Wednesday, April 23, 2014
PLACERVILLE, CALIFORNIA
99 CENTS

D’Agostini: ‘Il Duce’ or Constitutional patriot?

EDITOR:

I’m compelled to respond to letters being critical of Sheriff John D’Agostini’s lawful and required actions. In my opinion, they were merely flawed opinions and void of facts.

This is to the woman who stated she was “evolved” and asked the question, “Is D’Agostini a Constitutional scholar,” and to John Garon’s shameful letter in which he impugned the Sheriff’s bearing, character and resorted to no-class name-calling. The questions on the table are: (1) Is John D’Agostini a Constitutional scholar or does he have a degree in Constitutional law? (2) What’s the Sheriff’s reason and authority to write Biden and terminate the U.S. Forest Service?

The questions of “the evolved one” and Mr. Garon revolve around the Sheriff’s education, authority and gun control. In answer, I don’t believe the Sheriff is either a Constitutional scholar nor has a degree in Constitutional law. Regardless, I cannot see how the answers to those two questions have any bearing on the Sheriff’s lawful actions. Fact: The Sheriff is duly elected and legally viewed as the sworn “Chief Law Enforcement Officer” of this county. Fact: The Sheriff takes oaths to uphold both the U.S. and California State Constitutions. Fact: Our Sheriff has been trained and has 20 years of law enforcement experience. Ms. Evolved and Garon seem to believe the President and VP are better educated and equipped to arbitrarily and unilaterally make rules, laws and executive orders, in violation to those Constitutions, that trump our county elected official’s opinions and sworn-to duties and responsibilities. How does one only vested in scholastic theory trump the educated, and experienced?

I am of the opinion that anyone who believes that the President is a Constitutional scholar is delusional. Is a person who practices law for barely one year, teaches a class on the U.S. Constitution and who has never argued a case before the Supreme Court a Constitutional scholar? I offer a resounding no. In the recent past two major issues were “settled” by the Supreme Court with 5 to 4 votes. Indisputable evidence that even the “real” Constitutional scholars cannot agree on what is Constitutional or not.

The Second Amendment provokes controversy and debate, however, read the quotes, letters and memoirs of the Founding Fathers to know the true meaning of that God-given unalienable right for America — a right that Americans are born with, not given to, therefore cannot be taken away. The Second Amendment is the only place in America’s historical foundation papers that contains “shall not be infringed” and arguably the most important of all. If the Second Amendment, allowing the citizenry to be armed, is “infringed,” the balance of our rights and freedoms could not be protected.

A personal analogy regarding the educational/degree issue. I’ve been an aircraft pilot for 51-plus years with thousands of hours of actual experience at the cockpit controls. I was a naval aviator logging 2,700 hours in seven years followed up by a career with a major commercial airline. I’m not a person of letters with degrees, nor an aeronautical engineer. A simple question: “Whom would you trust to safely fly your family from here to anywhere, a person like myself or an aeronautical engineer with a Doctorate degree who has never flown as a pilot?”

Folks would be well advised to learn and understand the Sheriff’s authority, responsibilities and duties before judging. Character, trustworthiness and reputation are necessary traits for me to support any elected representative. Whom do you trust, our elected Sheriff upholding the law of the land or a mysterious guy in the White House who we really know nothing about, including his education, since all of his records from birth to present day are sealed or nonexistent?

It doesn’t take a Constitutional scholar to understand the Constitution — only to subvert it.

NORM MAHALICH
Placerville

Letters to the Editor

LEAVE A COMMENT

Discussion | 45 comments

  • Rodney StanhopeJuly 17, 2013 - 12:19 pm

    WOW Norm, 3 words AMEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! YOU ROCK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.July 17, 2013 - 4:10 pm

    Mr. Mahalich, took me a few minutes to decide whether I would want a pilot with thousands of hours versus a non-pilot. I'm going to opt for you. However, we won't be flying anywhere together -- because I don't fly the airlines anymore as I'm never sure who is up front. About three or four years ago a plane with passengers got a stall warning. Instead of increasing speed, they pulled back and decreased speed. As they were around 5,000 feet there was no way they could fly out of the stall and all were killed. So, one never knows who is up front. As for the Sheriff, I'm sure he is doing what he thinks is best, given that the president may not even exist -- Michelle (?) may actually be the president. Born in the USA, academic and dental records public knowledge.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.July 17, 2013 - 4:19 pm

    The president was born in Kenya in 1961. Somehow "they" knew he would be president in five decades, so they planted false information in local papers and had a doctor do a phony birth certificate showing he was born in Hawaii. And, you can quote me. Drool, drool.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.July 17, 2013 - 4:41 pm

    *** Michelle (Sp ?). Never sure how to spell it.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Karen WoodrellJuly 17, 2013 - 4:51 pm

    Great job, Norm !

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • MorrisJuly 17, 2013 - 10:23 pm

    It's doubtful that any U.S. President within the past century could be considered a constitutional scholar. While the experience and qualification would, indeed, be a great asset, being possessive of such is not necessary to successfully fulfill the role. That is why we have Congress. And the Senate. The President does not have a constitutional role in the amendment process. Neither does the Sheriff. The duties of the Sheriff are many; but interpreting the constitution is not one of them. Neither is the making of laws. His sworn duty is to uphold the rule of law. To expand on that role by picking and choosing piecemeal which laws he feels are valid or appropriate is simply wrong and comes dangerously close to being a violation of just those very freedoms our Constitution was designed to protect. Where does it stop? There are any number of amendments that one or another Sheriff may choose as applicable to current or proposed laws. Or not. Or even those which some consider having been laid down by a 'tyrant'; assuming of course the very definition of such is valid. Some readers here will paint President Obama as one. Others will color President George Bush. Or Clinton. Or anyone you or I do not agree with. Yet others do. The Constitution predicted these types of quagmires and addresses them. To circumvent this process is, at best, illegal. At its worst: Treason. It is my opinion that Sheriff D'Agostini is performing well in his role. Very well. But on this issue, not so much. It reeks of election pandering. It is disingenuous. And it diminishes the many positive contributions Sheriff D'Agostini has made by shifting the focus from his upholding the law to his intent to break the law. Disclosure: I support the 2nd Amendment and own weapons for the protection of my home. I believe that gun ownership requires great responsibility and that they are not 'cool' or a fashion statement; their sole purpose is to destroy that which they are targeted upon. I do not believe that public ownership of automatic weapons and/or high volume clips is responsible or falls within the intent of the amendment as originally conceived.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Paddy O'furnitureJuly 19, 2013 - 6:51 am

    Morris says " The President does not have a constitutional role in the amendment process. Neither does the Sheriff. The duties of the Sheriff are many; but interpreting the constitution is not one of them. Neither is the making of laws. His sworn duty is to uphold the rule of law. To expand on that role by picking and choosing piecemeal which laws he feels are valid or appropriate is simply wrong and comes dangerously close to being a violation of just those very freedoms our Constitution was designed to protect". ................................... So the sheriff can't choose which laws are valid, but the veep can? The sheriff simply said he would not enforce legislation that infringes on or violates the 2nd Amendment rights of the peeps of EDC. In spite of how many lefties would try to convolute the 2nd Am, it's pretty straightforward and the sheriff, knowing the proclivities of statist lefties and their despisal of privately owned firearms, said "Don't mess with this here in EDC". He is not the one picking and choosing Morris; the Ghetto Rat in Chief and his Jersey Weasel veep are the ones doing that. Think about it some...

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Paddy O'furnitureJuly 19, 2013 - 6:55 am

    And as far as the Forest ranger thing, if you have spent any time up the hill and been harassed by Ken Marcus, you'd know why the sheriff did what he did. If you have not had the pleasure of making ocifer Marcus's acquaintance, do a web search of "Ken Marcus USFS", and you'll get some good reading material that will enlighten you.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Jim riordanJuly 19, 2013 - 9:35 am

    Great Job Norm, I agree with every statement made. . I am proud we have REAL Sheriff in our County.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • FranJuly 19, 2013 - 9:47 am

    I support our sheriff...he will be in Pollock to speak to us on crime issues. 6:00 pm at the Pollock Pines Camino Community Center in Pollock Pines. This was Pollock Pines choice over having an advisory board--we felt we would rather just ask the questions to the people who knew the answers. Why go to a board--that goes to a board--that goes to a board? If I need a water questioned answered--I call EID. A Phone problem--I call the phone company....And the list goes on.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Jack MartinJuly 19, 2013 - 9:48 am

    Bravo Norm! Excellent points, anecdotes and provocative questions. I'm sure you'll be hearing from the IRS very soon.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • FranJuly 19, 2013 - 9:49 am

    Sorry...Monday the 22nd of July...this Monday.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Dink LaneJuly 19, 2013 - 3:00 pm

    The Executive branch -- "Executes" the laws. (President & Sheriff) ..... The Legislative branch -- Makes the laws & Policies (Congress & Boards).... According to Webster: Scholar = a learned person..... If President Obama knows it enough to "Teach" it, the "Scholar" title applies. .... If the "Constitution" was so easy to interpret, why do we grill judges before their appointments? ...... Part of Leadership.... IS.... working with other groups and working "Together."...... Stripping USFS "Law-Enforcement Officers" of CIVIL (Murders, Drunk-Driving) is NOT stopping a Rogue Ranger...... Enforcement Officers..are Different than regular rangers...and that rogue-Ranger Ken Something or other....... D'Agostini did NOT lead when the 1st public statement was at a JUNE "Board of Supervisor" meeting complaining about "Road Closures." ...... That's Grandstanding. (I called USFS Headquarters-- NO Complaints filed)... Just like the Sheriff did with the Letter to Biden..... He ADMITTED (March 7th) that CA has these laws on the Books already.... and he had to abide by them by CA Law.... But it really look good to the Tea-Potters.....

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • cookie65July 20, 2013 - 7:12 am

    If the Sheriff has garon buying lots of crayons for his letters to the editor he must, from a sanity perspective, be doing something right. garon does not possess a single perspective that even remotely resembles the foundations of this country. He is a world class useful idiot.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • FranJuly 22, 2013 - 12:14 pm

    The Sheriff will be at our town meeting tonight (July 22nd)at 6:00...Pollock Pines Camino Community Center. Topics are issues of crime...how can citizens help in their neighborhoods...it will be interesting to see who shows...and who doesnt. I think it is very nice that Ms. Santiago was able to get our Sheriff to come up to answer our concerns. I was told it is open to all...Camino is now recognized as part of our community (probably why Camino is in big letters on the side of the community center building...but whatever.) Yes. I am playing nice. Hope to see everyone...because this is the guy who can answer those "crime" questions.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Seems this debate is closedJuly 22, 2013 - 1:15 pm

    Or, Fran, by answering "questions," objectors remeal themselves and can now be singled out complainers and put them on EDC S list for future retaliation by denial of equal services! No thanks! The Supreme Court orders that immunity be stripped from officials who ignore these following quotes from Court decisions commonly ignored by EDC officils. I want to know why Augistini, who has record of California Judicial Counsel findings that Judge Wagoner was found guilty of "obstructing a grand jury investigation," "witness tampering" and many other provable crimes in the CJP investion that resulted in prison terms for other officials, but in a more non corrupt Orange County? Let's hear how that public record doesn't require arresting the Criminal Wagoner? Start Quotes: Claims against those who provide information about suspected crime have "never been regarded with any favor by the courts, and [are] hedged with restrictions which make [them] very difficult to maintain." W. Keeton, Prosser and Keeton on Torts § 119 at 876 (5th Ed. 1984) . "This disfavor of [these] actions represents a value choice based on public policy considerations. Sound public policy and the aims of justice require the uncovering of crime and the prosecution of criminals." Williams v. Ryder/P.I.E. Nationwide, Inc., 786 F.2d854, 857 (8th Cir. 1986) (citation omitted). Generally, these actions are disfavored because"[t]hey have an undesirable tendency to unduly discourage citizens from seeking redress in the courts," Chittenden Trust Co. v. Marshall, 146 Vt. 543, 507 A.2d 965, 969-70 (1986), and because they tend to discourage prosecution of crime. Kimbley v. City of Green River, 663 P.2d 871, 882 (Wyo. 1983) . As one court noted, "[t]here is almost universal agreement that sound public policy dictates that the law should encourage the uncovering and prosecution of crime. Any 'policy that discourages citizens from reporting crime or aiding in prosecution would be undesirable and detrimental to society in general.'" Sanders v. Daniel Int'l Corp., 682 S.W.2d 803, 806 (Mo. 1984) citation omitted). Ironically, I remember in the early 80's in Sacramento the Laotians were in the news because they were afraid to call police, because corruption was so bad in Lao's they were trained to not complain to corrupt police. Unfortunately, reading the above cases, officials have become so arrogant all across our country, we USA humans are experiencing common THIRD WORLD justice in this community. They get paid the same whether or not they do it according to the law, because ask D'Augustini, and he will tell you he as qualified immunity. But this local Jurisdiction, has ignored qualified immunity, and given them Sovereign absolute immunity not matter what they do. The County is there oyster, and if you object and point out their faults, they will cut your throats to chill Constitutional Rights. I haven't heard any real bad news about A'gustini, other than he the Counsel on Judicial Performance found Judge James Wagoner guilty of the same felonies that sent "Orange County" elected Sheriff MIke Carona to prison. So in closing, the Supreme Court again identifies how people can know if their municipality is corrupt. In City of Canton, Ohio v. Harris - 489 U.S. 378 (1989) and in Monell v. Dept of Soc. Servs., 436 U.S. 658, 701 (1978), the Supreme Court teaches us, that it when Law Enforcement fails to discipline above named officials, and their ACCOMPLICES, who turn a blind eye and "Fail to Discipline" public employees; The Supreme Court says that officials abrogate immunity and can be sued into bankruptcy, contrary to what their county counsel may tell them, because this is the major sign of a corrupt municipality. These acts I mention cause the right of a citizen to object, however, as you see, the courts explain that if the counties ignore the rights, the citizens cower. So there you have it. Welcome to third world Placerville! I've been in many 3rd world countries, and this is that!

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • FranJuly 22, 2013 - 1:52 pm

    The meeting tonight is based on the fact--some of us do not believe in advisory counsels--we would rather just talk to the people who can answer our concerns. This is not my meeting nor my questions. If i have a problem with water--I call EID. Phone- AT&T. Crime--the Sheriff. Local government--the BOS. I do not need to go before a board that goes before a board to be decided by yet another board. Actually some of the items on the list...are confusing to me "stat" wise...some are saying one thing--yet the "stats" in three different places disagree. So it should be interesting. There is a "catch" up here as well--if you make visitors (campers) feel they are in a glass bowl--they are not coming back. It seems many are being spoken to as thought they are committing a crime. I spent the last week just talking to strangers...it was interesting. The sheriff s office has always come when I have called...yet some say different...again --it will be interesting tonight.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • A Double Standard?July 22, 2013 - 1:52 pm

    Well there definately is a clear daparture between arresting Ray Nutting, Dave Michado, for white collar crime, while overlooking those who control criminal justice. Nutting at this point is only alleged to be guilty, while, as pointed out by the California Judicial Counsel, Judge James Wagoner is guilty, yet they seem to use him as a patsy to fix cases maybe. If you been sentence by Wagoner you should appeal on grounds that he is being held hostage by witholding arrest and prosecution where crimes have been actually found to be have been committed by a state agency.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • FranJuly 22, 2013 - 1:53 pm

    though

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • FranJuly 22, 2013 - 10:32 pm

    I walked away from the meeting feeling "good"--someone answered our concerns. The young people destroying property at C&Ts will be dealt with--but people have to call in..I know there are a few who know the names--please help by calling...I felt the Sheriff did a great job--I love when someone gives a history behind an answer or a personal platform. I love that the area is doing well--sure there are some problems--but we are not drug infested. Right now--the young hanging around Taco Bell and C&Ts seem to be the problem. Thank you to all that came...

