Friday, April 18, 2014
PLACERVILLE, CALIFORNIA
99 CENTS

Mass shooting at Conn. school

EDITOR:

I am writing in response to Patrick D. McAtee, Sr.’s letter in the Dec. 21 issue regarding the recent massacre in Connecticut. Mr. McAtee states the point of his letter is: “We can’t mitigate all the dangers of a free society or of life in general.” Well, the current nation-wide discussion is not about that. We are not talking about alcohol or automobiles or bad drivers or bad luck. We are talking about guns. And, by the way, I cannot understand how Mr. McAtee can compare the Newtown Connecticut tragedy to an automobile accident.

Our Founding Fathers were not seers; therefore, amendments to the Bill of Rights have been necessary. When an action serves no purpose but to harm others, it does not deserve to be deemed a right. As an opponent of censorship of any kind, I am nevertheless grateful that we have outlawed child pornography and yelling “fire” in a crowded theatre for the hell of it. I believe assault weapons are a menace to society.

I am appalled at Wayne Lapierre’s suggestion that the solution to these horrors is to have armed guards at schools. Not just because that didn’t work at Columbine, but because it is no solution at all. Would we have armed guards at private schools? What about day care centers, amusement parks, McDonalds?

What Mr. McAtee and Mr. Lapierre and so many others don’t seem to get is this: No one wants to take away your guns. The 2nd Amendment isn’t going away. Buy all the guns you can afford. But don’t forget that in a free society we must sacrifice our interests for the greater good. And we are not, and do not want to become, a military state. One question for Mr. McAtee and his ilk: Just who is it that hunts with an assault weapon?

SYLVIA MEDLEY
El Dorado

Letters to the Editor

LEAVE A COMMENT

Discussion | 87 comments

  • Harold FortneyDecember 24, 2012 - 6:57 pm

    Well stated, Sylvia. I have noticed that all of the NRA defenders on this forum always start their arguments with, "liberals are screaming to confiscate all the guns". I have yet to see anyone propose anything of the kind. It gives you insight into the NRA paranoid mentality. Have a merry and safe Christmas.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Chuck HollandDecember 25, 2012 - 8:29 pm

    Ms. Medley, the second amendment guarantee's all the right to bear arms. Arms are not just for hunting. A persons right to own a specific type of fire arm is part of living in a free society. Keep in mind guns don't kill, people kill. much the same as your car, it presents no danger sitting in your garage. Add a human to the vehicle and its now capable of killing. Explore the common denominators of the mass school shootings, at the root is mental health, and violent video games. Maybe a ban on violent video games would be more appropriate.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Sylvia MedleyDecember 26, 2012 - 8:47 am

    Mr. Holland, I'm all for a ban on violent video games. I've seen some of the worst of them. I know what they are. I know what the 2nd Amendment means. Have all the weapons at your home for protection you can afford. You don't need an assault weapon. Of course guns don't kill people. Bullets do. The weapon that can shoot the most bullets the quickest kills the most people. Mental health is part of the problem. That's another issue. Try thinking about the greater good.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • DarrinDecember 26, 2012 - 10:51 am

    For the - Schools Need Armed Guards - crowd, here are some more ideas. Firemen need armed guards. Search the SacBee for - NY firemen's killer mapped out plan for slayings Mall Cops need armed guards. Oh, wait, this guy didn't kill anyone, but some armed citizen should have shot him or a bystander anyway. Then they could get shot by the police who respond because they are shooting people... Where does it end? Search the SacBee for - Man cooperative after firing shots at mall Drivers need armed guards. Search the SacBee for - Driver killed in East Los Angeles shooting or Man fires at couple in SUV, passenger wounded The Police need armed guards - Wait, police already have guns. Search the SacBee for - Kansas man who killed 2 cops dies Homeowners need armed guards - Robber shoots resident with own rifle Search the SacBee for - Robber shoots resident with own rifle Whoops, maybe MORE GUNS are not the ANSWER!!!

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Howard JohnsonDecember 28, 2012 - 1:41 am

    Harold- does the second amendment guarantee you the right to own a bazooka? How about a rocket launcher? Chem/Bio weapons? Nukes? These are all "arms".

