Comments about ‘Colorado recall stifles any gun effort in Congress’

Return to article »

Published: Sunday, Sept. 15 2013 7:00 a.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
bandersen
Saint George, UT

Without eradicating the Compulsion impulse by those who want to deny every human of an unalienable and God given right, this non-issue will continue to capture the hearts of the naive, ignorant, and socialist planners.

Mainly Me
Werribee, 00

"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
George Mason

mohokat
Ogden, UT

Freedom 1 Socialism/Communisim 0 Way to go NRA,Way to go Colo. Now lets show Harry and the rest the way to go

Mountanman
Hayden, ID

I am not a member of the NRA, but I am going to join and contribute. They work to protect and defend the constitution of the United States of America from enemies foreign and domestic! Looks like recall elections worked also to get rid of those who don't remember the oath of office they took to defend and protect the constitution! But liberals don't like the constitution because it limits the power of the government and gives it to the people! God bless America!

SteveD
North Salt Lake, UT

"The NRA does its job better than our side does our job," said Jim Kessler, a co-founder of Third Way, which advocates for centrist Democratic policies. "They know how to influence and intimidate elected people."

Sure that's it. They would never admit the voters have a brain and believe freedom to self protection is an inalienable right. Naw, it's because the evil NRA has more influence.

cjb
Bountiful, UT

People have a right to defend themselves and their families. This is just the bottom line. An other line, although not quite as fundamental is that guns are a constitutionally protected right.

Legal
Salt Lake City, UT

Looks like "the people" have spoken.

lost in DC
West Jordan, UT

the anti-constitution dems lose out to the will of the people and so they create a boogey-man on whom to place the blame. Oh, the horrible NRA! So out of control! Such undue and undeserved influence!

Maybe they should look in the mirror. Maybe they should actually listen to their constituents.

Maybe they should look at the fact that the anti-constitution crowd, including bloomberg, pumped a lot more money into the campaign than did the NRA.

Oh well, typical dem thought process - "we lost, obviously the unwashed masses were misinformed. had to be the evil NRA"

SAS
Sandy, UT

Columbine. Aurora. Sandy Creek.

How quickly we forget preventable tragedies and repeat the same tired mantras.

If the NRA had any workable plans to bring to the table--or were willing to make the most basic, common-sense compromises--I'd be willing to listen. Until then, they're part of the problem.

And not a small part.

mohokat
Ogden, UT

SAS Sounds as though to you the Second Amendment is the problem. You should read it.

jayhawker
kearns, UT

SAS, there shall be no compromise on constitutional rights.

Pipes
Salt Lake City, UT

SAS
Tell the people that lost loved ones in Boston that gun control would have saved them. Oh that's right, they were killed with pressure cookers! Crazy people will find a way to kill with or without guns. To say that Columbine. Aurora. Sandy Creek would be prevented by gun control is naive at best. Those killers would have just used another means to accomplish the same end.

one old man
Ogden, UT

This is a tragedy.

One thing we need to know is what the voter turnout was for this recall. Was it a high percentage of voters in the state, or is this another case of voter apathy among people who would have cast ballots supporting these legislators.

Did a large number of voters stay home and allow a small, but active minority of NRA followers to dictate to the rest of them?

Can Deseret News publish that information?

bandersen
Saint George, UT

SAS: I agree! Had there been just one person who knew how important it was to protect him/her self and others with a God-given unalienable right, Columbine, Aurora, and Sandy Creek would have been symbols of God's protective power, not symbols of the failures of some Americans that a passive, non-literate understanding of our Constitution and God is a way to save lives. Unfortunate is the kindest word I can use.

Jack
Aurora, CO

I am amused by the whole tenor of the article. Somehow the NRA, being outspent and the underdog in the this is the bogeyman. Mayor Bloomberg and another contributor add many times the amount the NRA contributed, and the NRA is the culprit. In the reports here in Colorado, the overwhelming majority of voters voting against the two culprits were DEMOCRATS! They were recalled because of arrogance, because they ignored their constituents views and they thumbed their nose at the public when they rammed the offending bills through without allowing opposing testimony.

Short story: It wasn't the NRA, those two State Senators did it to themselves.

SAS
Sandy, UT

The text of the second amendment:

"A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

There are two clauses there; reconciling them has always been the tricky part.

But I'm not sure how this "you must have a gun at all times, and you're doing a public service by having it" hysteria bears any hint of being "well regulated." Could arms have helped prevent Sandy Hook? Perhaps, but that doesn't mean we should give semi-automatics to every kindergartener! Is George Zimmerman's itchy trigger finger part of that well-regulated militia? How about the blind man in Iowa who insists on his absolute right to a concealed-carry permit?

It seems to me that the current gun-mania serves mostly to undermine people's faith in the institutions of a democratic society and to prop up whatever paranoia (all-too-frequently mixed with fear of an ethnic or political other) is left in its place.

And, of course, to line the pockets of the gun manufacturers who back the NRA.

Jack
Aurora, CO

@ SAS,
No, arming the kindergarteners isn't the answer, but since that shooter committed murder to get his guns in the first place, I don't know how another layer of laws he would have ignored would have made any difference. How about securing the school? Perhaps a better result. Columbine? Again, laws broken to obtain the guns used. Another layer of laws? No difference. Aurora? lots of conjecture, but had the security measures already in place been enforced (patrolling and inspecting the doors in the back, he was able to prop open a security door that should have been locked) I don't think he could so easily have done his terrible deed. Nobody here is clamoring for mandatory gun possession as you claim, only the right to carry legally and according to the Constitution. Making it tougher for the law-abiding doesn't curb the bad guys from breaking the law to get a gun. The NRA has never advocated for these bad guys, they have always advocated for enforcement of the laws penalizing criminals with guns.

Dr. Thom
Long Beach, CA

Just proves the old adage of "peace through superior firepower"

to comment

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