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • FranJuly 28, 2013 - 10:17 am

    The Sheriff was excellent at our town meeting--the town invited him up. The coordinator was Bruce--he did a wonderful job. He lead us in the flag salute, followed by a prayer. This event was not sponsored by any group. Those of us that voted on it--do not believe we need the advisory boards. The people in our town can ask the best people to come up to answer our questions. The next group that will be asked to come up is EID...but it has not been officially decided on. People at the end of a meeting can go up to the coordinator and suggest topics and/or volunteer to coordinate a meeting. We thank the Sheriff for coming up. And we thank Ms. Santiago for arranging it. Once again--these meetings are not run by CEDAPP or the Chamber. And there is no new "group" being formed.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • QuestionsJuly 28, 2013 - 10:45 am

    So how many people in this non-group decided to ask the Sheriff to speak to selected members of the community? How many people were actually there? Who paid for the use of the Community Center or was that donated? Since it is all unofficial, just curious as to the particulars

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • FranJuly 28, 2013 - 12:09 pm

    At the previous meeting...a person suggested that if people were interested in crime--why not ask the sheriff to come up...more than half voting to do just that. It was then suggested to have people volunteer to coordinated and facilitate the meeting. Ms Santiago said it could be her or any member of the community. Someone volunteered. At the end of the meeting a jar was passed around to pay for the lights and electricity. There was enough made for the next meeting as well...we thought $20.00 for air and lights. No one at the Community Center asked for any money...residents just thought it would be nice to help pay the bills--our Community Center is run by the people--no one gets paid. It is all donations. At the end of the meeting people were asked to come forward to talk about ideas for other meetings...or to volunteer to run one.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • FranJuly 28, 2013 - 12:11 pm

    I know many groups count people now...it was estimated by chairs that 90+ people came. The questions asked came from different people. The Sheriff did an excellent job.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • FranJuly 28, 2013 - 12:54 pm

    Okay...how funny...I was just asked how I participated. It was not my idea...and they were not my questions. I did support the idea after it was suggested...and that idea is that if you have a question about crime--ask the sheriff. I did not volunteer to facilitate--although I know how. I did let people know what the time and date--because I supported having the Sheriff come up. And I put in money to help pay for lights and the cooler. I also excepted one of the free bottles of cold water that had been donated. Oh and I ate a cookie (also donated) lololol

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynJuly 28, 2013 - 2:03 pm

    About "Questions" @ 10:45 am: I never understood that the Sheriff was invited to speak "to selected members of the community". Rather, the event was open to anyone interested. There's a difference!

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynJuly 28, 2013 - 2:06 pm

    Apparently Mr. Delphi was not in attendance.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • FranJuly 29, 2013 - 7:20 am

    "@Evelyn July 28, 2013 - 2:06 pm Apparently Mr. Delphi was not in attendance." Nope-Mr. Delphi was not invited...although there was a group who still brought flyers bringing up the advisory board again--with a box to put the flyers in. I felt this was "rude" to the sheriff...it was a neutral meeting...I didnt bring any politics to his show. I voted for the sheriff--felt he was the one that was "best" to answer the questions pertaining to crime. He did a beautiful job. I support bringing up the actual people that can answer what questions people have. He supported what I already knew--crime is down--no drug labs--they have patrols--a substation...we are not a dumping ground for any thing--The Sheriff is doing a great job. Our town meetings are booked for one year...I understand that the suggestions for the next meeting are...talking about neighborhood watch...(which I imagine would be the illegal parking issues by the library for me--parking in front of a fire hydrant is still not allowed right? Pulling down private property "no Parking" signs would fit in there as well.) Possibly bringing up EID...regarding rates--Forebay work (which they did a presentation in April)and the baseball field (which some have forgotten has its own board.) I forget the third item. I understand EID is happy to come on up.(I really like their board--they call back right away--very impressive.) Im sure the Sheriff will send the right people for discussion on neighborhood watch (I think he is doing a great job here in Pollock Pines.) I forget the third choice.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynAugust 01, 2013 - 3:01 pm

    "Illinois’ Cook County Begins Gun Confiscation" - HERE

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • FranAugust 01, 2013 - 3:13 pm

    Sheriff’s team working to seize guns from thousands in Illinois fox news Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/07/28/sheriffs-team-working-to-seize-guns-from-thousands-in-illinois/#ixzz2al4FrgRz

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • FranAugust 01, 2013 - 3:15 pm

    Sheriff’s Deputies Seizing Guns From People With Revoked Permits http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2013/07/26/sheriffs-deputies-seizing-guns-from-people-with-revoked-permits/

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • FranAugust 01, 2013 - 3:19 pm

    Do people need paperwork for rifles?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Dink LaneAugust 01, 2013 - 4:30 pm

    Fran: I'm confused about your objection to Cook County sheriff taking guns away from people who have had their "Firearms Owner's Identification Cards" (FOIC) pulled? These are people who have been arrested or found mentally unstable by the courts. Are you saying you want them to KEEP their guns? You want people like Adam Lanza to keep his gun?.... This is an area that had 17 KILLINGS over the weekend. Are you saying the sheriff shouldn't go after these people???

