says:

      We already have a handgun registry in the Evergreen State, whether you know it or not. The police know how many handguns you own, along with the caliber, brand, and model name of every single one.

      Makes you wonder how close we are to confiscation. From a political perspective, it looks safe, but the cops here are corrupt and the liberals are many…

      1. avatar Jack says:

        The police may have a list of all the guns you’ve transferred through an FFL, but not the ones you’ve bought and sold privately.

    2. avatar CarlosT says:

      I am aware. When there was talk earlier this year in the state legislature about background checks, Gottlieb was willing to negotiate as long as what we got in return was a scrapping of the pistol registry. That was a no-go, so the negotiations died. Just as well, but it was refreshing to see a demand that the other side give up something real in a compromise, not just us.

      What has me worried is the initiative push. It’s going to get on the ballot, there’s no doubt about that. The thing is to make sure it dies the ignominious death it deserves.

      1. avatar WA_2A says:

        The main thing to do is keep the fight up and make our voices heard; don’t let Olympia ignore the issue. Keep pestering anyone in the Capital relevant to this debate, and make it clear this is an issue that will decide whether they are re-elected or not. A registry is unacceptable in what is otherwise a free state.

  4. avatar Lucubration says:

    “…It’s a matter of safety and it’s of the utmost importance.”

    It’s really not as important as they think it is.

  5. avatar WA_2A says:

    “common-sense reforms in this legislation would allow the ATF to consolidate and centralize gun dealer records so that when a crime is committed or when gun trafficking is discovered, the ATF and other government agencies can quickly trace the gun’s purchase history and identify the criminals involved and the mistakes that may have been made in the approval of purchases. ”

    AKA registration, which is illegal under FOPA, for a good reason.

    But, hey, obey the law? That’s for stupid second-class citizens and peasants, and Rep. Charles Rangel isn’t going to let that get in his way. Laws were MEANT to be broken by the government!

  6. avatar KevinMA says:

    Hm, consolidate and centralize gun dealer records into a database, coupled with a 4473 on every firearm transfer. A federal registry by any name still smells like poo… These people will really try anything to get around the laws they swore to uphold won’t they? Sadly they have constituents that will vote for them as well.

  7. avatar Frodo says:

    Dude looks like a lady.

    1. avatar Totenglocke says:

      Mrs. Doubtfire was more attractive, not to mention more intelligent.

  8. avatar great unknown says:

    So Blumenthal is saying that the gun rights of immigrants flooding the country under the Gang of Eight proposal should be limited. Why? Because common sense tells him that a large portion of this group should not be trusted with weapons. I.e., he assumes that they are going to be criminals or otherwise dangerous to others.

    a) Unfortunately, he’s probably correct.

    b) If he was a Republican, people would be screaming “RACIST.”

  9. avatar surlycmd says:

    What a horrible picture to see. My only hope is I’m too drunk to remember it while I sleep.
    Thanks, Frank.

  10. avatar VaqueroJustice says:

    If Wayne lapierre is responsible for the letters,
    wouldn’t gun ban advocates be responsible for
    the actions of Chris Dorner ?

    1. avatar Jon R. says:

      +1 I was about to post the same exact thing.

  11. avatar Bob Wall says:

    “She claims he and the NRA are “directly responsible for [the] ricin letters sent to gun control leaders” last week. “Wayne LaPierre is an accessory to each and every one of these ricin crimes.”

    Does anyone smell potential litigation for slander, or is it just me?

    1. avatar Rich Grise says:

      It’s in print – it’s libel.

  12. avatar Colt Magnum says:

    Regarding the Seattle store owner and the “pointy stick” bandit. In Washington State, a business owner doesn’t need a CPL in his fixed place of business. A employee would need a CPL, though. I wonder why the cops looked into his license. Trying to find a way to forward the Mayor’s anti-gun agenda? Also, if he was carrying openly, he doesn’t need a stinking license.

  13. avatar DisThunder says:

    I just smile every time I see some hopped up op-ed like this one. They trash the NRA. They make dick jokes. They even find time to be angry at Monsanto and Eric Holder, and somehow gymnastically can complain about the government and yet still praise the President.
    And yet, the NRA grows every day. My dick grows…oh. Well, it’s still enough to get the job done. And people who have never even heard of Alex Jones are wondering just what the hell these people are up to, and asking for advice on their first gun purchases.

