Quantcast
Utah

Nearly 3,000 rally against president's gun control measures at Capitol

Comments

Return To Article
  • Lagomorph Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 24, 2013 1:48 p.m.

    Defenders of gun ownership observe that the underlying intent of the Second Amendment was to allow individuals to have the means to protect their lives and property and to protect themselves against government tyranny. They claim (and to a certain extent I agree) that an armed populace keeps the government honest and nontyrannical. I am completely comfortable with the idea of “militia” as conferring an individual right. However, would somebody please explain how a militia (individual or collective) works in practice to oppose government tyranny? Can anyone act as militia in opposition to the governmemnt? Must there be formal organization? Do the Weather Underground, Symbionese Liberation Army, the 1973 AIM Wounded Knee occupiers, the Black Panthers, or the Unabomber count as militia (they all claimed to be fighting government oppression), or only those touting “true” American values. Who decides? Is the difference between “patriotic hero” and “violent criminal” who wins the gunfight?

    On a practical note, compare the effectiveness of any of the above groups to those practicing nonviolent protests and civil disobedience (civil rights movement, Clamshell Alliance, MX opposition in Utah, ACT-UP, etc.). Perhaps armed insurrection is obsolete.

  • Jack Aurora, CO
    Jan. 23, 2013 10:10 p.m.

    What did my guns do?

    Nothing. They sit in my gun locker and do nothing until I, as the operator or user, do something with them. They are not capable of doing anything of themselves, they wait obediently in their locker for me to take them out for use. They obey my commands...if the trigger is pulled they fire a bullet. If I don't they wait for me to do so. They cannot do anything without an operator. Inanimate, without brain or controlling circuitry, they don't accomplish anything by themselves. A person accomplishes a task, an object doesn't.

    So, what does any gun do? It obeys the operator. It can be used to accomplish a good task, or a bad one. It doesn't care which, it just obeys the operator. Penalizing the object instead of the operator accomplishes nothing but leaves the operator with the same state of mind, only looking for another tool to accomplish the task desired. Fix the operator, not the tool.

  • Harley Rider Small Town, CT
    Jan. 23, 2013 6:18 p.m.

    Part II

    The elite all have their kids , grandkids going to school with armed guards and the common man deserves the same safety for his kids.

    Pay teachers , bus drivers , school employees extra money to become licensed to carry and pay them more if they maintain a marksmanship rating. Israel does this with great success

    End the gun free zones - That only benefits the criminal , stop the use of these drugs , let the schools arm their employees as we sure don't need another government agency such as the TSA providing security.

    The UN is on record - that they will not send in any muti-national peace keeping forces - Until America is Disarmed

  • Harley Rider Small Town, CT
    Jan. 23, 2013 6:15 p.m.

    Obama said that he will never touch America's Guns or raise taxesLOL
    Now he is using the Tragedy in Sandy Hook to begin the disarming of America & that is exactly what is going to happen - the criminals sure ain't going to give up the semiautomatics , so why should law abiding citizens ?

    Obama should concentrate on the cause of all these school shootings, which is Psychotropic Drugs being forced upon our young - ages kindergarden to 18 years old. Every shooter has been on these awful mind altering drugs , They are especially harmful when taken by the young.

  • 22ozn44ozglass Southern Utah, UT
    Jan. 23, 2013 5:28 p.m.

    This should have been handled by Congress and not Obama and executive fiat. 2nd this is people control first and foremost and an affront to the law abiding working middle class. None of these measures will affect the plague of gang violence/murder on our streets. None of these measures will curb deaths caused by illegal aliens who participate in organized crime in this country. None of these measures will impact those who do not uphold the rule of law and have nefarious objectives.

    None of these measures will affect the wealthy and politically powerful (the elites) having the ability to hire professionals to protect themselves and their families with assault weapons.

    AR15 SEMI autos are expensive. Tactical semi-auto handguns are expensive. Ammo is expensive

    The law abiding middle class Dr, Lawyers, Accountants, Engineers and teachers ect and their ability to protect their families and property are the ones who will be impacted by these executive orders. We will be left to depend upon the inept, inefficient and often incompetent Government.

