Quantcast

Comments about ‘Burbank and gun laws’

Return to article »

Published: Monday, May 6 2013 12:00 a.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
ronnie
sandy, utah

"The majority of Americans say that we have enough gun laws and we only need to enforce them to take criminals off of the streets."

Mr Pollei you are wrong on two accounts. We already have more people in jail than any other country, but yet we still kill more people with guns than anyone else. By the way a majority of Americans believe in better background checks and more restrictions on assault type weapons. My suggestion is to read, learn and think about the issues as it relates to risk to our children and us as a society.

one vote
Salt Lake City, UT

He supports a reasonable not a hysterical approach.

cjb
Bountiful, UT

I find it curious that police chiefs tend to be anti 2nd Ammendment while sheriffs tend to be pro.

Police chiefs have to move up through the ranks and please their superiors which requires political skills. Sheriffs get their position by appealing directly to the people.

No particular point here, but it's a little interesting.

m.g. scott
clearfield, UT

All this Constitutional argument is why I cringe at the idea that judges are given the power to "interpret" the Constution, rather than "apply" it. With the power of interpretation, one can do almost anything. The power of interpretation is the power to do anything without guidelines. I don't believe the constitution should be given that much lattitude. If it needs change or updating, as has happened many times, then do it the right way. Judges who on their own whim "find" a right where one was not written, are rendering the Constitution meaningless.

mark
Salt Lake City, UT

procuradorfiscal

"nothing in the Second Amendment magically makes the words "shall not be infringed" mean "shall" or "may be infringed"

"nothing in my time as a cop"

Oh. So you were a cop.

So tell me Officer Procuradorfiscal, when you had a suspect in custody and you took away their weapon. . . what gave you that right? After all, "nothing in the Second Amendment magically makes the words "shall not be infringed" mean "shall" or "may be infringed" "

Tell me by what authority did you infringe on someone's right to keep and bear arms?

LDS Liberal
Farmington, UT

mark
Salt Lake City, UT

So tell me Officer Procuradorfiscal, when you had a suspect in custody and you took away their weapon. . . what gave you that right? After all, "nothing in the Second Amendment magically makes the words "shall not be infringed" mean "shall" or "may be infringed" "

Tell me by what authority did you infringe on someone's right to keep and bear arms?"

============

Beautiful come-back!
Agreed.

Officer Procuradorfiscal, what say you?

2 bits
Cottonwood Heights, UT

LDS Liberal
I thought you respected the rulings of the Supreme Court. The SC recently ruled that the 2nd amendment doesn't only apply to police or military (ref the Washington DC ruling) and that YES it does apply to ME, and ALL American Citizens (not the National Guard).,

Some groups that call themselvs "militias" are just thugs. But that doesn't mean all are. You can't group people you don't know in with the radical "Black Snake Militia" just because you paint with a broad brush and have this stereotype for anybody involved in neighborhood security that isn't in the National Guard. You should know something about them before you stereotype them. I don't know you and you don't know me so don't judge me.

I think there is a place for the National Guard. And also a place for prepared families and neighborhoods. We may be a mob... I'm OK with that label. The people who stood up to the British in Concord were considered a "Mob" by some. So I'm good with that.

Res Novae
Ashburn, VA

@cjb

"I find it curious that police chiefs tend to be anti 2nd Ammendment while sheriffs tend to be pro.

Police chiefs have to move up through the ranks and please their superiors which requires political skills. Sheriffs get their position by appealing directly to the people."

If you're looking for some sort of correlation, I suggest that police chiefs are from urban areas where crime, including gun violence, is higher, whereas sheriffs are predominately from rural parts of the country where it isn't as great an issue. I suspect that having to deal with the impact of guns on a daily basis colors police officers' views on gun control far more than whatever shady politics you're implying.

2 bits
Cottonwood Heights, UT

Police Chiefs are 100% politicians (not police officers). That's why the drastic difference. POLITICS controls their every word and every decision. They have to worry about votes and polls (not the people the meet on the street and deal with their problems).

LDS Liberal
Farmington, UT

2 bits
Cottonwood Heights, UT
Police Chiefs are 100% politicians (not police officers). That's why the drastic difference. POLITICS controls their every word and every decision. They have to worry about votes and polls (not the people the meet on the street and deal with their problems).

10:49 a.m. May 8, 2013

==========

I disagree.

I think he's a COP, just trying to do his job,
i.e., trying to keep citizens safe and his officers from being shot at by
keeping guns out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill.

Republicans and the NRA are making this 100% political.

to comment

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