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • DB SmithAugust 01, 2013 - 4:46 pm

    Fran, paper work and waiting period for rifles is needed.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • FranAugust 01, 2013 - 6:42 pm

    Dink--no I do not want people who kill to have guns. But just as you said about information coming from the net...where did they get the information so quickly to find people and all the cards that were no longer valid? I would imagine some people who are not thinking right--are hidden? Is there a computer that links all this information and tells them where to find them all? I know people who have killed with their bare hands...some have to register those hands...some are not always thinking straight--should we round them up? So no Dink...im worried about a round -up...a "Gun" posse...it is all something to think about. Those people will now just go get guns--and not register them...so now it becomes--well we use to know where they were. Just a different point of view--I believe in people getting help--I believe in mental hospitals being allowed to work with people...I believe that people kill--not guns. I do not know how to fire a gun...I was just told that because im disabled (it is my hands and legs that dont work)I may not own one...interesting.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • FranAugust 01, 2013 - 6:43 pm

    DB thanks :)

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • FranAugust 01, 2013 - 6:56 pm

    Dink--this is the original article I bounced off of Illinois’ Cook County Begins Gun Confiscation http://intellihub.com/2013/08/01/illinois-cook-county-begins-gun-confiscation/ I just provided two more sites.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • FranAugust 01, 2013 - 6:58 pm

    “A new Cook County Sheriff’s team is crisscrossing the suburbs to seize guns from thousands of people whose Firearm Owner’s Identification Cards have been revoked. More than 3,000 people in Cook County have failed to surrender their revoked FOID cards to the state. Sheriff Tom Dart said he thinks many of them continue to possess firearms… Every week, the [Illinois] State Police alert the sheriff’s gun team of about 10 to 20 new revocations in Cook County. The investigators conduct a basic inquiry into the gun purchasing histories of the people they intend to contact. Then they knock on their doors.” same site D--say mental people vs, r--who say it is just a way to take away guns

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.August 01, 2013 - 7:58 pm

    Fran, re. your 6:58pm. If a gun owner in Illinois is required to have a Firearm Owner's ID card in support of having their firearm and the card expires it seem reasonable that the authorities require them to renew their card or surrender their firearm. Should I be worried that this is in Illinois (the home of Obama) and California might be next and maybe I should bury my pistol in the back yard so the Regular Army, National Guard, Sheriff, police, or Sheriff volunteers, et. al., cannot find it. What do you think?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • FranAugust 01, 2013 - 8:34 pm

    lolol...i dont know James--I just thought that "More than 3,000 people in Cook County have failed to surrender their revoked FOID cards to the state. "--is a lot of people. My grandpa slept with his rifle near him...he had a fifth wheel outside of the main house...he said that instead of locking up his guns--he would just lock himself and his guns up in the fifth wheel. I miss him. I do not know how to fire a gun...after teaching me to use the ax--he said I was not allowed to touch any other potential weapons. Go figure...(shhhhhhhh I dont like guns at all.)

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.August 01, 2013 - 8:43 pm

    Fran, I have to ask -- what is a fifth wheel? Tried to think it out, but came up empty. As for sleeping with your weapon, in Vietnam I would go to sleep with my pistol in my hand in case we were overrun, but upon waking I would find that I had dropped it during sleep. Just lucky I didn't shoot my thing off.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • FranAugust 01, 2013 - 8:49 pm

    It is hard to imagine 3000 crazy people having cards in the first place. "Here is your card...months later--years later--oops-- we didnt know you were a crazed killer--we revoke your card--you must give up your gun now." James...it doesnt make sense. The FOID card is issued by the Illinois State Police, who first perform a check of the applicant on the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), an electronic database maintained by the FBI. Grounds for disqualification include a conviction for a felony or for an act of domestic violence, a conviction for assault or battery within the last five years, or being the subject of an order of protection. wiki