    From 1900 to 2000, Governments have murdered more people than were killed in all of the 20th century wars combined.

  • FT salt lake city, UT
    Jan. 23, 2013 8:19 a.m.

    Rural Sports Fan-

    "Taking citzen's guns won't stop mad men from killing people, it will only change their method."
    That is 100% correct. But, the argument that progressives use is that an assualt weapon with a multiple shot magazine is a lot more damaging than a hammer, fist or even another weapon with far less impact.

  • Rural sport fan DUCHESNE, UT
    Jan. 22, 2013 3:47 p.m.

    Pagan, you wrote:
    The US government has a flag on the moon.
    Taken photo's of Mars.
    20 kids were murdered last month in elementary school.
    What have your guns accomplished?

    Well, since our guns have accomplished none of those things, what exactly are you asking?

    Do you still not understand that there were several million guns in this country that were owned and used by American men and women, who didn't kill a single person last year? Do you still not understand that as tragic as Sandy Hook was, it is a single outlier of a statistic that is being mis-represented to get foolish people to think a certain way? Do you not understand that more people were beat to death by hand last year, than were shot with rifles? That more people were killed with a knife or a hammer or other tool, than by a rifle?

    And yet, the government doesn't complain about the more dangerous hammers or fists, they only complain about the one tool that could possibly stop them from doing anything they want.

    Taking citizen's guns won't stop mad men from killing people, it will only change their method.

  • iron&clay RIVERTON, UT
    Jan. 22, 2013 10:53 a.m.

    I hope that all who comment here have the best interests, safety, and love of innocent children and our families in mind when we speak for or against the right of the people of the US to own firearms.

    Let's all be honest with ourselves, if we know and understand HUMAN NATURE, we can also understand and know that a concentration of power and monopoly of our country's resources at the head of our government would sooner or later lead to tyranny. Tyranny of course is the loss of the separation and division of powers and the guarantee of individual rights and private property or in other words, the loss of our constitution.

  • Anti Bush-Obama Washington, DC
    Jan. 22, 2013 10:27 a.m.

    "I recognize the sad reality that when a few citizens act irresponsibly it causes the rest of us to lose some of our freedoms. Until WE are able to do a better job of teaching,setting a good example for our children, and providing better mental health care for those who show signs of instability, then the government has to help protect us from ourselves. That is not government tyranny as some tyrannophobes out there are suggesting."

    So would it be fair if I robbed a bank and as a consequence, you who had nothing to do with it, had to spend a few days in jail for my crime? So we are tyrannophobes? Why is there the patriot act? why is there warantless wiretapping? why do we have to be sexually violated if we want to fly somewhere? So why do they have these "laws" in place if it isn't tyranny?

    Is the new motto of the country "It's not tyranny if we do it." ?

  • xert Santa Monica, CA
    Jan. 22, 2013 5:41 a.m.

    It's easy to see that for many on this threat, obstructing Barack H. Obama trumps the safety of children. I am so tired of a nation which pats itself on the back so often for its love of "the kids" then allows them to be bullied, abused and shot with assault weapons, weeps awhile and then goes back to business as usual. They are right in one respect, Guns don't kill Sandy Hook students---cowardly Americans do.

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 22, 2013 2:53 a.m.

    The US government has a flag on the moon.

    Taken photo's of Mars.

    20 kids were murdered last month in elementary school.

    What have your guns accomplished?

  • JayTee Sandy, UT
    Jan. 21, 2013 9:56 p.m.

    Government is adept at two things: (1) taking your property, and (2) taking your rights. They pretty much fail at everything else. If you want a real SOLUTION to a situation, you're looking in the wrong direction if you're looking at government. Of course most people don't understand this, which is why Winston Churchill said the best argument against a democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.

  • JayTee Sandy, UT
    Jan. 21, 2013 9:50 p.m.

    Looks like all the liberals are no longer satisfied with just commenting on the Salt Lake Tribune site. Now they're flooding this one, telling us that the most confused, indebted, encumbered, inefficient, ineffective, and political organization in the history of the world (the U. S. Government) has another plan to keep us safe and warm. Amazing.

