Comments about ‘KSL temporarily suspends firearms listings on ksl.com’

KSL is a private company and can take whatever action it feels like taking. We can also interpret their action as anti 2nd amendment.

Do they really think that their shortsighted action will make any difference in the world?
I used to keep my TV on KSL for the morning news, Today, and beyond. Just changed that.

Mr Heretic... It amazes me how you liberals always jump on the gun control bandwagon and systematically ignore abortion. Guns kill maybe hundreds of innocents each year, abortions kill millions of babies each and every year. Which is worse, a firearm most often used for protection, or the abortionist's knives which are purposefully used to kill every time they are used? Hypocrites.

While KSL as a private business has the right to make this suspension and are free to do so, they are not free from the consequences. Making knee jerk PC decisions bring consequences as well, and rarely are knee jerk PC decisions meant to cure the disease but rather make a public display of treating symptoms.

Happy Vallley Heritic you make a false analogy. The Obama administration and their subservients knowingly and willingly violated laws and the Obama administration most certainly knew the pattern of nefarious lifestyles of the people who they illegally sold guns to. The Obama regime has gone to extreme measures to conceal & cover their nefarious activities in fast and furious. Yet they are not held accountable. KSL did not sell guns to anyone. They have no knowledge of the criminal records and goals of anyone who might purchase a gun through their add. Last but not least there is no law against printing classified adds which connect private citizens who want to sell/buy guns.

Models/Examples of lawful behavior & honest, legal, responsible handling of gun transactions has to start at the top-yes that means POTUS and his administration.

You, the only purpose in having a gun is NOT to just kill people. There are many responsible gun owners who enjoy the shooting sports. Ever see the Olympics? The thing is, criminals will ALWAYS be able to get guns and kill...and they don't go through licensing for the most part. Responsible gun owners go through the licensing process. Sometimes you can't protect people no matter how many hoops everyone is made to jump through. I wonder if KSL allows anti-depressant ads to be run on their stations? Hmmm.

YOU might be right. But I'm afraid it goes much deeper than that. Could it have something to do with cultures that actually respect other people and don't hold violence as a national value?

Just looking at some of the postings here -- with their hints at violence as they disagree with other posters -- is one illustration of a much more deeply embedded problem in America.

Joe Blow, read it again. I never mentioned religion. I did mention the 10 Commandments which are the basis for common law all over the world.

By the way, my guns are secured in a gun safe.

Chicago has had over two hundred gun related homicides this year, with two weeks left to go. They have some of the most restrictive gun laws in the United States. I don't see gun control helping Chicago a lot. Same with DC, same with New York.

Banning guns is not the solution to the problem. Changing behaviors is the solution to the problem. But even then, there will always be the random crazies out there.

Ted Bundy killed how many? Have we banned porn? Did Dahmer use a gun? How about Art Bishop?

By the way, I bought 100 pounds of ammonium nitrate for fertilizer from IFA and I never even got questioned.

What happened last Friday is a tragedy. No doubt about it. Banning guns wouldn't have stopped it. Mom's guns were legal, but apparently not secured. How do we know he wouldn't have made several pipe bombs and used them instead of the Bushmaster?

When I was a high schooler, we used to bring shotguns right on the bus to school. We had a gun club. Other schools had gun clubs with teachers being sponsors. No killings, no mass murders, no incidents. What happened? First, the nation as a whole has left God. This nation doesn't even want to hear about God anymore. Jesus' name is toast here. Secondly, the nation is on anti-depressants like mad. Mothers more concerned about their work life than their home life. Families broken apart. Kids without direction or proper parenting. That's what happened in the USA. Next, these same people don't want to deal with anything so they'd rather have the Feds deal with it all. It saves them up to just think about Disney trips, buying the next new car, and getting those sporting tickets and jerseys. What a mess of a country. Gun bans won't fix it. All gun bans will do is make sure the criminals are the only ones with guns. Worse, that the Feds are the only ones with them.