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampDecember 28, 2012 - 7:20 am

    Howard Johnson, the atrocities perpetrated against disarmed populations exceed by millions the tragedies occurring within armed populations. “Events” within disarmed populations are modified with words such as genocide and extermination. “Tragic” is an adjective that insults a good despot but applies aptly to Newtown Connecticut. I fear the insane acts of totalitarian government above the insane acts of individuals. Stalin, Pol Pot, Hitler . . . Please Mr. Johnson, cease cluttering the debate with claptrap such as ” does the second amendment guarantee you the right to own a bazooka? How about a rocket launcher? Chem/Bio weapons? Nukes?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Paddy O'furnitureDecember 28, 2012 - 7:38 am

    1911 – Turkey disarmed its citizens, and between 1915 – 1917 they murdered 1.5 million Armenians. 1929 – Russia disarmed its citizens, and between 1929 – 1953 they murdered 20 million Russians. 1935 – China disarmed its citizens, and between 1948 – 1952 they murdered 20 million Chinese. 1938 – Germany disarmed its citizens, and between 1939 – 1945 they murdered 16 million Jews. 1956 – Cambodia disarmed its citizens, and between 1975 – 1977 they murdered 1 million Educated people. 1964 – Guatemala disarmed its citizens, and between 1964 – 1981 they murdered 100,000 Mayan Indians. 1970 – Uganda disarmed its citizens, and between 1971 – 1979 they murdered 300,000 Christians. Death by government is a much bigger danger than death by a crazy man with a gun.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardDecember 28, 2012 - 8:27 am

    Tax, license and demand gun owners insurance for all gun owners like DMV does autos, trailers and boats annually with heavy penalties.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • robertdnollDecember 28, 2012 - 9:10 am

    insurance for gun owners will fix or stop?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • DB SmithDecember 28, 2012 - 9:15 am

    Richard, you're typical liberal suggestion of more government control over law abiding citizens is not the answer. More taxes, licenses and insurances huh? You're little pea brain probably really thinks that the criminal minded would pay their tax, licenses and insurance for their guns.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Howard JohnsonDecember 28, 2012 - 9:26 am

    Phil- so you think that the slaughter of 20 innocent kids is unfortunate collateral damage in your imaginary war? Disgusting. Sounds like you do support private citizens having a military arsenal. Again I ask you, what does the 2nd amendment NOT allow you to have?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampDecember 28, 2012 - 10:02 am

    Howard Johnson somehow winnowed from my 7:20 am comment that I, think that the slaughter of 20 innocent kids is unfortunate collateral damage in your(my) imaginary war.” Mr. Johnson, please reread that post and you find none of that rubbish. And I will NOT pursue the red herring arguments you present as a distraction. “imaginary war”??? The Armenian, Ukrainian, German, Chinese and Cambodian genocides were imaginary?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • cookie65December 28, 2012 - 10:15 am

    Well done, this could be one of the most clueless demonstrations of ignorance regarding all of human history that I have ever read. And I have read some pretty clueless examples of ignorance. Congratulations. We certainly have the low information voters to thank for the next four years.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampDecember 28, 2012 - 10:31 am

    BTW Howard, drop by anytime and I'll happily surrender to you ALL my bazookas, rocket launchers, Chem/Bio weapons and nukes . . . provided you surrender the government data base on me, my friends, relatives and neighbors WRT everything else.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardDecember 28, 2012 - 10:42 am

    Smith, I love it, my little pea brain from a guy who sleeps with a gun dreaming of the day he can use it for real and who truly thinks he needs it to defend himself from our government, as if it would do any good. The idea of fees is to educate, discourage the acquisition and document who has weapons and what kind annually. Annual fees at $25.00 could amount to almost +- 7billion annually with the fees going to law enforcement to pay for the aftermath of shootings, new equipment and to social services to document those who from the get go who should not be allowed to even get in line to purchase a weapon. An Additional side benefit for law enforcement would be any weapon discovered during a routine stop, domestic violence, or similar event discovered with or without a permit could be taken off the streets if the fees aren’t paid. And I might add an additional requirement to legally own a weapon, annual physical evaluations and drug testing of gun owners similar to a commercial truck driver and pilot’s license would go a long way to taking weapons away from crazies like you who feel the need to defend themselves against our armed forces. And if I’m wrong, you can always buy a weapon from one of those who think they can manufactory weapons in their backyard shops a barns during a time of national crises

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Howard JohnsonDecember 28, 2012 - 10:59 am

    Oh I get it, Phil. Any question you cannot answer is a red herring. You are the one who thinks we need to be armed so that we can fight the government when the time comes. Therefore, using your logic, we need to be armed for war. We need wartime weapons. Where in the second amendment does it say that we cannot own rocket launchers?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Roberta SimonsDecember 28, 2012 - 11:04 am

    There is one very disturbing thing emanating from this thread, and that is that the gun owners who post here come off as the very last people that I would trust with a gun. Hopefully, they are not representative of all gun owners.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Chairman MaoDecember 28, 2012 - 11:16 am

