"Assault weapons that can fire numerous times in seconds are designed for only one thing: killing large numbers of people. The military and law enforcement officers need that ability; ordinary law-abiding citizens do not."
I'd say that the Tribune just made our point.
6 comments:
Utah has become very Liberal in the last 20 years . That's why there has been an mass exodus of LDS members out of that state for many years . There are more LDS (Mormons) in Idaho than in Utah
Sometimes it is amazing how our enemies, in a single sentence, outline to us, exactly what they have in mind.
We do not live in a police state, where they can do anything they want.
That is why we must have the ability to fight back.
Sometimes, journalists with one neuron between their ears open that gash on their face and show the entire world the plum bob of imbeciles..er..make that idiocy as it takes at least two neurons to make an imbecile.
Redlining the DUMB-O-METER notwithstanding, this statement actually made me ROTFLMFAO.
quote:"Second, while the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution may provide that citizens can arm themselves, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the government has authority under the Constitution to set reasonable limits on gun ownership and use."unquote
Fucking priceless...I responded..
Maybe in your Parallel Universe dimwit. Great Moments in Monumental Stupidity notwithstanding, as a journalist you might consider doing a little research before opening that gash on your face next time. Here in the Universe of reality, in Printz v. U.S.,the U.S. Supreme Court actually struck down the Brady law on June 27th, 1997....thanks to two SHERIFF'S, who sued the US Government in response to Federal officials threatening them. IN THEIR COUNTY, Sheriff's have more power than the POTUS, and Scalia proved it.
quote:
"Scalia
quotes President James Madison, “father” of the Constitution:
“[T]he local or municipal authorities form distinct and independent
portions of the supremacy, no more subject, within their respective
spheres, to the general authority than the general authority is subject
to them, within its own sphere.” The Federalist, No.
39 at 245." unquote
http://www.newswithviews.com/S...
So Mr. Big Bang of Stupidity, perhaps you'd like to discuss your moronic opinion with Scalia. I'm positive he might take it in consideration if and when the next Sheriff sues the Fed's, but given it's already case law...I'd submit he'll laugh in your fucking face.
When they write "the Constitution is clear: Federal law must win", they ignoring two major concepts in the Constitution. The first is that the Constitution does not establish the military and police as having more rights than others that are non-military and non-police. In fact, police are not recognized at all since the police power at the time was either the sheriff or the militia, which is comprised of the people. The second is that powers of the Federal government not enumerated in the Constitution are reserved to the states. So where does this leave 2nd Amendment rights? The wording is very clear, as the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Those that talk about "reasonable restrictions" are blowing smoke because the Federal government is not authorized to impose them, even with the mental gymnastics of invoking the Commerce Clause. Government repetitively overstepping authority until resistance is reduced never makes it right. The right to keep and bear arms without infringement is like virginity - either you have it or you do not, no matter how much they try to tell you otherwise. Resist despite their efforts.
Perhaps the government needs to impose "reasonable restrictions" on the press for the press to understand how that is a civil rights violation.
The Salt Lake Tribune or "Völkischer Beobachter Utah" is not deserving of respect. The staff is in opposition to every free productive person in the state of Utah if not the entire United States and/or world!
Post a Comment