"Though Justice Antonin Scalia tried in the majority opinion (Heller v D.C.) to use the Second Amendment to defend gun rights, the many sources that he cited are clear that the purpose of the amendment was to protect state militias. One source, for example, declares, that the purpose of the Second Amendment is "to secure a well-armed militia... ." Another source Scalia cited indicates that the amendment covers only arms that "have some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia."

Therefore, Scalia acknowledges that the Second Amendment -- even in his pro-gun interpretation -- only protects arms that would be used in a militia, not the weapons of a formal army. He makes clear that "M-16 rifles and the like" have no Second Amendment protection and may be banned.

More basically, the idea that unregulated private gun ownership and trade protects us against tyranny, or that gun controls would threaten tyranny to us all, is baseless. Democracies around the world regulate guns, preserve their freedoms, and achieve firearm murder rates that are a tiny fraction of the rates suffered in the United States."
(Jeffrey Sachs)

You
SLC, UT
"2008 gun-related homicides:
US = 12000+
Japan = 11 (11 total! With a population of 128 million!)
And Japan has a more rabid video game culture than the US, so there goes the video-games-are-to-blame argument that many love."

In Japan, the total murder rate is almost 1 per 100,000. In the U.S., there are about 3.2 murders per 100,000 people each year by weapons other than firearms. This means that even if firearms in the U.S. could be eliminated, the U.S. would still have three times the murder rate of the Japanese. Whereas Japan’s murder rate may be low, its suicide rate is over 20 per 100,000 people. Combined, Japanese are being murdered and committing suicide at a rate of about 21 per 100,000. In the U.S., our combined murder and suicide rate is also about 21.

Please, give us more 'data'. Your statement hardly eliminates the 'video-games-are-to-blame' argument.

You
SLC, UT--
"The UK and many fine countries in Europe have similar low gun crime stats due to strict gun control laws that we need to develop here."

Really?

Since gun banning has escalated in the UK, the rate of crime – especially violent crime – has risen. Ironically, firearm use in crimes in the UK has doubled in the decade since handguns were banned. Britain has the highest rate of violent crime in Europe, more so than the United States or even South Africa. They also have the second highest over all crime rate in the European Union. In 2008, Britan had a violent crime rate nearly five times higher than the United states (446 vs. 2034 per 100,000 population).A Sep 2007 study showed 67% of British residents surveyed believed that “As a result of gun and knife crime [rising], the area I live in is not as safe as it was five years ago.”

You need to get your facts straight, and quit parroting unsubstantiated myths.

mdp, so when confronted with the absolute silliness of your defense, you change the subject just like a good radio junkie.
Try staying on subject I know it's hard when you've posted a silly comment.

22ozn44ozglass: your wrong it's exactly the same thing minus your presidential hatred and faux news bias.
As far as "KSL did not sell guns to anyone." and Nabster didn't sell music to anyone either but the owners are still in Jail?

"I am hereby resolved that under no circumstances shall the freedoms guaranteed by the Bill of Rights be infringed. In particular I am opposed to any attempt on the part of the federal government to deny the people their right to bear arms, to worship, and to pray when and where they choose, or to own and control private property" Ezra taft Benson

The problem with the "guns-aren't-the -problem-but-culture-is -the-problem" argument: The people who claim this can seldom pin down what specifically about the culture causes us to be such a dramatic outlier when it comes to homicide rates. (About 3 to 4 times higher than other countries with similar socioeconomic statuses.)

People will try to bring in Mexico or Russia as examples to the contrary. That's silly. Of course in countries with wildly corrupt police forces and judiciaries, poor law enforcement, and known-and-left-alone warlords you're going to have high homicide rates. Culturally speaking, we're a lot closer to Canada (our homicide rate is 2.7 times higher) and the U.K. (ours is 3.5 times higher). So what, if not guns, is the difference?

Finally, the mere fact that culture is a part of this problem (and I think it is) is not evidence that the proliferation of guns isn't also a part of the problem.

The problem with the "X-kills-more-people-than-guns" argument: It doesn't recognize the bias in the technology.

