Quantcast

Comments about ‘Un-American Rifle Assoc.’

Return to article »

Published: Thursday, April 18 2013 12:00 a.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
george of the jungle
goshen, UT

There's good law abiding people that have guns, who take car of what they have. There's some bad one's out there to. You don't need a gun to kill. The most dangerous weapon in the world is the human mind.

Mountanman
Hayden, ID

The author is assuming that gun control laws prevent bad people from getting guns which they never have and never will. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you Chicago, Illinois, the murder capital of the world with the strictest gun laws in the nation! Anyone with a brain can see more gun control laws are useless and only serve to punish law abiding citizens! Cops can not protect you from bad guys!

SEY
Sandy, UT

Let's compromise on this name change: you call it the Un-American Rifle Association, and I'll call Obama's health care plan for what it is: the Un-Affordable Health Care Act. Deal?

William Gronberg
Payson, UT

My U. S. Army drill instructors, in the year 1964, had a little gem that sums up the following quote taken out of context from an above DN post.

"...Chicago, Illinois, the murder capital of the world..."

"Some of you people must live in a vacuum."

There are small countries with murder rates substantially higher than Chicago.

Bloodhound
Provo, UT

Guns are merely tools. By themselves, they can do nothing. It takes a human mind and heart to put them to use, for good or ill. Gun control laws are not going to stop evil people from violently attacking those they wish to hurt. Americans have a constitutional right to defend themselves. The NRA merely helps protect that right.

JoeCapitalist2
Orem, UT

The reason we have these mass killings is because we have crowds of unprotected people. So let's pass a law that says everyone must wear full body armor every time they go out in public...or...lets pass a law that says no more than 2 people can be within 100 yards of each other. That will solve it...right?

I'm sure the writer would be for such measures, because as he put it..."Why would anybody be against a law that may have the possibilities of reducing the number of killings?"

Such silly notions make about as much sense as this gun bill does.

Lane Myer
Salt Lake City, UT

"Bombs are merely tools. By themselves, they can do nothing. It takes a human mind and heart to put them to use, for good or ill. Bomb control laws are not going to stop evil people from violently attacking those they wish to hurt. Americans have a constitutional right to defend themselves. The NRA merely helps protect that right."

--------------

If you do not see anything wrong with this post, I pity you.

Why ARE bombs illegal?

Truthseeker
SLO, CA

Did you call your legislators to let them know how you want them to vote on gun control measures?

Apparently your legislators believe voting against expanded background checks is politically the right thing to do.

Moderate
Salt Lake City, UT

Keep in mind that the NRA represents the gun manufacturers. Their goal is money money money. This scare over "they might take my gun away" has generated a nice spike in the sale of guns and ammo. As gruesome and repugnant as it sounds, the massacre of children at Newtown was great for business.

procuradorfiscal
Tooele, UT

Re: "Why would anybody be against a law that may have the possibilities of reducing the number of killings? "

Primarily because it does NOT "have the possibilities of reducing the number of killings."

The current crop of Anti-American liberal gun control proposals don't address the issue of reducing the number of killings. They don't even address the issue of gun control. They only address controlling people, and even then, they're directed at controlling the wrong people.

Liberals are well aware of the ONLY tactic that actually has a chance of reduceing the number of killings -- directing their efforts against criminals, rather than the law-abiding.

Well-known Republican liberal, Rudy Giuliani, even implemented that tactic, and it worked. He reduced the number of killings in NYC by 65%, simply by getting serious about enforcing those laws already in effect.

But today's anti-American liberal politicians clearly want a festering political crisis they can run against, WAY more than they wan't an actual solution.

procuradorfiscal
Tooele, UT

Re: "Why ARE bombs illegal?"

They aren't. Unless you intend to use them to kill or injure people. See 18 USC 921.

Why is it so hard for liberals to wrap their heads around the concept that the cause of crime is criminals, not their tools?

Counter Intelligence
Salt Lake City, UT

The 5 year old that gets run over when mom backs up the SUV cannot defend himself either
So what’s your point

I am NOT a gun person. But I am an anti-politically correct silliness person: So in the spirit of renaming efforts, I give you: Planned Anti-parenthood, Nutty Organization of Women, Unoccupied (brain) Wall Street, National Association of Professional Victims, Human Rights Crushers, PMSNBC

Harry-T
Davis, UT

From the t-shirt that is worn by Mr. Larsen in the movie Happy Gilmore, “Guns don’t kill people, I kill people”

My heart and prayers go out to all those who were victims of the Boston bombings, the shooting in Newtown, and the other violent tragedies that have transpired. It is clear that there are some very sick people among us, and unfortunately it is unclear when, where, and how the next catastrophe will occur.

Whether it is by gun, pressure cooker, or airplane, it is apparent that anyone who is determined to inflict pain and carnage, they will by any means necessary. Keep the guns in the hands of those who respect them, and who are trained to use them.

Why would I ever give my gun to the government in return of their protection? It is quite obvious that the protection they are currently offering can’t catch everything. It is because of that I have guns to protect myself, my family, and my property from the previously mentioned people, and if needed tyrannical governments, and foreign attacks/invasions.

Hutterite
American Fork, UT

We won't see progress on this front until the elected ones are as fearful of the electorate as they are of the NRA.

Mountanman
Hayden, ID

Here is the ironic paradox of "gun control"; Obama and the "important" people in government all have armed guards to protect them and their children but you and I must not be allowed to protect ourselves! Welcome to the new America!

Ajax
Mapleton, UT

Let's be honest, there is no way prudent gun control ever has or would ever violate any reasonable interpretation of the 2nd Amendment, let alone weaken the Constitution and hasten the downfall of the government. And regardless of what federal policies under consideration are adopted, there is no legitimate reason to suspect that we won't be at least as protected and as free as ever. So why the conniption?

Obviously hidden under a welter of competing facts are deeper issues influencing the debate.

All of us (regardless of how objective we fancy ourselves to be) mostly believe what we want to believe and find what we look for. Researchers have even suggested a genetic component to a person's conservative and liberal leanings.

Key to our understanding is recognizing that the way we see our world is very much a projection of our inner selves. Acceptance of ourselves precedes acceptance of others, and to an important degree it is our inner insecurity that drives our outward aggression.

You could say like Pogo of old that, "We have met the enemy and he is us.

VIDAR
Murray, UT

The mentality here seems to be; laws will not stop people from getting guns illegally, so we should not have gun laws.
Could we not apply this logic to any crime? Do murder laws stop murder? Do other laws stop crime?
I do not think it is unreasonable to require a background check before selling a gun at a shop, gun show, or between two people.
They register when you transfer a car, why not a gun?

RedShirt
USS Enterprise, UT

I am still trying to figure out what is unamerican about defending constitutional rights. The NRA is defending our rights, and I can't figure out why that is wrong.

DougS
Oakley, UT

I think there should be a background check on our Commander in Chief who orders thousands of armed citizens into conflict. None such has been performed...

There You Go Again
Saint George, UT

The nra tells us we will all be safer if everyone owns lots and lots of weapons.

There is really no need for background checks.

The 2nd Amendment was written to enable all of us to be safer since everyone is allowed, by the Constitution, to own lots and lots of weapons.

The nra represents weapons owners and would-be weapons owners.

As advocates for weapons owners and would-be weapons owners, the nra will soon be lobbying all weapons manufacturers to make more weapons so that we can all be safer.

Stockholders holding weapons industry stocks salute the nra and the weapons industry!

What could be more American?

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments