Gun rights perverted
Published: Monday, April 8, 2013, 9:00 p.m.
Gun rights perverted
Regarding the news story “Rifle ban's real impact may be dud” (March 31 and TribLIVE.com): Banning these weapons of mass destruction was never meant to curb all gun violence.
We all know that handguns are killing us more than anything else is, and flag-waving, anti-abortion idealists still scream at the top of their lungs that this is OK. I will never understand the hypocrisy.
A whopping 237 years ago, a few men got together to write down their thoughts as to how to make this country work. They were religion-neutral, corporation-fearing local leaders who wrote that we needed a well-regulated militia.
Like religion, capitalism has perverted this idea as a way to perpetuate itself, to the detriment of our citizens. Politicians are not far behind, waiting for their next installment of “Let's Make a Deal.”
Now we have new community leaders making it unlawful not to own a gun. While this idea has its merits, it is akin to giving the Transportation Security Administration a no-rules mission. The TSA was never a good idea either: Corporate-sent packages receive a free pass in the belly of the plane while the violated passengers attempt to recover their dignity.
A community full of guns will survive until the nut jobs start picking them off one at a time. I do not care to subjugate myself to idiocy.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Choosing judges I
- Choosing judges II
- Prevailing wage downsides I
- Lies and disrespect I taught …
- Prevailing wage downsides II
- Privatization disastrous
- Forcing their beliefs
- Valid comparison?
- Hero at rest
- Christians must vote