In our opinion: Boston Marathon tragedy shouldn't destroy our freedoms


Return To Article
  • mark Salt Lake City, UT
    April 18, 2013 12:28 a.m.

    Happy Valley Heretic, you are absolutely correct. Arms very much includes, by definition, all weapons, all amunition, all armament. (Armament, Arms, get it?)

    Military weapons and equipment: "chemical weapons and other unconventional armaments".
    The process of equipping military forces for war.
    arming - arms - weaponry

    It is actually a very reasonable question that has been asked of Richards. And all people who insist on a literal reading of the constitution in all areas. The second is clearly saying that the people have a right to all arms. And yet that was written with an 18th century understanding of Arms. The drafters of the Constitution saw absolutely no problem with people owning muzzle loading muskets, or even cannons. Or, frankly, even the most powerful explosives of the day: gunpowder.

    They had no understanding of the type of Arms we would be dealing with today.

    So this puts conservatives in a bind. If they admit that the 2nd allows regulation of some Arms, then the only question is: where is the line drawn?

  • Tolstoy salt lake, UT
    April 17, 2013 4:59 p.m.

    are you really calling others out for being deceptive through the use of multiple sign ins Mike J White?

  • Happy Valley Heretic Orem, UT
    April 17, 2013 4:53 p.m.

    Definition of arms: noun, weapons and ammunition; armaments.

    I don't see arms as specific to guns mike, and remember the rockets red glare, bombs bursting in air?

    The constitution doesn't specify so one must use common sense, right? or else LDS Lib is correct and his right to bear arms, even bombs and drones, is being infringed upon.

    Like an earlier commenter said, "why is the only time the word "regulation" is used in the constitution, it's in reference to the 2nd Amendment?

    Because the founders expected that common sense would be used, not just your interpretation set in concrete.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    April 17, 2013 11:01 a.m.

    Mike Richards
    South Jordan, Utah
    @Open Minded Mormon,

    Your "question" deserves no answer.


    Mike --

    Yes or No?

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    April 16, 2013 2:35 p.m.

    @Open Minded Mormon,

    Your "question" deserves no answer. When you change the "right to keep and bear arms" to the right to keep and bear bombs you are being both ludicrous and infantile. You mock the lives that were lost and the injuries received when an impotent government could not detect nor stop another terrorist attack on Americans in America.

    Diverting attention away from that bombing is not what a patriot would do nor is it something that helps any American understand what he duty is to protect himself and his family against any and all who would hurt him or them.

    We look to the police for protection but they can only be in one place at one time and they can only respond to danger when they are made aware of that danger.

    Our borders are not secure. Terrorists are inside the borders of our nation. The TSA searches little old ladies but lets pass anyone who fits the profile of a terrorist so that they are "politically correct".

    The government has failed to do its job, yet you demand that the government oversee our safety. Will you ever learn?

  • OlderGreg USA, CA
    April 16, 2013 2:38 p.m.

    @ LDS Liberal
    Farmington, UT

    Definitely not Timothy McVeigh level of thinking.

    My "battle" was in quotes. Think in terms of public discourse, ballots, letters to politicians-- newspapers -- public opinion.

  • Noodlekaboodle Poplar Grove, UT
    April 16, 2013 2:22 p.m.

    @John Charity Springs
    So, on one hand the constitution is a god given document that we must follow. On the other hand, ahhhhhh, that freedom of speech thing, lets get rid of it. Couple of thoughts on that, the same freedom to produce violent video games and movies is lumped in with religious freedom. For better or worse, it's all in the 1st Amendment. The other thing I don't get is why the 2nd amendment is some idea that must be protected at all cost, with no restrictions whatsoever, but the 1st is only a good idea when you agree with the opinion being expressed.

  • Anti Bush-Obama Washington, DC
    April 16, 2013 2:11 p.m.

    Regimes always use terrorism as a weapon to dispose of their political dissidents.

  • Anti Bush-Obama Washington, DC
    April 16, 2013 1:33 p.m.

    lds liberal

    Are you in favor of putting yellow stars on all "right wingers"? Would that make you feel better?

  • Open Minded Mormon Everett, 00
    April 16, 2013 12:24 p.m.

    Mike Richards
    South Jordan, Utah
    @ airnaut aka openminded mormon aka lds liberal,

    What is your solution?


    Um - something called "restrictions".

    For example -- Keeping track as to who buys what.
    Someone walking in and buying 40 pounds of black powder should at least be questioned as to why.

    You can buy dynamite, but there are restrictions [what for, how much].
    You can buy Pseduophed, but there are restitictions [what for, how much].

    Because those over the counter purchase can be used for bad purposes.

    You and your "shall not be infringed" for anyone for anything just allows whack hobs like this to get away with murder.


    You this everytime Mike --
    you deflect and NEVER answer a direct question.
    It's your way of not incriminating yourself.

