NY Times rant for more federal gun control

[ericire12]

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/20/opinion/20fri2.html?_r=1

 

[twyacht]

Although concealed, loaded weapons obviously have no place in the national parks, the Justice Department brief asserts that the rule “will not have any significant impacts on public health and safety.”

Who is the source for this quote? The Times writer? The Justice Dept???

I missed it.

Maybe the stats of sexual assaults, murder, robberies, that happened at National Parks should be sent to the Justice Dept. Do they not look at their crime figures.

Just put a sign up at Yellowstone, "Criminals Welcome. All Visitors/Victims Unarmed."

[TAB]

Although concealed, loaded weapons obviously have no place in the national parks, the Justice Department brief asserts that the rule “will not have any significant impacts on public health and safety.”

Who is the source for this quote? The Times writer? The Justice Dept???

I missed it.

Maybe the stats of sexual assaults, murder, robberies, that happened at National Parks should be sent to the Justice Dept. Do they not look at their crime figures.

Just put a sign up at Yellowstone, "Criminals Welcome. All Visitors/Victims Unarmed."

I'd bet that if you compare the crime stats of National parks to that of the states they are in, they would be very, very close.

[Fatman]

Although concealed, loaded weapons obviously have no place in the national parks, the Justice Department brief asserts that the rule “will not have any significant impacts on public health and safety.”

Who is the source for this quote? The Times writer? The Justice Dept???

I missed it.

Maybe the stats of sexual assaults, murder, robberies, that happened at National Parks should be sent to the Justice Dept. Do they not look at their crime figures.

Just put a sign up at Yellowstone, "Criminals Welcome. All Visitors/Victims Unarmed."

I think the comment on the ' inappropriateness ' of CCW in the parks was a Times statement. The statement contained from the JD brief is actually a good thing - what they mean is they foresee no danger to the general public from CCW in the parks. Must be really aggravating the Times writer to see the Administration he sold his soul for acting  sensibly based on facts, at least for now.

[runstowin]

The New York Times, the No. 3 paper, fell 3.9 percent in the six months ending in March (2008), according to the Audit Bureau of Circulations. Huffington Post.
Thank goodness their foul voice is getting progressively smaller.

[Sponsor]

[Pathfinder]

The New York Times, the No. 3 paper, fell 3.9 percent in the six months ending in March (2008), according to the Audit Bureau of Circulations. Huffington Post.
Thank goodness their foul voice is getting progressively smaller.

Maybe so, but they are advertising like crazy. There are ads all the time on History especially featuring NYC types - mostly young people in trendy clothes who are more gullible in their minds

[runstowin]

Maybe so, but they are advertising like crazy. There are ads all the time on History especially featuring NYC types - mostly young people in trendy clothes who are more gullible in their minds

In the new improved depression economy Yuppies with froo froo jobs will be standing dazed and confused in soup lines, no longer proud and cocky and distainful, just down and out and confused.

[tt11758]

Is anybody else sick to death of the anti-gunners describing those of us who not only support the second amendment, but exercise our rights under it, as "extremists"?

I submit that those who would deprive us of the rights given to us by God above, and supported by the United States Constitution, are the REAL extremists.  And it's high time that our gloves come off and we begin fighting back at every turn, calling these people out as what they are, unamerican, anti-constitution, anti-liberty, totalitarian, extremist, elitist bullies.  We have turned the other cheek far too long.  It is time to go on the offensive.  All the politicians understand is power.  Let's show them how much power we have.  How many of us there are, and remind them that we WILL have a long memory when it comes time to enter the voting booth. 

The squeaky wheel gets the grease, and until now the Brady Bunch have been doing most of the squeaking.  It's time for us to come out of the closet, and let them know we're here, we're not going away, we're mad as hell and we simply aren't going to take it anymore!!

[TAB]

Is anybody else sick to death of the anti-gunners describing those of us who not only support the second amendment, but exercise our rights under it, as "extremists"?

I submit that those who would deprive us of the rights given to us by God above, and supported by the United States Constitution, are the REAL extremists.  And it's high time that our gloves come off and we begin fighting back at every turn, calling these people out as what they are, unamerican, anti-constitution, anti-liberty, totalitarian, extremist, elitist bullies.  We have turned the other cheek far too long.  It is time to go on the offensive.  All the politicians understand is power.  Let's show them how much power we have.  How many of us there are, and remind them that we WILL have a long memory when it comes time to enter the voting booth. 

The squeaky wheel gets the grease, and until now the Brady Bunch have been doing most of the squeaking.  It's time for us to come out of the closet, and let them know we're here, we're not going away, we're mad as hell and we simply aren't going to take it anymore!!

here is the deal, the people that are getting the attention, ARE the extremists, on both sides of the coin.   The people in the middle are not making any noise/waves so they go unoticed.

[tt11758]

here is the deal, the people that are getting the attention, ARE the extremists, on both sides of the coin.   The people in the middle are not making any noise/waves so they go unoticed.

Sorry TAB, but you're ignoring the fact that, to the anti-gunners, we're ALL extremists.