"People like to think of technologies and media as neutral and that only their use or content determines their impact. Guns don't kill people, after all, people kill people. But guns are much more biased toward killing people than, say, pillows — even though many a pillow has been utilized to smother an aging relative or adulterous spouse.

Our widespread inability to recognize or even acknowledge the biases of the technologies we use renders us incapable of gaining any real agency through them."

Sure a lot of people die via car. (Which cars are more heavily regulated than guns because we recognize their danger, by the way.) But a car isn't designed to kill people. In many ways, it's just the opposite. Cars also do an extraordinary amount of things to improve our lives. In terms of making my life better while bringing some risk, cars have a much higher ratio than guns.

"The mere fact that culture is a part of this problem (and I think it is) is not evidence that the proliferation of guns isn't also a part of the problem."

BINGO Daniel. It is a complex problem and no single, simple solution will fix it.

The problem with the "if-they-take-away -guns-than-they-can -take-away-X" argument: Slippery slope arguments are seldom legitimate because they don't recognize that we are capable of making distinctions nearly every day and with all kinds of rules and laws.

To most people it would sound silly if I said, "Government can't tax me even 1% because what is to keep them from then taxing 100%?" Or "If the FDA can limit the amount of arsenic in my food, then what's to keep them from telling me that I can only eat lima beans?" Or "if you can tell me that I can't drive 100 mph, then what's to keep your from telling me that I have to drive at 5 mph?"

The fact of the matter is, to avoid utter chaos (a premier threat to my liberty) we have to have some rules. The existence of some rules doesn't mean everything will be ruled over. Just some things. We draw these lines in many ways every day. They are seldom perfect lines. But we get by and are able to adjust them regularly as the people demand.

Why do the KSL management want to keep people from having legal self defense tools?

Sure, they are free to do so, but people who want to legally purchase firearms have plenty of other options. As do subscribers, viewers and advertisers- all of whom should be reconsidering their choices of dealing with a media conglomerate that bows to political correctness, on top of being pretty much part of the liberally biased media to start with.

There are plenty of on-line services legally selling guns. I cannot post any links, but if you search for "Gun Auction" you will probably find some excellent options, including one based in Utah.

The problem with the "the-Constitution-says-so" argument: It assumes that a very limited and historically questionable interpretation of the 2nd Amendment is unfailingly correct.

In the very sentence that grants the right to arms, it also says the purpose of that right is for the states to maintain a well regulated militia. We can argue about what that means, but it actually meant very different things to different founders and records indicate parts of the constitution were left intentionally vague in order to be ratified by the different states. So to say this means people can have weapons carte blanche and that it can't mean anything else seems reckless.

Most of us would probably agree this right does not apply to prisoners or three-year-old boys. It probably also doesn't apply to nuclear warheads.

The fact that regulation is mentioned in tandem with the right is interesting. I believe it's totally possible to have guns more regulated without infringing on the rights of honest people to own a gun. Much like the government requires a fair amount of regulation on my car, but the intention is not to keep me from owndership.

Knee-jerk KSL. In that mental illness and violent video games are part of the 3-legged stool, is KSL going to suspend sales of violent video games?

A remember, about the same time in China a mentally ill fellow went into a children's classroom and stabbed about 20 children. What would KSL's reaction be to this...other than not reporting it like they didn't do.

Daniel, buddy. "A well regulated Militia, (new subject due to the comma) being necessary to the security of a free State, (new subject) the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, (new subject) shall not be infringed". The Second Amendment for those of you in Rio Linda.

From my reading of the Federalist Papers on this subject, a period should have been put after "free State", which would have totally changed the meaning of the 2nd Amendment to make a lot more sense.

My interpretation of the 2nd Amendment? A well regulated Militia is essential to a free State (country). The right of the common people to bear arms is a valid right and that right can't be infringed. This amendment covers two different subjects.

This whole issue is like someone failing to wear a required article of supportive clothing in gym class. Everyone gets punished for one persons bad behavior. Not the way a free society should operate.