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • FranAugust 01, 2013 - 8:51 pm

    a spare tire?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • FranAugust 01, 2013 - 8:56 pm

    I had brought my kids up here with me and told my grandfather he had to lock up his guns...that is why he chose to take them all with him to his fifth wheel...Im not sure why he called it that--it had more tires than that...it was his pride and joy. I just let my grandparents do and say what ever they wanted...I was brought up to respect my elders--even if they didnt make sense.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • FranAugust 01, 2013 - 9:05 pm

    Some recreational vehicles use a fifth wheel configuration, requiring the coupling to be installed in the bed of a pickup truck...now it makes sense--I asked my grandfather the same question--and he always point to the truck...so I counted eight wheels with both combined and just walked away...lolol...he was pointing to the object it hooked onto in the back of the truck...lololol...no wonder he called me the stupid city kid...lololol...good night James.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
.

News

Downtown group coordinates painting, awnings

By Wendy Schultz | From Page: A1

 
More mountain lion sightings reported

By Dawn Hodson | From Page: A1, 8 Comments

 
Supervisor Nutting trial begins

By Cole Mayer | From Page: A1, 72 Comments | Gallery

Sanford murder case to jury

By Cole Mayer | From Page: A1 | Gallery

 
Herard over the back fence: Try fishing at Wakamatsu

By Bob Billingsley | From Page: B1

Gearing tax questions to correct office saves time

By Treasurer-Tax Collector | From Page: A3

 
.

Opinion

My turn: More than a buzzword

By Special to the Democrat | From Page: A4, 23 Comments

 
Building restored

By Mountain Democrat | From Page: A4

 
Outstanding dog

By Mountain Democrat | From Page: A4

.

Letters

‘Parents, be afraid’ letter

By Letters to the Editor | From Page: A5, 20 Comments

 
Ukranian situation

By Letters to the Editor | From Page: A5, 4 Comments

Misquote

By Letters to the Editor | From Page: A5, 9 Comments

 
Altshuler framing

By Letters to the Editor | From Page: A5, 9 Comments

National Day of Prayer

By Letters to the Editor | From Page: A5, 2 Comments

 
.

Sports

Pedal power at the forefront next month

By Jerry Heinzer | From Page: A6 | Gallery

 
Outside with Charlie: Transitioning

By Charlie Ferris | From Page: A6

Pitching the ‘Root’ cause of Trojans’ victory

By Mike Bush | From Page: A6 | Gallery

 
Sports Scene: April 22, 2014

By Democrat Staff | From Page: A7

Roundup: April 22, 2014

By Democrat Staff | From Page: A7

 
.

Prospecting

4-H’ers star at showcase

By Dawn Hodson | From Page: B1 | Gallery

 
At a glance: Look for fireballs

By Mimi Escabar | From Page: B2, 1 Comment

Authors to share their stories

By Pat Lakey | From Page: B2, 2 Comments

 
Church to host human trafficking conference

By Pollock Pines | From Page: B3

Grow For It! Flower of Easter

By Barbara Schuchart | From Page: B5

 
.

Essentials

Crime Log: April 1-3

By Cole Mayer | From Page: A2

 
Weather stats 4-22-14

By Michael Raffety | From Page: A2

Building permits 4/7-11/2014

By Michael Raffety | From Page: A2

 
.

Obituaries

Bobby Lloyd Bridges

By Contributor | From Page: A2

 
Harry Frank Harper

By Contributor | From Page: A2, 6 Comments

Marion “Wayne” Griswold

By Contributor | From Page: A2

 
.

Real Estate

.

Comics

New York Times Crossword

By Contributor | From Page: A8

 
Flying McCoys

By Contributor | From Page: A8

Speed Bump

By Contributor | From Page: A8

 
Tundra

By Contributor | From Page: A8

Horoscope, Thursday, April 24, 2014

By Contributor | From Page: A8

 
Horoscope, Wednesday, April 23, 2014

By Contributor | From Page: A8

Working It Out

By Contributor | From Page: A8

 
TV Listings

By Contributor | From Page: A8

Shoe

By Contributor | From Page: A8

 
Sudoku

By Contributor | From Page: A8

Rubes

By Contributor | From Page: A8