    All political power comes from the barrel of a gun. The communist party must command all the guns, that way, no guns can ever be used to command the party - Mao Tse Tung

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • DB SmithDecember 28, 2012 - 11:20 am

    Richard, so you want to "educate and discourage" law abiding citizens. In your plan you advocate for more taxes, more licensing, more insurances, and now you want to tag on annual physical exams and drug testing. I can see how that would be discouraging to the law abiding citizens. I can also tell you that as a law abiding and responsible gun owner you can go to hell. I believe that the criminals out there would agree with your thought process though because it would make it much easier for them to carry on with their deeds.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Dink LaneDecember 28, 2012 - 11:31 am

    We have MORE regulations on the RIGHT TO VOTE...than on the right to own a gun or assault rifle. Losing the right to VOTE is "more" dangerous to our freedom than having the right to a gun LOCKED in the house.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • George W.December 28, 2012 - 11:35 am

    "A free people ought to be armed." - George Washington

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampDecember 28, 2012 - 11:42 am

    Howard, “when the time comes”, Is YOUR premise. “The time will not come” is my premise. My premise is contingent on my ownership of the hunting arms I currently possess, which,BTW, have lain idle for 20 years. NOTE TO SELF – Phil, gather your sundry pistols rifles and shotguns and give them the cleaning and maintenance they deserve. Purchase some fresh ammo. Pledge to self – If the time comes Take out at least one. One to one and they lose. . . . But they have already done the math – hence registration, buy-back, owner data base, confiscation, stigmatization, propaganda, ridicule, gradually reduce the “problem” of a well armed citizenry.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • DB SmithDecember 28, 2012 - 11:53 am

    Dink, your wrong again.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardDecember 28, 2012 - 12:14 pm

    Repeat after me, its not 1798 anymore. This is not a frontier society. It is a nation where 30,000 people a year die from gunshots. Keep repeating this until your desire to gently rub your weapon with a smooth oiled cotton cloth round and round and round goes away.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Dink LaneDecember 28, 2012 - 12:17 pm

    DB Smith -- 18-year old bought 53 weapons at a Virginia Gun Show, paid cash and walked out of the building with ALL 53 WEAPONS THAT day got in the car and drove out of state (ATF Testimony at the Issa's Hearing on "Fast and Furious" investigation.) He didn't have to PROVE he was a Resident of the state (HE WASN'T), he didn't have his guns held until he could be verified (LIKE VOTING). It takes MORE to get a BALLOT TO VOTE in VA than it does to buy 53 guns for the Drug Cartel.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Paddy O'furnitureDecember 28, 2012 - 12:25 pm

    30,000 people a year Richard? Your credibility keeps dropping. Now into negative integers.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampDecember 28, 2012 - 12:27 pm

    Note to Richard – Within the next 80 – 90 years 312,000,000 Americans ARE GOING TO DIE. – with or without guns. Thirty thousand by guns per year, Richard? Hitler would have executed his “cleaners” for that pitiful production.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Jim RiordanDecember 28, 2012 - 12:46 pm

    Everyone. Please remember any good machinist can build a rocket launcher AND the rocket. Simple RPGs/Bazookas would be a cake walk to build. Guns are easy to MAKE. Many of you have good points however, please always remember to include this knowledge in your mix. I have never built any of those, but I could. Easily. Any of my close friends know that. It does not require "rocket science" to make any kind of projectile come flying out of a tube or barrel. If the time ever came where I thought, "only criminals have guns" and I fretted about the safety of my family, I would build whatever I thought I needed. So would every good machinist I have as close friends. My point is there are also many bad guys who can do the same. Although (ahem) most bad guys are stupid and lack the skills necessary to make QUALITY firearms, they can still make ones that work at close range. If guns were removed from law abiding citizens, whom do you think will protect them? I think the world of our Sheriff's dept. Yet I also know a little about "response time". So please, people, remember, there is no possible way you will ever eliminate firearms. Start cutting welfare and "EBTS" and free rent and use that money to lock up mental cases . . Forever. Instead of Gun Control, I am for idiot and criminal control.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardDecember 28, 2012 - 12:47 pm

    Your right Paddy what ever your name is, its at least 31940 people died from gun injuries in 2011.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Paddy O'furnitureDecember 28, 2012 - 1:01 pm

    Keep trying Richard. Geez, even with the internet and all the stats available you lefties can't get it right. 30,000 gun killings a year? Care to give us a source?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampDecember 28, 2012 - 1:05 pm

    Chicago, Paddy?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampDecember 28, 2012 - 1:10 pm

    off topic but FYI anyway - LINK - Hillary Clinton, post-concussion, back to work next week - soldier on, Hillary!

