Comments about ‘Un-American Rifle Assoc.’

Return to article »

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

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Centerville, UT

Is a pressure cooker worth more than the lives of fellow Americans? Why would anybody be against a law that may have the possibilities of reducing the number of killings? Do we need pressure cookers capable of killing 20 runners in a marathon for our own cooking?

the old switcharoo
mesa, AZ

Guns are terrible home defense. Strong doors, alarms and security shutters are the right tools to keep your family safe. All these gun nut's fantasy is to take down a robber IN their home but to do that they first have to FAIL to keep their family safe. Pathetic.

And as far as defending against tyranny, they may as well be concerned for their ability to have a spear. They should be limiting the size and spending of the DOD. But that's what conservatives do. They're in denial and resistance to change.

Centerville, UT

Let's be honest, the downfall of the government or the weakened Constitution and gun control would violate the reasonable interpretation of the 2nd Amendment. Why did the English request any firearms from the U.S. during WWII? Why did the Nazi army go into the local governments to get the gun registration records first? Why does China support gun registration in the United States? And what program does the federal government administer without corruption and fraud? Which tyrannical government that has existed in the last 100 years didn't start with the concept of taking care of the people?

West Jordan, UT

"They register when you transfer a car, why not a gun?"

Well for one, you do not have the constitutional right to own or drive a car. It is considered a privilege and the state can regulate that privilege.

Salt Lake City, UT

There You Go Again,
Your logic will lead the manufacturers of pressure cookers to join the NRA.

Centerville, UT

"They register when you transfer a car," Yes and the only reason they register cars is for the collection of taxes.

Salt Lake City, UT


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

If the "tool" is irrelevant, why are the penalties for committing a crime with a firearm enhanced over committing exactly the same crime without one?

Why is it so hard for conservatives to wrap their heads around the concept that a person who commits a crime with a firearm is more culpable than one who commits a crime without one, hence the "tool" used is not irrelevant?

Tooele, UT

Re: "Let's be honest, there is no way prudent gun control ever has or would ever violate any reasonable interpretation of the 2nd Amendment . . . ."

Yeah, and while we're being honest -- let's admit that the US Supreme Court recently struck down laws that really DID violate the Second Amendment, laws that must have seemed "reasonable" to someone.

Let's also be honest enough to admit liberals DO want to disarm America. Adoption of one or another "reasonable" restriction won't solve the problem, and is not the real end to liberals.

Though the people have spoken, they have no plans to quit.

They justify their perfidy with various excuses -- "people don't need guns;" "it's not 1791;" or my favorite, "armed insurrection is illegal."

Actually, our Declaration of Independence sets out the conditions under which we, the people, may rebel. And there are millions of us that have sworn a perpetual oath to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States," NOT its government.

Real people really do associate Lexington and Concord with our guns, not Newtown and Aurora.

Tooele, UT

Re: ". . . a person who commits a crime with a firearm is more culpable than one who commits a crime without one . . . ."

Huh? Seems like desperate, anti-gun liberals are now reduced to "jumping the shark."

It's a little hard to ask them, but I'd bet big money that murder victims are WAY more concerned about being dead than about what tool was used to kill them.

If that's the best liberals have got, it's no wonder they lost the argument.

Mark B
Eureka, CA

I suppose proc knows that the measure actually passed by 54-46, but of course the GOP has changed the Constitution to to require 60 votes under filibuster rules. Their battle cray is "Do nothing!"

Mike Richards
South Jordan, Utah

Is it Constitutional to prequalify us for ownership of guns when the Constitution explicitly forbids government from infringing on that right? That right is one that the people made perfectly clear to Obama and all who believe him that Americans have the right to keep and bear arms and that government has no right to infringe.

If yesterday's melt-down by the President has shown us anything it is that we must distrust Washington when our liberties are at stake. When the President of the United States throws our liberties under the bus for political gain, he is someone to be pitied not someone to be admired. His total and complete disrespect for the Constitution has reached a new low. He, who swore and oath to protect and defend the Constitution has done exactly the opposite.