    I don’t blame her a bit for fighting like a wildcat, throwing crazy punches and going extreme to try and prove a point. Her team is losing fast. Hell, if roles were reversed, I can’t say I wouldn’t be doing the same thing.

    If I were a hateful bitch, that is.

    1. avatar jwm says:

      Well, since you brought up dick jokes. Guy walks into the girls crib at the house of ill repute. They make a deal for services. He pays the cash and proceeds to get naked. When fully unclothed he faces the girl, who proceeds to laugh in his face. She tells him that’s the smallest dick she’s ever seen on a man and asks him who does he intend to please with that. Without hesitation he tells her, me.

      1. avatar Matt in FL says:

        Drunk guy lookin’ for some love aims for the house of ill repute, but accidentally walks into the podiatrist’s office next door. Nurse shows him to the exam room and tells him to hop up on the table, and someone will be right in to take care of him. He hops on up and proceeds to “make ready.” Another nurse walks in and exclaims, “That’s not a foot!”

        He replies, “It’s close enough!”

        1. avatar DisThunder says:

          What’s the biggest difference between a dick and a bonus check?
          You can always count on your wife to blow the bonus.

      2. avatar Bluehaman79 says:

        Old man with a cane walks into a bar with a alligator.Bartender yells “Hey pal you can’t”t bring that in here.” Old man says “he does a real neat trick, you need to see it.” Bartender says “ok let’s see this trick”. Old man drops his pants, opens the alligators mouth, puts his penis inside the gators mouth and starts beating it over the head with his cane. The people in the bar start shouting “stop that man he’s crazy.” After 2 minutes of hitting the gator the old man stops, pulls his penis out and it’s completely unscathed. Everybody in the bar is amazed. The old man looks around and says ” anybody else wanna try.” A little old lady hobbles up and says “sure, just don’t hit me with that cane.”

  14. avatar William says:

    What’s with the limp-d*cked personal attacks on Becky’s appearance, folks? No need to make her a sympathetic figure…

    For a bit I thought Becky was joking! But I now realize she’s a lot less bright than I thought – she doubtless thinks a “false flag” is a padded bra!

    1. avatar Chuck Pelto says:

      TO: William
      RE: Appearances Are Deceiving

      What’s with the limp-d*cked personal attacks on Becky’s appearance, folks? No need to make her a sympathetic figure… — William

      Not that that isn’t her mug—with the lantern jaw—hanging out there.

      This woman is the epitome of what was written in Proverbs

      A foolish woman is clamorous: she is simple, and knoweth nothing.

      But just because she is foolish doesn’t mean she isn’t clever.

      Because of this, these guys know that attacking a woman’s appearance is a very effective technique to make her ‘upset’. Women being so vain and all.

      They realize that logical argument is not going to change her mind. Indeed, she’ll just laugh them all off, so they go for the ‘jugular’.

      Regards,

      Chuck(le)
      [Few women are dumb enough to listen to reason. — Sophicles]

      P.S. Sophicles?!??!? This problem has been around for millennia….

  15. avatar JoshinGA says:

    “He stole SWAT gear including a fully automatic rifle, a handgun, ammunition and tactical gear from a sheriff’s deputy’s basement…” Does this Sheriffs deputy not lock up his (very valuable) toys?

  16. avatar LongPurple says:

    She said: “If it’s illegal to yell ‘Fire!’ in a public place and incite a riot . . .”

    Oliver Wendell Holmes said : “The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man FALSELY shouting fire in a theater and causing a panic.” (emphasis added)

    Is it “trumping up an imagined [?] threat to the Second Amendment” when the statements of various Senators, Representatives, Govenors, Mayors, and our President clearly indicate a desire to eliminate, or restrict far beyond the minor infraction of “infringe”, the Constitutional guarantee of the people’s right to the keeping and bearing of arms?

    1. avatar Chris says:

      The invocation of the Holmes quote is even worse. It was used not in a case about a stampede and falsely yelling fire — but quite specifically to limit political speech

      1. avatar LongPurple says:

        Amen.
        She uses an incongruous reference inaccurately.

  17. avatar PNG says:

    Becky, you dumb cow, you can’t charge La Pierre with any crimes; good luck proving intent, negligence, or recklessness… you dumb cow.

  18. avatar Ralph says:

    Becky Sarwate is proof that for every stupid position, there’s a stupid ho to advocate for it.

  19. avatar Coloradan says:

    PUAHAHA! I tried pushing back against the drones on that site and promptly banned and my comments erased. I didn’t even curse or call anyone names other than that one troll Shiva who bravely called for 5 million NRA’s members to be disarmed.

  20. avatar Matt in FL says:

    “There was evidence he had fired the automatic rifle, a .223 caliber Colt M4 Commando.”

    Well… yeah. How stupid would you feel if you ended up going to jail for this and never took the chance to rock & roll?

    1. avatar Chris says:

      +1,000 If I’m gonna do the time, I’m gonna have a story for my Grand child about it.

  21. avatar Matt in FL says:

    Oh, on the site in the first paragraph, I left this comment:

    I’m curious how many more comments than 48 there would be if the ones that disagree you weren’t being deleted and their submitters banned?

    My comment is “awaiting moderation.” I’m betting it’s going to die a quiet death.

    1. avatar Lucas D. says:

      But it lives on here, my friend. For as much as they talk about tolerance, people like Ms. Sarwate don’t react well to people who think differently from the way they do. I mean, look at this forum for contrast; rtempleton’s trolling here has selfishly deprived the Special Olympics of a stellar athlete many times over now, and we still put up with him.

    2. avatar Accur81 says:

      I posted a bunch of replies as well, and one of yours was still there. One of the users named Shiva is convinced that the NRA wants more children dead. I told him that if he could substantiate that the NRA was “pro child murder,” that I would rescind my membership.

      I enjoy posting on anti gun forums every now and then. It is entertaining to challenge ignorant fools with facts.

      1. avatar Matt in FL says:

        Yeah, I see yours are staying up, I’m getting emails. Maybe my doubt was misplaced.

        1. avatar Chuck Pelto says:

          I suspect that whether or not intelligent and erudite comments of the negative, i.e., rebuttal, form persist on that system depends on whether or not the commenter is making ‘progress’ in pointing out the fallacious arguments Becky presents.

          In other words, if the comments are effective, they could well ‘disappear’ and the commenter be ‘banned’.

          I’ve witnessed it often enough, myself….

        2. avatar Chuck Pelto says:

          TO: Matt in FL
          RE: Heh

          My suspicion has been confirmed.

          My comments—that don’t have foul or abusive language, but only ask for evidence supporting Becky’s claim—are no ‘disappearing’.

          Regards,

          Chuck(le)
          [The Truth will out….]

        3. avatar Matt in FL says:

          Are you being delusional again? When you posted your comment here about your comments there disappearing, you had seven comments there. As of this writing, you still have seven comments there. What’s disappearing?

  22. avatar CyborgCowboy says:

    I’m increasingly annoyed with the statists citing “common-sense” gun controls. You keep using that word…I do not think it means what you think it means, Ms. Sarwate.

    I’ve lived in California most of my life (with plans to vacate asap). We have those “common-sense” background checks, yet somehow it’s not a magical wonderland of safety and non-violence.

    1. avatar Theo says:

      Common sense – the least common of all senses.

      1. avatar Chris says:

        How absolutely racist and ethnocentric that SOB is! I hope the immigrants I’ve met from Laos who are now citizens become enraged by this!!!!

        “Give me your tired, your poor,
        Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
        The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
        Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
        NO GUNS FOR YOU!! ”

        I’m not gonna lie y’all, I added that last part about the guns there.

  23. avatar Mehul Kamdar says:

    Until TTAG brought this hag to the world’s attention, I’ll bet not more than 10 people knew of her miserable existence. Now, she and her blog have the benefit of publicity thanks to the pro gun media.

    1. avatar Lucas D. says:

      Publicity within the pro-gun media, which isn’t exactly a boon to her or her shitty little blog. There is such thing as bad publicity, you know…

  24. avatar In Memphis says:

    If Blumenthal is so worried about immigrants and safety maybe he could make it law that all the Mohegan Sun employees walking to work on the 32 (in dark clothing) at night weat DOT compliant traffic vests. I got so sick of almost hitting thoes sensless idiots. As a former Firefighter/EMT in Montville and EMT in Norwich Im really surprised that statistics involving motorvehicles and pedestrians arent through the roof.