  • JayTee Sandy, UT
    Jan. 21, 2013 9:39 p.m.

    All the liberals should get out and march for the things that are dear to THEM: Higher taxes, more government debt, runaway public spending, government monitoring of all private activities, more regulation on enterprises that try to make a profit, more dependence on foreign energy and foreign capital, mandated public funding of abortion, increased medical costs due to confusion and government intrusion, etc., etc. It's only right that they get out and support the things that they believe in, too.

  • ApacheNaiche PINETOP, AZ
    Jan. 21, 2013 8:14 p.m.

    Make that three thousand and one!

  • Jack Aurora, CO
    Jan. 21, 2013 6:52 p.m.

    I see the full range of opinion is posting here, so here's my take on it.....these folks held a rally, as is their Constitutional right, to have their say on a Constitutional right. They didn't hurt anyone, didn't get arrested, didn't behave like the Occupiers so they must have done it right.

    @Pagan, nothing will bring those children back. Nothing. Those folks held a rally in support of their Constitutional rights, not a celebration of those deaths.

    @OJF64 - Having seen too many children who suffered at the hands of others doesn't make me want to ban guns, a fruitless and illegal effort that won't undo the suffering they endured. I am instead focused on the perpetrator of the crimes, not the tools used. Getting mad at an inanimate object is illogical, and doesn't solve anything.

    For those looking for a one-size-fits-all, perfect-without-exception solution to the violence in our society, I am afraid you will be disappointed....there isn't one.

  • mohokat Ogden, UT
    Jan. 21, 2013 3:52 p.m.

    @ Happy Valley You may want to step back a ways from the fireplace the smoke is getting to you. First your post did not make any sense and second who do you think was responsible for Fast and Furious? On yea you libs like to blame everything on Bush. So Bush must have done it!
    Follow the bouncing ball. Your skills are in question.

  • Rural sport fan DUCHESNE, UT
    Jan. 21, 2013 3:18 p.m.

    Why is it "crazy" to want guns, in case the gov't tries to impose it's will on the citizens?

    After all that is EXACTLY how this country came to exist! And that is specifically why the 2nd amendment exists; since the gov't will need an army, the founders thought it would be a good idea to ensure the citizens could fight that army, if it were used against the people, exactly as England used it's military against it's citizens.

    Is it happening now? No, but can you say that will be true in 10 years? 20 years? No, you cannot.

    And it doesn't matter if you can, as the constitution says specifically, the gov't cannot infringe our right to keep and bear arms. It is not up for debate, rational or otherwise, so get a clue, and move on to something that MIGHT actually save some kids, like better mental health care or better prescription drug regulation

  • Screwdriver Casa Grande, AZ
    Jan. 21, 2013 1:53 p.m.

    One old man, it could be worse. You could live in Arizona where the ATF gives guns to smugglers and then blames it on Obama.

    Or asks every brown person for their papers. Or sells all the public buildings for a short term budget boost and then pays much more rent to their buddies in the future. Or that....

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    Jan. 21, 2013 12:30 p.m.

    The Tribune reports that estimates made by SLC police put the number in attendance at about 1,500.

    And here comes another insane legislator trying to pander to his base with a bill that will allow Utah sheriffs to arrest any Federal officer who dares try to enforce a Federal gun law in Utah.

    Ah, insanity!

    Ain't it fun?

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    Jan. 21, 2013 11:22 a.m.

    By the way -- where did that count of "Nearly 3000" come from?

    I saw the photos and it sure didn't look like 3000. Several hundred, yes. But 3000????

    The article should tell us who made that estimate. If it came from the gun lobby, then it is REALLY suspect.

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    Jan. 21, 2013 11:19 a.m.

    ""The Utah legislature knows what is best"??? Are these people nuts?"

    Yes.

    Why won't I be the least bit surprised when someone is shot up one of the gun nuts because they feel "threatened" by the other person's opinions against guns?

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    Jan. 21, 2013 11:14 a.m.