    Now please -- AGAIN,
    Are you both willing to stick your neck out and defend this nut-job's 2nd amdendment "right" to keep and bear bombs?

    Your comments for months have been saying - Yes indeed.
    You've never said you'd protect my "right" to keep and bear biological, chemical or nuclear bombs...

    I just double-dog-dare you to "man-up", show some integrity and stand by your comments and say so now.

  • Irony Guy Bountiful, Utah
    April 16, 2013 12:20 p.m.

    I fear we will become inured to such events, just as we have become inured to violent gunshot deaths all around us all the time.

  • Ajax Mapleton, UT
    April 16, 2013 12:00 p.m.

    Words are inadequate in describing the Boston tragedy. We are left with our thoughts and prayers in behalf of those who suffer.

    The bombing brings into sharp focus the horror of violence. While violence in theory may appeal to some either as a weapon used aggressively or as a deterrent, in reality, as we see in Boston, it is abhorrent in every regard and a marker of the worst of times.

    Might this give us pause in our advocacy of unlimited guns in America.

  • Ernest T. Bass Bountiful, UT
    April 16, 2013 11:30 a.m.

    Why would it destroy our freedoms?
    My hunch is that this was a homegrown terror act similar to McVey and OKC. During the Clinton years the nut jobs formed thousands of militias to combat the federal government. Same thing is happening during Obama's administration.
    A repub in the White House can get away with anything without the far right even paying attention but once a Dem is in the White House the extremists want to mix it up.
    If they find the person who did this, I would wager it would be an anti-government militia member who was quite happy when Bush gave us the Patriot Act.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    April 16, 2013 10:40 a.m.

    @ airnaut aka openminded mormon aka lds liberal,

    What is your solution?

    Would you live in jail so that the government can lock you up safe from anyone who would harm you?

    Would you give up your firearms because the government told you that only they had the right to keep and bear arms?

    Would you give up your privacy because the government wanted to listen to your conversations?

    You are advocating all of the above when you mock the citizens of this nation who are free from government oversight; free from government infringements; free from bureaucrats telling them when they can travel, where they can go, what they can do.

    Laws are on the books the restrict "bombs". You know that. You know that those laws were broken in the Boston bombing, yet you mock honest citizens who understand that they must speak responsibly against corrupt politicians who use any excuse to take away our rights and that they must speak against ignorant citizens who misunderstand their personal responsibility to defend our rights against government intrusion.

    The Boston bombing was against the law. The law did not stop the bomber(s). Government restrictions did not stop the bomber(s).

  • airnaut Everett, 00
    April 16, 2013 9:51 a.m.

    Hayden, ID

    Mike Richards
    South Jordan, Utah


    Time to but your rhetoric to the Constitutional test...

    Just curious,
    Are you both willing to stick your necks out and defend this nut-jobs 2nd amdendment "right" to keep and bear bombs?
    Just so long as he doesn't blow anybody up?

  • Flashback Kearns, UT
    April 16, 2013 9:50 a.m.

    I think that we need immediate legislation to ban bombs, right now. Oh wait. We already have laws against bombs. Hmmm. Someone set two off without regards to the law. Maybe we need a background check to keep bombs out of the hands of law abiding citizens. Oh wait. Law abiding citizens are not going aroung posessing bombs. Only criminals and terrorists.

    I'm guessing that Open Minded Mormon is way off base. But keep living the dream.

  • Ultra Bob Cottonwood Heights, UT
    April 16, 2013 9:28 a.m.

    The worst part of these disasters is that we never get to know the reason why.

    It almost seems that the political propagandist like it that way. They are free to spin the cause to their advantage.

    I find it very incongruous that we place so much attention to the killing of people for political reasons and very little attention to the killing of people by business malfunction.

    We will spend millions of dollars to apprehend, convict and punish the people who put the bombs in Boston along with other millions of dollars of media coverage.

    Yet we know the people responsible for the deaths of people by peanut butter, spinach and bad medicine and have not seen any of them properly punished for ignoring the regulations of our government.

    I think it was the cable news that said the Dentist who use the unsanitary tools, might lose his license to practice.

  • dalefarr South Jordan, Utah
    April 16, 2013 9:22 a.m.

    Any rhetoric to the contrary, we are vulnerable to terrorist attacks and we will remain so. We will have to trade some of our privacy rights to enhance public safety. Maybe we should follow the London example and install surveillance cameras in the downtown sections of our major cities.

  • Tolstoy salt lake, UT
    April 16, 2013 9:08 a.m.


    So then you do plan to shamelessly use this as a platform?

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    April 16, 2013 8:35 a.m.

    Our first concern should be for the people who were injured, their families and the families of those who died. Have we remembered them in our supplications?