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Paddy O'furnitureDecember 28, 2012 - 1:16 pm

    Excellent point, Phil. Most of the 12,000 (not 30K as Richard says) killings occur in Chicago, DC, Oakland, Detroit and other cities where MOST GUNS are already illegal. And these silly little leftists think a gun ban would bring lines of criminals (who commit the gun crimes, don't you know) to the doors of the police stations ready to go legit and turn in their guns. Hope and change, baby. hope and change.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynDecember 28, 2012 - 1:29 pm

    National Vital Statistics Reports, U.S. Dept. of Health & Human Services, DEATHS: Preliminary Data for 2011, published October 2012 gives us these figures: • Assault (homicide) by discharge of firearms: 11,101 • Drug-induced deaths: 40,239 • Alcohol-induced deaths: 26,256 ********** HERE (pg. 43).

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Looks like Richard is correct!December 28, 2012 - 1:31 pm

    In 2011, the latest figure available from the Centers for Disease Control. But who can trust the federal government! Accidental discharge 851 Suicide 19,766 Homicide 11,101 Undetermined Intent 222 Total: At least 31940 people died from gun injuries in 2011. Also 258 people were killed during legal intervention, most of them due to guns. Guns were involved, but were not the primary cause of death: -in 2 fatal accidents. -in 6 homicides.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynDecember 28, 2012 - 1:33 pm

    The link I left is incorrect. Try this: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr61/nvsr61_06.pdf

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Joe DreslerDecember 28, 2012 - 1:53 pm

    Wow, Phil, HOJO is really wiping the floor with you. But I admire a guy who keeps doubling down and isn't afraid to make a fool of himself.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Paddy O'furnitureDecember 28, 2012 - 1:54 pm

    Including suicide with gun violence statistics is what you do when you're desperate to make the issue seem as baaaaad as possible. There were 11,000 homicides by firearm in 2011 and until 15 minutes ago, that has been the number of focus. While we're adding the suicide thing though, notice that while 19,000 people chose the firearm as the preferred means of self-termination, 18,000 chose a different method (presumably one less messy). Nearly equal numbers. Take away guns, and people will kill themselves (or others, if they are so inclined) with something else. Unless, that is, you're of the mindset of "people don't kill people, guns kill people", in which case, I hope my gun never chooses to commit me to suicide ;^)

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynDecember 28, 2012 - 1:58 pm

    Though numbers of deaths by various means legitimately constitute part of the discussion, I do not believe numbers themselves should be the main focus. However, responding to the 1:31 pm comment on firearms' deaths, I think that for the purposes of this particular discussion the only clearly legitimate firearm fatality figure is that for homicides = 11,101. The other figures should be excluded. HOWEVER, I will not enter into a debate about numbers.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynDecember 28, 2012 - 2:00 pm

    Paddy, I see you had posted while I was still writing.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardDecember 28, 2012 - 2:29 pm

    The fact still remains Evelyn, 31940 died in our nation from the availability of guns in 2011. I believe all guns should be taxed, licensed, and insured. And that each gun owner submit to a mandatory annual medical check, just like truck drivers and pilots.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynDecember 28, 2012 - 3:29 pm

    (1) I wonder how the rate of suicide by firearm would be affected by the tax, license, insure & annual medical exam requirements. (2) Including self-inflicted death in the figure seems illogical. If we're going to do that with firearm stats then what about self-inflicted death by other means? We already know (for starters) that drug and alcohol-induced deaths FAR EXCEED death by firearm.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Carol.December 28, 2012 - 3:36 pm

    It's no wonder the liberal anti-gun crowd doesn't point to cities like Chicago to show how well their lame-a** anti-gun laws are working......The two cities in America with the strictest gun laws are Chicago and Washington D.C., both have among the highest murder and crime rates in the nation and both are overwhelming liberal democratic cities..... Just this year alone over 500 people were killed in Obama's hometown of Chicago (many of them children caught in crossfire)...The stats all point to the conclusion that is our existing gun laws are not the problem....The problem is that guns are in the hands of those responsible for most of our nations murders which by far happen to be the same inner-city, gang-bang'in, entitlement grubbing Democrats that voted Obama back into office ...So, an obvious and permanent solution to our Nation's gun problem is simple;..Go house to house and confiscate all guns from Democrats, at the same time make it illegal for any/all registered Democrats to ever buy or own a firearm.....Our Nation's inner cities will definitely see a lot less mischief, plus Dems get what they have always said they wanted, a bunch of guns off the street. (their guns)...And, us Republican's who aren't the ones creating the problem get to keep our guns without having to listen to anymore bit**'in and whining.......Problem solved!!.....