    JanSan -- apparently what you've heard about Sweden's gun laws in not completely true. Here's some of what Wikipedia says:

    Gun ownership requires license and is regulated by the weapon law (Vapenlagen 1996:67) further regulations are found in weapon decree (Vapenförordningen 1996:70). The law doesn't ban any specific firearms or weapons, it merely states the requirements to own one. Everything from pepperspray to full-automatic machine guns are technically legal, and license to civilians can be given in 'special' cases. Like the other Nordic countries Sweden has a high rate of gun ownership, due to the popularity of hunting. The weapons law doesn't apply to air guns and similar with a projectile energy less than 10 joules at the end of barrel. These require no license and may be bought by any person over 18 years.

  • Happy Valley Heretic Orem, UT
    Jan. 21, 2013 11:12 a.m.

    mohokat "It is humorous that when a death occurs(and there are plenty)from driving when impaired it is the driver who is vilified not the vehicle. The opposite is true when there is a death that occurs from the result of a gunshot it is the gun that is vilified."

    ... and then you blame of Obama for the fast & furious in the next sentence? Your empty rhetoric and poor analogy skills used here daily, don't help your cause.

  • mohokat Ogden, UT
    Jan. 21, 2013 9:45 a.m.

    @ Pagan How about this as a result of your idol. Bengazi Americans were dying and Obama is still lying. It is humorous that when a death occurs(and there are plenty)from driving when impaired it is the driver who is vilified not the vehicle. The opposite is true when there is a death that occurs from the result of a gunshot it is the gun that is vilified.Both the same. Wow how about backward thinking. Oh and how about the government wanting to control guns they need to re read Fast And Furious. The king and his ilk can not control their own guns. Of course they can cover that up with an executive order. Others of you there is no such thing as an assualt rifle. The Libs have managed to put the boogey man complex on something that just looks bad.

  • Doug10 Roosevelt, UT
    Jan. 21, 2013 8:38 a.m.

    do those who made it to the capital think they are somehow going to get smarter and not have any more accidents and there are going to be fewer deaths as a result of their rally?

    how many deaths or woundings before we say enough is enough?

    In our country there are over 20,000 people who are accidentally shot, maimed, some are crippled and have their lives forever changed and live to tell about it.

    does that number have to increase?

    in a domestic dispute an out of control spouse grabs a high powered weapon is it fair to the police to have to respond to somebody out of control who has the armour piercing high powered assault type weapons?

    when the government comes for you because you deserve their attention the high trained military will not be dissuaded by your guns but more likely by a high powered attorney.

    Rambo and Bruce Willis live in Hollywood because that is the land of make believe... maybe Utah has a place for them as well.

  • one vote Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 21, 2013 4:08 a.m.

    The 15 year old in New Mexico that used the assault weapon this weekend "always walked around in camouflage". As Beck used to say before he left the air "I am just saying....".

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    Jan. 20, 2013 4:44 p.m.

    Obama wants, our guns, medical care, and money.

    So, what's next?

  • OJF64 Sandy, UT
    Jan. 20, 2013 1:53 p.m.

    Chances are pretty darn good that those attending have never actually been faced with a child who died from a gun shot, guaranteed it will change your entire line of thinking and perspective on whats imporant whats not what could have been avoided if only.........

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 20, 2013 1:13 p.m.

    3000 Rally

    20 children still dead.

  • Brotherly Kindness SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    Jan. 20, 2013 12:31 p.m.

    To whoever would say that if guns do not kill people, then alcohol does not kill people, consider that both items contribute to deaths in some way, but we cannot assume it is to the same degree.

    I think it would be informative to compare total alcohol-related deaths, both in Utah and in the country at large, to total gun-related deaths. I have my suspicions about which would be higher, but I leave it to professionals to do the research.

    Consider that, last I checked, positive protection of alcoholic beverages is not spelled out word for word in the Constitution as a right--only the repeal of its complete and utter prohibition is, while the right to keep and bear arms, which "shall not be infringed" is spelled out word for word in the Constitution.

