Comments about ‘Letters: Background checks’

Return to article »

Published: Thursday, April 25 2013 12:00 a.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
the old switcharoo
mesa, AZ

Wow. Utah is weird. Conservative psychology is just full of YOU must but I don't have to's.

The Real Maverick
Orem, UT

Couldn't agree more. Amen and Amen.

Teachers just need an NRA like entity to buy off our politicians with millions of dollars in "campaign contributions."

one old man
Ogden, UT

An excellent letter. Too often, stupidity wins.

Real Maverick hit the nail on the head above.

Henderson
Orem, UT

Why not mandatory background checks on our politicians? Because they know that most of them wouldn't pass?

Mike in Sandy
Sandy, UT

Welcome to Utah. We have Republican senators railroading good legislation, arcane liquor laws, the worst air in the nation, the most clogged and underfunded schools, abysmal voter turnout, guns in church but no permits required.....Yeah....

Curmudgeon
Salt Lake City, UT

Real Maverick and OneOldMan:

I'm with you on the disproportionate influence of the NRA, except that teachers do have a lobbying organization - the NEA - whose contributions and lobbying payments are far greater than the NRA's. I think the NRA's outsized influence is more than just a money issue; it also involves idealogy and the rabid activism of right-wing extremists. Too bad the teachers don't have a group that is quite as passionate or effective.

DougS
Oakley, UT

It should be obvious that the more impact a person has on others, the more a background check should be required. Our Commander in Chief has never had one but he commands armys. In fact, he has spent millions to cover up his past. Why?

Badgerbadger
Murray, UT

I wonder how many teachers are prevented from committing criminal acts by background checks?

JoeBlow
Far East USA, SC

"Our Commander in Chief has never had one but he commands armys. In fact, he has spent millions to cover up his past. Why?"

Do you have any idea how baseless those statements are? You sincerely think that Obama has not been vetted fully and completely? Seriously. Use a little logic and think about your statements.

Certainly you should be able to see how embarrassing they are.

atl134
Salt Lake City, UT

@Henderson
"Why not mandatory background checks on our politicians? "

After nominating the likes of Angle, O'Donnell, Mourdock, and Akin I'm surprised the Republican party doesn't do that.

airnaut
Everett, 00

We use checks all the time for preventing --

DUIs,
ID for alcohol,
TSA for Airline safety,

But not for stopping children, KNOWN criminals, and the KNOWN mentally unstable from purchasing or possessing weapons used to massacre those very Teachers and Children....

It seems conservatives are all about checking for Word of Wisdom and immoral sexual crimes but when it comes to protecting inncocent citizens - crickets.

The double standard is truely sad.

ugottabkidn
Sandy, UT

Sorry to disappoint Ms Curmudgeon but Unions have little to say in this state and nationally because our nation has decided the average Joe or Jill need no right to collective bargin. Trillions stashed overseas and the people that helped earn it, teaching our children, saving our lives, protect us from crime, and actually are the ones adding wealth for only 7% of the population are left looking over their shoulders wondering if they are next ones on the chopping block.

Redshirt1701
Deep Space 9, Ut

The liberals here fail to see the use of these checks. Think of it this way.

Would you support the US government from reverifying the information for security clearance applications? Currently they have to periodically re-investigate and verify the security applications for all clearance holders.

Are you liberals saying that your children are less valuable to you than national security secrets?

That is the message that you are sending when you say that teachers do not need to have background checks every few years.

Your complaints about gun background checks is unfounded. The Gun Control Act of 1968 already makes Strawman purchases illegal, the sale or transfer of guns to mentally ill people ilegal, and the sale of guns to fellons and criminals illegal. How about we worry about enforcement of current gun laws, rather than adding new and unenforcable laws to the books.

JoeBlow
Far East USA, SC

"Your complaints about gun background checks is unfounded. The Gun Control Act of 1968 already makes Strawman purchases illegal, the sale or transfer of guns to mentally ill people ilegal, and the sale of guns to fellons and criminals illegal."

And many on the right, including many posters here, call these laws unconstitutional and would quickly do away with all the laws you cite, if given a chance.

Open Minded Mormon
Everett, 00

SALT LAKE CITY — Utah’s dubious distinction as one of the leading states for suicide could be linked to its high rate of gun ownership and political conservatism, according to a newly released study.

Utah was the second-most-armed state behind Kentucky in 2012.

Suicide in the 2nd leading cause of death for Utahans age 15-44 and THE leading cause for males in that age group.

Suicides accounted for about 85% of gun-related deaths in Utah between 2007 and 2011, according to statistics from the Utah Department of Health.

Utah is in the top 5 in the nation in firearm-related suicides.

“Many studies show that, of all suicide methods, firearms have the highest case fatality, implying that an individual that selects to use this technique has a very low chance of survival,” states the study.
Firearms are by far the most common way that suicide is committed, and having firearms present in a home is a demonstrated risk factor for suicide. Restricting access to firearms for persons at risk of suicide is one potential way to prevent suicide.

Both of our U.S. Senators just snubbed their NRA noses at this.

Redshirt1701
Deep Space 9, Ut

To "JoeBlow" go and read the Gun Control Act of 1968 and tell me what is unconstitutional about that law. Does it do anything different than the current background checks that are already in place and conservatives agree are constitutional?

Kent C. DeForrest
Provo, UT

DougS:

Every candidate who runs for president gets a more thorough background check than anyone buying a gun. It's called the primary election, followed by the final election. Remember all the fun we had with the Republican parade of clowns last year? And if there is anything lurking in the background, "millions" won't hide it. If the election process didn't uncover it, it is probably another of those wacky notions (like Obama's foreign birth) so popular among right-wing extremists and conspiracy theorists.

DougS
Oakley, UT

Joe Blow and M. DeForest; please tell me what passport he used for his foreign travel forbidden to U.S. Citizens.. Please tell me under what name(s) he was registered at the schools he attended and show me his grades.. Explain the in-consistencies in his birth certificate from a hospital that didn't exist when he was born and a father from a country that didn't exist at the time...If he was "vetted" so completely, surely you have the answers because no one else has..

JoeBlow
Far East USA, SC

"tell me what is unconstitutional about that law."

Are you telling me that it is accepted by people like Mike Richards and Mountanman that the current system of background checks are constitutional?

Mike, Mtnman? Thoughts

RedShirt
USS Enterprise, UT

To "JoeBlow" I don't think you read the law. Please go and read the Gun Control Act of 1968 and tell me what is unconstitutional about that law. Does it do anything different than the current background checks that are already in place and conservatives agree are constitutional?

Please stop cutting what I post in a way that misleads what I wrote.

to comment

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