In America, we are innocent until PROVEN guilty of a crime. Owning a firearm is not a crime; it is a right that we, the people, have reserved to ourselves without any government oversight.

Anyone who trusts the government to provide security need look no further than Boston.


"People have told me that I'm courageous, but I have seen greater courage. Gabe Zimmerman, my friend and staff member in whose honor we dedicated a room in the United States Capitol this week, saw me shot in the head and saw the shooter turn his gunfire on others. Gabe ran toward me as I lay bleeding. Toward gunfire. And then the gunman shot him, and then Gabe died. His body lay on the pavement in front of the Safeway for hours.

I have thought a lot about why Gabe ran toward me when he could have run away. Service was part of his life, but it was also his job. The senators who voted against background checks for online and gun-show sales, and those who voted against checks to screen out would-be gun buyers with mental illness, failed to do their job.

They looked at these most benign and practical of solutions, offered by moderates from each party, and then they looked over their shoulder at the powerful, shadowy gun lobby -- and brought shame on themselves and our government itself by choosing to do nothing."
(Gabby Giffords)


Murray, UT


Centerville, UT

well how many people die by pressure cooker compared to guns?

Murray, UT

Banning pressure cookers would be much easier than banning guns. The Founding Fathers didn't foresee the need for them so they are not protected in the Constitution.

Salt Lake City, UT


If the Constitutional right to keep and bear arms is absolute, as you seem to argue, then you must support the right of felons, minors, and lunatics to keep and bear arms of all types (since the 2nd Amendment contains no exceptions), and you must also think that the current federal requirement for background checks when buying from a gun dealer is unconstitutional and should be abolished, right? And you must disagree with the Supreme Court, which has the responsibility to interpret the Constitution, as well as with common sense, both of which tell us that there are and must be some limits on 2nd Amendment rights, just as there are on all the other rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights.

Do you have any idea how extreme and irrational you sound?


Adolphus Busch IV, heir to the Busch family brewing fortune, resigned his lifetime membership in the National Rifle Association on Thursday, writing in a letter to NRA President David Keene, "I fail to see how the NRA can disregard the overwhelming will of its members who see background checks as reasonable."

Las Vegas, NV

Re: People that say gun laws won't stop gun violence.

So by that logic, should we also do away with all traffic laws? Because hey, even with traffic laws people are still running red lights, etc.

Murray, UT

The title on the letter accuses an organization of being un-American. But the screeners won't pass any post I have tried saying that those who are trying to circumvent the constitution are the ones who are un-American.

Maybe I don't have to name them. You know who they are.

Thank God for a Patriotic American organization that upholds the Constitution, called the NRA!


In the 1920s and ’30s, the NRA was at the forefront of legislative efforts to enact gun control. The organization’s president at the time was Karl T. Frederick, a Princeton- and Harvard-educated lawyer known as “the best shot in America”—a title he earned by winning three gold medals in pistol-shooting at the 1920 Summer Olympic Games. As a special consultant to the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Frederick helped draft the Uniform Firearms Act, a model of state-level gun-control legislation.

Frederick’s model law had three basic elements. The first required that no one carry a concealed handgun in public without a permit from the local police. A permit would be granted only to a “suitable” person with a “proper reason for carrying” a firearm. Second, the law required gun dealers to report to law enforcement every sale of a handgun, in essence creating a registry of small arms. Finally, the law imposed a two-day waiting period on handgun sales.

In the 1960s, the NRA once again supported the push for new federal gun laws.

Today, NRA=gun maufacturers.

Centerville, UT

But VIDAR the liberal argument is if it saves one life, we need controls. Tuesday, June 7, 2011, Miami woman hurt in pressure cooker accident dies. Just one death could have been prevented by common sense laws. Oh and for the last 40 years pressure cooker bombs have been used to kill thousands. It is about time liberals use reality checks.

to comment

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