  25. avatar Fred says:

    “If it’s illegal to yell ‘Fire!’ in a public place and incite a riot, there should be no distinction between trumping up an imagined threat to the Second Amendment and standing smugly aside as violence ensues.”

    Ummm, shouldn’t it be illegal to yell “terrorist” and demand someone be arrested and jailed (or other terrible things) just because you don’t agree with the other side? That’s a literal parallel, something Becky apparently can’t conjure up.

    If we turned the tables and held Becky and her kin responsible for the “social injustices” they directly or indirectly (as in her example) cause they’d all be jailed by now.

  26. avatar DaveL says:

    Take a look at the article on the proposed amendment to the immigration bill. The caption for the accompanying photo says:

    An attendee looks through the scope of a Freedom Group Inc. Remington brand gun…

    The actual photo shows a man sighting along an empty scope mount.

  27. avatar Carry.45 says:

    I think those kids have a better defense the that Gregory schmuck. These kids can say honestly that no one told them not to. Gregory got a no from locals and a yes from the ATF. Or vice versa. I don’t remember.

  28. avatar Crunkleross says:

    Ironic that some early gun control measures were aimed at minorities, history does repeat itself.

  29. avatar Chuck Pelto says:

    TO: All
    RE: Typical…..

    ….’liberal, i.e., psychopathic, logic. Evidence has nothing to do with it. It’s all in their warped mind.

    Regards,

    Chuck(le)
    [Liberals aren’t. Progressives won’t.]

    1. avatar Chuck Pelto says:

      P.S. If she thought she could get away with it, she’d kill members of the NRA herself. Typical psychopath……

      The only thing that restrains her is that the people she wants to kill are better equipped and trained than she is.

      1. avatar Red Sox says:

        So if any member of the NRA expires should she then be investigated?

        1. avatar Chuck Pelto says:

          It might make her ‘think again’…..

          After all, her comments could be perceived as being of the same ‘inflammatory’ nature she decries about the NRA.

  30. avatar DerryM says:

    Conflating Wayne LaPierre with the “ricin letters” is like conflating Barak Obama with “The most ‘transparent’ Presidential Administration in U.S. History”. However, it does demonstrate very clearly the mindset of the Socialist, Progressives, which is to manufacture egregious catchphrases and talking points to advance their agenda of “deciding everything for everyone all the time”. The truly incredible thing is that Becky Sarwate no doubt thinks what she’s saying has some sort of intellectual validity. You see, we are facing opponents, like Sarwate, who have self-administered intellectual pre-frontal lobotomies and are no longer capable of discerning truth from their manufactured “reality”. We’re wading waist deep in a cesspool of mindless propaganda.

  31. avatar GS650G says:

    Hey Becky, I’ve got an important job for you to do that will actually give importance to your existence,

    1. avatar Derrick says:

      Oh oh, is it feeding raw chicken to starved alligators by hand. That sounds like a good one for her.

      1. avatar Lucas D. says:

        Well, it’s like that, only she’d do it while wearing a raw chicken costume.

  32. avatar Mark says:

    Okay then – guess that makes Husein Obama DIRECTLY responsible for the deaths of Ambassador Stevens and the SEAL’s who died in Benghazi. Period. Can’t have it both ways Libertard. Guess we need to haul Husein in to the nearest precinct and turn the lights on him too.

  33. avatar Ardent says:

    A bit off topic but in the realm;
    Confiscation as a concept is overly broad.
    There can be limited confiscation, such as of a certain type of weapon, but this is more likely to be criminalized in order to push the weapons underground and or force a ‘voluntary’ forfeiture while allowing confiscation during traffic stops and etc.
    There can be targeted confiscation, in which individuals or concise groups are singled out for disarmament.
    What I don’t think is conceivable is the nightmare scenario of actual door to door forcible confiscation. The logistics involved, the certainty of resistance, and the rate at which word of it would spread are such that I just don’t think even the looniest of the left wing loons would consider it a viable option. That is, until there has been enough limited confiscation has occurred to largely reduce the most effective means of resistance, and enough targeted confiscation has occurred to disarm those most likely to resist.
    This too however might be overly difficult in practice; how many of us are so armed as to be able to instantly rearm several others who have been the target of confiscation? How common is this amongst gun owners?
    I don’t fear confiscation. I fear the slow, creeping erosion of ranges, ammo availability, liberties and rights. I fear the demonization of gun owners and guns themselves.
    Confiscation isn’t in my opinion a fear for this decade, but given time the MSM and the slippery slope of legislation may make us prone to confiscation.
    This is why every molehill is worth fighting on, and why one must rail against any encroachment.

