PUBLIC VIEWPOINT: Don’t Decide What Others Need

Posted: January 16, 2013 at 1:19 a.m.

I’ve been reading a lot of letters in the paper regarding gun ownership, most written in light of the horrid massacre in Newtown, Conn.

This story is only available from our archives.

Opinion, Pages 5 on 01/16/2013

Democrats contend that we should fully support Obama in his efforts to do everything he can to protect us. How does abridging or taking our rights and abilitiy to defend ourselves do that? It doesn't because that is not what he intends at all. Resurrecting efforts by a iberal eleite to disarm and subjugate the people using a tragedy invovling children is despicable. It reinforces the fact that liberalism is a mental disorder that can be very dangerous.

Posted by: jeffieboy

January 17, 2013 at 11:12 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Please explain to clear terms why an AR-15 with 2 30 round magazines is superior in self defense to a 12-gauge?

How does an AR-15 with a 100 round drum become a superior weapon to a .308 with 10 rounds and a scope?

Why is a ban on 10+ round magazines and military-style designs suddenly unacceptable but I haven't heard any arguments about a repeal of the "Firearm Owners Protection Act" of 1986?

In short, where are conservatives and the NRA drawing the line at a "restriction of rights" and why there?

Posted by: Nilatir

January 17, 2013 at 12:03 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

jeffieboy, please explain which rights are being taken away from you and how do they affect your ability to defend yourself? I read Obama's plan of action and saw nothing in it that I personally need to worry about. I can still keep the gun I have now and can even acquire additional ones should I need to.

Posted by: Dexter

January 17, 2013 at 12:10 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

From posts on other threads I gather that jeffieboy regards the "mental disorder" of liberalism is exemplilfied by the passage of Social Security in 1936, 75 years ago.

Posted by: Coralie

January 17, 2013 at 1:25 p.m. ( | suggest removal )