    Finally, guns, in addition to negative and neutral uses, have vitally positive uses of defending ourselves and our communities. Alcohol, I would argue has neutral and negative uses, for I suggest that intoxication, even in moderation, is basically neutral at best. That does not compare with the important and desirability of protecting the lives of those we love against violence and villainy.

  • Well.ok Lehi, UT
    Jan. 20, 2013 11:42 a.m.

    For the love of all that is holy stop embarrassing those of us level headed individuals who are proud to call Utah home. Do you really believe the Obama and the Federal gov'mnt are just waiting till they take away our assault rifles so he can inflict unending tyranny on us. What do you think he's going to do put us all in forced labor camps while he imposes his socialist agenda?

    As has been mentioned before a moderate and rational approach needs to be taken where individuals are still able to enjoy their second amendment rights while sensible restrictions are put in place.

  • mohokat Ogden, UT
    Jan. 20, 2013 10:25 a.m.

    They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
    Ben Franklin
    American Statesman

    "What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms."
    Thomas Jefferson
    to James Madison

    Thanks to all the Patriots who were in attendance at this rally. And to those who poo poo this and blow it off as gun nuts please read Benjamin Franklin again. And good luck to you.

  • EDM Castle Valley, Utah
    Jan. 20, 2013 9:09 a.m.

    This rally was nothing more than an irrational and emotional outburst against rational and reasonable proposals for gun control measures. These emotional types worry me much more than their talked-about would-be evil intruders.

  • Dektol Powell, OH
    Jan. 20, 2013 8:53 a.m.

    "The Utah legislature knows what is best"??? Are these people nuts?

  • no fit in SG St.George, Utah
    Jan. 20, 2013 8:47 a.m.

    Photos show the Rugged, the Roughest, and the Reddest of the Red gathered together yesterday.
    Yes, we will stay out of you and your "any weapon I want to have" way.
    Why do you have to carry them around to the Malls, tho?
    Ah......if only some time travel was available to the bygone days of the ol' Wild West, huh?

  • Screwdriver Casa Grande, AZ
    Jan. 20, 2013 7:44 a.m.

    Honestly I see very little difference in the terrorists across the waters and the people here using the threat of their assault weapons and other guns in the political process.

    Well, I guess the difference is that Al Qaeda is far away and has 0 impact on our elections or laws unlike the t-party gun nuts. And we hunt down anyone overseas that even hints at being weaponized against us.

  • Mad Hatter Provo, UT
    Jan. 20, 2013 1:20 a.m.

    It appears that the people most opposed to having an open and rational discussion about gun violence are those most concerned about a "tyrannical government" coming in the black helicopters and taking away their freedom to have a gun. The only problem is that no one is talking about eliminating the second amendment much less taking away their guns. Whoever got them worked up into a froth is not interested in finding common ground. The only suggestion they have is more guns. That's not a suggestion. That's incitement. But then, the gun crazies from the fringe are not interested in anything except keeping the pot boiling because their paranoia requires constant reinforcement. They don't want to live in a democracy. The appear to want a tyranny with themselves in charge.

    Reasonable gun owners understand this and they don't want extremists acting like they speak for them. It is unfortunate that the NRA doesn't represent their interests as it has moved to join forces with the anti-democratic fringe of the conservative movement. It's not a question of hunting, sport shooting, or even home defense against an assailant.

  • isrred South Jordan, UT
    Jan. 19, 2013 11:48 p.m.

    "There is NOTHING in Obama's proposal that would have prevented what happened in CT. Nothing! Get a clue. What would have prevented the tragedy was an armed guard. Every school should have an armed Policeman in their school."-ThomasJefferson

    Oh really? Because one of Obama's executive orders specifically designated grants for police departments to hire school resource officers aka ARMED GUARDS FOR SCHOOLS.

    So which is it? Is there absolutely nothing in the President's proposal that would make a difference or would armed guards make a difference? You cannot have it both ways on this point, even if your blind opposition to the President makes you want to.

  • Why would I? Farmington, UT
    Jan. 19, 2013 10:56 p.m.

    Why would I not be surprised that the powerful interests that make a healthy profit from fire arms would be out in droves for this rally?