    Then, we must not allow any level of government to use terrorism to inhibit our liberties. We, the people of the United States, must use our own eyes and our own ears to see those among us who cause fear and harm. We must not allow the government to use this as an excuse to listen to our conversations, to restrict our movements, to open our email or to infringe on any liberty in any way.

    There is always a "trail" in any crime. Those in law enforcement have the tools and the training to follow that "trail". The criminals will be caught and they must be prosecuted, but we must never let criminals cause us to run to government for security. Too many corrupt politicians will embrace our fear as they make laws to take away our freedoms.

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    April 16, 2013 7:59 a.m.

    @ Open minded Mormon. Nice speculation on your part but have you considered it might be a dope smoking, occupy Wall Street, Godless secular progressive that do not know that good and evil are not relative, that they are accountable to no one therefore who's life has no meaning, no purpose and therefore killing people is the only way he can be "somebody" like Jared Loughner, Adam Lanza, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold (Columbine)? Or have you considered it might turn out to be Al Qaida who hates and is at war with America precisely because of Godless secular progressives? Now please remember to "keep an open mind", right?

  • george of the jungle goshen, UT
    April 16, 2013 7:31 a.m.

    Sole is to put yourself in someone else's shoes. I sympathizes with the family's.

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    April 16, 2013 12:36 a.m.

    In the early 90s I used to travel to the UK on business often. While there, I would stay with a friend who lived in Cevent Gardens section of London.... and twice there were bombings like this. Once a Pub was bombed, another a bus stop.

    The Brits were amazing in their resolve in not letting those who would try to shape opinion and policy through acts of terrorism was amazing. They did the tight british upper lip thing, and would not dignify the acts, validating those horrific acts.

    I worry that in todays news hungry world that ratings will eclipse the need to not encourgae or give air to those who seek to exploit our feers. Today was a horrific act of cowardess. Patriots used to give their own lives to achieve the greater good. These cowards take others lives - forcing the sacrifce on others. Who ever they are - they are weak and cowards.

    May the people of Boston stand united that they will not be scared into reacting to these people. May they not bend to those who would use violence and the sacrifice of others to gain their political ends.

  • George New York, NY
    April 15, 2013 10:19 p.m.

    @john charity spring
    funny that you would find it shameful for others to use it as a platform for their agendas but then go on to do exactly that.

  • John Charity Spring Back Home in Davis County, UT
    April 15, 2013 10:01 p.m.

    How shameful that this tragedy will be exploited by those how actually seek to destroy traditional American values. They will use the cry of "freedom" to push for fewer restrictions on violent forms of entertainment. They will scream that the public must have the freedom to view violent movies and play violent video games.

    Hopefully, the general public will not fall for these false references to freedom. When a society abandons restrictions on violence and wanton sexual conduct, it actually places itself in bondage to the resulting disease, crime, and broken families.

    Let us all resolve to honor true freedom and the victims of this terrible tragedy by resolving to abandon violent and sexually explicitly forms of entertainment. Instead, we must return to the values that made this Country great, such as fidelity, honor, chastity, and peacefulness.

  • the old switcharoo mesa, AZ
    April 15, 2013 9:27 p.m.

    "On days like this there are no Republicans or Democrats," Obama said. "We are Americans united in concern for our fellow citizens."

    Since FOX won't directly quote Obama...

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    April 15, 2013 8:54 p.m.

    USA, CA
    To "battle this evil without abandoning what it holds dear", we will have to "battle" our own governments,...


    It's thoughts like THAT that led to Timothy McVeigh and the Oklahoma Federal Building bombing, and quite possibly this one as well.

  • OlderGreg USA, CA
    April 15, 2013 6:22 p.m.

    To "battle this evil without abandoning what it holds dear", we will have to "battle" our own governments, because we abandoned many of those dear things long ago.

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    April 15, 2013 5:26 p.m.

    I agree. They 'win' when we react out of fear. Like we do at the airport. Every time something like this happens I compare our reaction with the steadfast stoic resolve of London during the IRA attacks in the 70's, or even during the recent subway attacks.

  • DN Subscriber 2 SLC, UT
    April 15, 2013 5:16 p.m.


    Now, I assume you also believe that horrific deeds by crazy people should not be an excuse for destroying some of our other freedoms?

    Freedom comes with risks, and few guarantees as to safety, but not everyone wants to give up liberty for some temporary security.

  • Open Minded Mormon Everett, 00
    April 15, 2013 4:16 p.m.

    I won't be the least bit surprised to discover this perpetrator ends up being an --

    Patriot wanna-be,
    honoring the Battle of Lexington and Concord,
    by using a blackpowered homemade IED, [pipebomb],
    seeking to sound a "shot heard 'round the world",
    Can't take away MY right to bear any arms I want!,
    "Boston" Tea-Partier.

    It "shouldn't" destroy our Freedoms,
    but those thinking they are defending Freedom and the Constitution -- are actually the very one's trampling it faster than any outside force possilbe ever could.