  34. avatar JLR says:

    The “yelling fire in a theater” meme is a particular pet peeve of mine.

    The quote comes from a Supreme Court decision was which later over-ruled as unconstitutional. And besides, the use of the phrase in the decision was meant as an analogy, it was never intended to be binding law.

    http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/11/its-time-to-stop-using-the-fire-in-a-crowded-theater-quote/264449/

    1. avatar Rich Grise says:

      It’s actually the gun-grabbers who are using the tactic of yelling fire in a crowded theater, and the Constitution gets trampled in the ensuing stampede.

      “For the children!”

  35. avatar Chuck Pelto says:

    TO: All
    RE: JSYK

    My comments challenging Becky to provide evidence to support her claim that the NRA is responsible for the latest wave of ricin poison-pen letters are NOW being ‘disappeared’.

    Typical ‘Progressive’ activity.

    Regards,

    Chuck(le)
    [Progressive is a one-word oxymoron.]

  36. avatar cbpelto says:

    TO: All
    RE: Becky? Helloooooo…Beeeeckyyyyy

    Is Shannon Rogers Guess Richardson a member of the NRA?

    Regards,

    Chuck(le)
    [The Truth will out…..]

    P.S. I’ll bet that Becky and Shannon are both as crazy as a bag full of cats. Rabid ones at that…..

  37. avatar Niki says:

    I can appreciate that people will have different views. I can even appreciate that some people will strenuously disagree with Ms. Sawarte. It is even pretty much expected that people with a lot of anger and little logic and reason with which to argue their opinions will resort to ad hominem attacks on a person’s intelligence or physical appearance because they cannot come up with more logical arguments and reasoning.

    What makes many of you commenters above really make yourselves look bad is that you are arguing on a post about why you should have unfettered access to unlimited amounts of weapons by making comments about how you would like to physically harm another person because they have a different opinion than you do.

    That definitely will convince people that you are right. I’ve got nothing but insults on someone’s chin and how I want to physically attack them in my effort to argue for unrestricted access to something with which to harm people.

    And the person who made the erroneous and untrue legal and historical analysis of the “fire in a crowded theater” example actually used the analysis of the wrongness of shutting down dissenting political speech in an effort to shut down the political speech of some with whom they disagree. You can make up irony like this.

    As for the intelligence of the IWPA and national award winning journalist whose face you are all so obsessed over, her opinion does not legally amount to libel, I suggest you look up the laws on it right after you all do a better study of the Constitution and the Second Amendment to understand those better and realize that you are not part of a well-regulated militia and that there are quite a few laws on the books restricting rights to own weapons for various reasons that have been in effect for DECADES and that having you and anyone else go through a background check only restricts the gun owning rights of those citizens who are legally restricted because of their criminal backgrounds.

    And you should look askance at The NRA and Wayne LaPierre every time he claims that he is representing gun owners. Because the organization is far more heavily funded by gun manufacturers and serves to effect policy that helps sell more guns. They use gun owners as pawns to get support for their political aims in favor of gun manufacturers much like the Smoker’s Alliance was a front group for the tobacco industry. If the NRA was more about law abiding citizens than gun manufacturers, what logical reason could they possibly have for opposing legislation banning people on the freaking terrorist watch list from buying weapons? What they work for is to scare citizens into buying as many weapons as possible and to keep as many people as possible (dangerous, criminal, terrorist aims, mental illness or not) able to plunk down more money for more weapons.

    I might not agree that LaPierre is responsible for the ricin letters exactly, but he most definitely *IS* responsible for keeping as many people who are not law-abiding as the people he claims to represent able to buy whatever dangerous weapon they can as long as they provide a steady stream of customers for the NRA funders (the gun manufacturers).

    I find it fascinating that it never occurs to the protect their home and family people that allowing convicted criminals to buy weapons without background checks so that they can circumvent laws that restrict them from owning them without anyone being wiser don’t realize that LaPierre and the NRA keeping them able to buy those weapons are a big part of the reason their homes and family would be in danger.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email