    I am OK with people owning guns, even assault rifles and large capacity clips, which they need like a fish needs a bicycle. But when people's guns are not secured and their guns are used to kiil innocent persons they should be fully prosecuted as being assessory to the crime.

    Buy your guns, but store them SECURELY! Even though people kiil people, not their guns, the guns are designed to kill and that is their very purpose. So take care of them, folks!!

    Veterans fought to keep our country free from dictators, not necessarily so you could buy ammo and an assault rifle and take it to JC Penny. Good grief.

    And a background check will assure you can have one, not the other way around. Get a clue! Not everyone should have a gun, or a car, or a machette, or a rattlesnake, or.....

  • On the other hand Riverdale, MD
    Jan. 19, 2013 10:54 p.m.

    @JanSan, you're probably thinking of Switzerland, where most able-bodied men between the ages of 19 and 30 are in the militia and are required to keep their military-issued gun at home. Switzerland does indeed have a low rate of gun deaths--3.84 per 100,000 people (compare to 10.2 per 100,000 in the United States).

    Sweden, on the other hand, has very stringent gun control laws, and an even lower rate of gun deaths--1.47 per 100,000. However, it's unlikely that the crime rates in either country is primarily due to gun laws or the prevalence (or lack) of guns in households. There are socioeconomic and cultural components to the gun violence equation that aren't easily extracted from statistics like these. Switzerland and Sweden are countries with more or less stable economies and governments and a certain degree of societal equality. There's arguably less motivation for people in those countries to commit violent crimes.

    There's no guarantee that one country's gun laws will produce the same outcomes in another country. While we should examine other nations' laws, ultimately, we need a uniquely American approach that reflects our historical, cultural, and societal circumstances.

  • There You Go Again Saint George, UT
    Jan. 19, 2013 10:27 p.m.

    Hey Thomas...

    "...Get a clue. What would have prevented the tragedy was an armed guard. Every school should have an armed Policeman in their school...".

    Like the security guard in Michigan who left his weapon in the charter school bathroom?

  • JanSan Pocatello, ID
    Jan. 19, 2013 9:12 p.m.

    To jrgl.. I have been informed that not only in Sweden are you allowed to have guns but that it is the law there to have a gun and you are fined if you do not have one.

    Does anyone know if this is correct?

    From what I also have been told is that they have a very low rate of accidents/deaths/killings etc.. from guns.

  • Moderate Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 19, 2013 8:27 p.m.

    "He specifically cites the necessity of every citizen armed to dissuade a tyrannical government."

    I believe reasonable gun owners exist, and I definitely believe in gun nuts.
    You say "I need a gun for protection against criminals"? Reasonable.
    You say "I need a gun to protect myself from a tyrannical government"? Crazy.

    We're tracking terrorists by satellite and killing them with drones guided by a guy sitting in a computer lab. You think your AR-15 with a high-capacity clip is going to protect you from that? Too funny.

  • MiddleRight Orem, UT
    Jan. 19, 2013 7:50 p.m.

    There are maybe three of the executive orders he issued that would have ANY positive effect and those only dealt a glancing blow to the real need. This should be handled by Legislators, not the executive branch. It should take time and be thought out, not rammed through like NY's new laws that didn't have the normal "doesn't apply to Police" clause.

    The best way to deal with this is to get rid of the laws establishing so called "Gun free zones" that have proven to be "Come shoot us we can't stop you" zones.

    You don't have to have armed guards, you don't have to force Teachers to carry, just stop forcing EVERYONE to die because it is "Politically correct" to not allow anyone to defend themselves.

    This stuff didn't happen like this back before all these knee jerk laws got passed.

    The Media needs to quit making Hero's of these nuts that shoot people. They want to die, but only die Famous.

  • John C. C. Payson, UT
    Jan. 19, 2013 6:58 p.m.

    Let's not jump to either extreme. It's not against the 2nd Amendment to have some restrictions on gun, nor are most gun enthusiasts anti-government crazies. Those who enjoy guns just don't want to see their opportunities diminished, and those who feel the pain caused by widespread gun availability would like to see better control. There is plenty of middle ground.

