You must be registered to comment and vote on comments.
****** Jimmy Lee Dykes. The Southern Poverty Law Center characterizes Jimmy Lee Dykes as a “survivalist” and has “anti-American” views. He reportedly has ties to the anti-government movement. ******* ------- Jimmy just shot and killed a bus driver and abducted a six year old boy. These are the people that La Pierre is trying to say deserve the right to have a fire arm. Jimmy is got you right flank folks.
Re: "These are the people that La Pierre is trying to say deserve the right to have a fire arm." - Don't bother letting facts get in the way of a good story. Mr. La Pierre and the NRA have always championed 2nd Amendment rights be preserved for law abiding citizens. Someone that killed a bus driver and abducted a boy likely would not fall into that category. Throwing that drivel out there does nothing to credibly add to the discussion. Something tells me that the bus driver might have appreciated an armed citizen intervening and assisting him/her in prolonging their life. I'd go out on a limb here and guess that the bus driver may have wished he/she had a gun themselves at some point during this event. What Mr. La Pierre said in a nutshell is that people may need guns to protect themselves in the event the government can't protect them. Even lacking a major catastrophe such as La Pierre was referencing, that distinction is likely lost on the bus driver and their family. The primary difference between those supporting the 2nd Amendment and those attacking it is a matter of perspective. The people attacking the 2nd Amendment see the world thru the shooters eyes. The supporters mourn the defensless bus driver, fear for the child, and wish someone would have shot the shooter first. They also believe without doubt that another crazy shooter is waiting to emerge somewhere and sometime. And while the police will be called if time permits, we recognize that protecting our own is job one, and failure is not an option.
perronjp - And just who exactly is attacking the second amendment? Adding restrictions on assault weapons and magazine sizes does not prevent American citizens from defending themselves with hand guns. It does not prevent citizens from owning rifles and shotguns. Including semi-automatic rifles. The proposed restrictions are a reasonable, measured response to the too-common mass killings that have been happening in our country. That is not an attack on the second amendment any more than restrictions on bazookas, mortars, shoulder-fires missiles, etc.
mylittleid - I view people that make comments such as blatherskite made to be attacking the 2nd amendment. I said "Throwing that drivel out there does nothing to credibly add to the discussion." - I don't necessarily disagree with your position, you are engaging in an adult discussion and I can appreciate that. And I think we both understand that our positions will vary at times. For blatherskite to say that La Pierre's position is that murderers and child abductors should be afforded the rights outlined under the 2nd amendment is ridiculous. La Pierre said no such thing. In my opinion, making such blatantly insightful and false comments is an effort to avoid intelligent discussion on a subject because either the facts do not support the person's position or the intelligent discussion component is beyond that person's grasp.
mylittleid - Sorry, my spell check offered me the word "insightful " - I was looking more towards the "Incite" definition.
I sure wish people would quit using the term "assault rifle"...The media has whipped ya'll up into a frenzy over that word. It is a semi-auto, same as most other rifles and handguns which can do just as much harm when the next nutjob decides to use them.......
Wayne Lapierre and the NRA are on our side. His carefully crafted words are true and no amount of "spin" can change that.
Wayne LaPierre, the NRA and the congressmen in their pockets are NOT on your "side", or my "side." They are on the "side" of the gun manufacturers and furthering their own careers. They do not speak for me, I am not protected because of their actions, and neither were those poor children in Sandy Hook Elementary. How many such children have to be blown to bits before this country wakes up? And by the way, Wayne was for universal background checks before he was against it, as he now admits.
So when the "time is NOW" to make people safer, we should reenact an Assault Weapons Ban and other knee-jerk legislation that "may take many years for the effects of modest, incremental policy changes to be fully felt, a reality that both researchers and policy makers should heed?"...Brilliant! Sounds like all these new laws are nothing more than "feel good" moves that do nothing more than avoid the real problem which is our culture of hate, depression, and destructive self esteem issues; then there's the "truly" mentally ill on top of that...Happy, productive, loving and loved people wouldn't turn on their neighbors if they all owned their own military issued tanks...I guess it's just easier to fight the object rather than provide treatment and a cure to destructive behavior...War on drugs anyone?
Your comment is being reviewed for inclusion on the site.
Comments will be reviewed before being published.
425 Portland Av. S.
Minneapolis, MN 55488
© 2013 StarTribune. All rights reserved.
StarTribune.com is powered by Limelight Networks