    Among all those of us who are moderates on the issue are some who enjoy shooting, but do not want irresponsible people and criminals to be easily armed.

    I can just imagine the interest groups on one side saying that broader background checks will lead to a national registry and confiscation. On the other side I can see interest groups portraying 2nd Amendment supporters as Rambo wannabe's and gun runners.

    They are both wrong. Most of us would accept a reasonable compromise.

  • Phillip M Hotchkiss Malta, Mt
    Jan. 19, 2013 6:53 p.m.

    @Meckofahess.History will show the Federal Goverment does not always have the interest of our safety in mind while taking away our rights as humans. Look what happened when they took the weapons away from the natives at Wounded Knee and it was so called for the safety of the Indians. Look what happened when the Government took the weapons away from the LDS in Missouri. And it was for their Safety. Although I do agree with the restrictions on the type of guns we should be allowed to have but I think it should be decided by the voice of the people and not some Executive Order.

  • Shaun Sandy, UT
    Jan. 19, 2013 6:44 p.m.

    When someone kills somebody because they were drunk, people in this state cry for tighter restrictions on alcohol especially our state lawmakers. When someone kills twenty six people with a gun. People in this state not only do not cry for more restrictions they want less.

    If guns do not kill people alcohol does not kill people.

  • jrgl CEDAR CITY, UT
    Jan. 19, 2013 6:40 p.m.

    Really Utah? The beehive state shoot 'em up legacy was in high gear at the capital today! I'm more afraid of redneck weapon owners in Utah and their paranoia of the "Feds" and hatred for Obama than I am for gun control. Three thousand protesters is a small minority compared to the entire nation who have clearly voiced that gun control needs to happen to prevent children dying in shootings like Sandy Hook Elementary. What could possibly be the reason for owning an assault rifle with clips capable of killing so many? Other developed countries don't allow gun ownership like we have here in the U.S. My cousins son shot and killed a 8 year old friend whilst playing. A gun found in his parents bureau that was loaded for "protection against evil intruders" but was instead used in play by 2 boys. I hope all you protesters lock those semi automatic guns up so your own children use them! Our country is a war zone with all the private guns! Do you really sport hunt with assault rifles? Blow the deer up?

  • Meckofahess Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 19, 2013 6:32 p.m.

    Stand up against "government tyranny"? - What government tyranny are you talking about? The government is tying to protect our children from all the gun toating nuts in America that wouldn't know the difference between responsible gun ownership and sour owl manure. As a hunter, gun owner and citizen, I recognize the sad reality that when a few citizens act irresponsibly it causes the rest of us to lose some of our freedoms. Until WE are able to do a better job of teaching,setting a good example for our children, and providing better mental health care for those who show signs of instability, then the government has to help protect us from ourselves. That is not government tyranny as some tyrannophobes out there are suggesting.

  • George Bronx, NY
    Jan. 19, 2013 6:23 p.m.

    "Obama wants to take our guns" so in other words it was a rally based on lies.

  • Phillip M Hotchkiss Malta, Mt
    Jan. 19, 2013 6:15 p.m.

    I think its Great to see States stand up to the federal Goverment. Great job Utah
    Stand for something .Or sit through everything

  • Ying Fah Provo, UT
    Jan. 19, 2013 6:12 p.m.

    Well, it's Utah, pride of the South and reddest of the red. So what else is new.

  • Cool Cat Cosmo Payson, UT
    Jan. 19, 2013 6:11 p.m.

    this rally was like many others that happened nationwide, and I am proud to say that I made the trip to the Utah State Capital and carpooled with several other like-minded friends to see the rally. I felt like the speakers articulated very well the fact that this issue is about control, and less so about violence. While some Americans may be willing to sell their own rights and the rights of their fellow Americans, many are not.

    Even though it was bitter cold (some 10 degrees I think...), we showed our support, and it was inspiring to see the other men and women out there joining us. Thank you to all who made the trip out, and I hope that as we discuss the issues before us of violence, we may be both civil, and also look at ALL the sources guilty; entertainment, mental illness, prescription drugs, etc., to name a few, and not just blame responsible gun-owning citizens as the scapegoats.