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • cookie65December 28, 2012 - 3:51 pm

    “The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government - lest it come to dominate our lives and interests.” ― Patrick Henry

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • cookie65December 28, 2012 - 3:59 pm

    The writer of this letter proves Winston Chuchill correct when he said "The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter."

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynDecember 28, 2012 - 4:12 pm

    Petition: Make White House, Federal Buildings and Events Gun Free Zones : HERE

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • DB SmithDecember 28, 2012 - 4:13 pm

    I hereby declare that anyone by the name of "Richard the Action Hero" should take and provide a negative drug test prior to being allowed to post any comments on this MD site. I secondly declare that anyone by the name of "Richard the Moocher" should be penalized and taxed by the MD in order to "discourage" his idiotic posts. Further more I think "Richard the Wants Something for Nothing Liberal" should have to have a license in order to exist and... thank you very much.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • cookie65December 28, 2012 - 4:48 pm

    Evelyn, that could be the single greatest idea I have ever heard. Take away the armed guard security of the ruling class. The thing people like Sylvia don't understand is the reason she enjoys freedom is only because of the second amendment. She is as clueless about human history as she is about American history.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • DB SmithDecember 28, 2012 - 4:53 pm

    Dink, Fess up...you're 11:31 am post was incorrect and regarding your second post, you don't even need a photo ID to vote in Virginia. You're WRONG.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Paddy O'furnitureDecember 28, 2012 - 4:59 pm

    I agree, DB. If it's so hard to vote, how did so many dead folks vote for Obama?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynDecember 28, 2012 - 5:14 pm

    (Another one you might like, Cookie!) - PETITION: Try Senator Dianne Feinstein in a Federal Court For Treason To The Constitution : HERE.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardDecember 28, 2012 - 5:26 pm

    Well, thank you Mr. Smith for the Proclamation and the honor of bestowing upon me the title of Action Hero, which is probably truer than you could imagine. The drug test I must decline for I would definitely not pass. As for the Mountain Demo discouraging idiotic post, well, well that would reduce the posts on this thread alone to almost nothing making it not worth logging on and limiting most of the letters to the editor. The right to exist I thought all of you right wing Christians believe that all gods children have a right to exist, never heard anything about having to have a license. Can I substitute my California Driver License? Just between you and me Smith, when you sleep with your gun dreaming about that day of days when the Feds attack, do you have a favorite position? Additionally, you’re a prime example of why gun owners should be reviewed each year, taxed, licensed and insured so that the taxpayers don’t have to pay the cost, which is considerable, for the mess 31,000 gun related events leave behind, like they did in 2011.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • DB SmithDecember 28, 2012 - 5:42 pm

    Kudos to you Richie, you little bass turd, for admitting that you couldn't pass the test but then you want us to listen to your suggestion of more taxation, licensing, insurances, physical exam and DRUG testing (I know you can think of something else) all so that the law abiding and responsible US citizen can own a gun. Well Princess, I've been very busy preparing for the New Year which will include a bunch of guns and fast women. It will be a totally fun and legal event and we don't plan on killing anything except a paper target. I hope you will be able to hear it. Happy New Year.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • DB SmithDecember 28, 2012 - 5:53 pm

    BTW Richard, I cannot take credit for "Action Hero". If you can remember back a little ways (I doubt it) it was "foamie" that titled you that and not me. I think it's fitting.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardDecember 28, 2012 - 6:11 pm

    Happy New Year to you Smith.........

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • DB SmithDecember 28, 2012 - 6:19 pm

    Thank you Richard and I hope everyone has a happy, healthy and prosperous New Year.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampDecember 28, 2012 - 7:24 pm

    Good night John Boy - - - - Good night - - -

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • DB SmithDecember 28, 2012 - 7:47 pm

    We deserved that one! :)

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Ken SteersDecember 28, 2012 - 9:12 pm

    Ms Medley I hunt with my Bushmaster AR-15.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampDecember 28, 2012 - 11:21 pm

    LINK - WHAT ME WORRY? - Hillary E. Neuman

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Mike BellewDecember 28, 2012 - 11:59 pm

    I find it ironic that the shooting in Conneticut has sparked such heated debate on "Assault Weapons", when an assault weapon wasn't even used. http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fvideo.today.msnbc.msn.com%2Ftoday%2F50208495&h=0AQH0cTq-AQFtezIqkbwGDe9VrtSM-NPeRX0Fr2Czh3ORIg&s=1

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynDecember 29, 2012 - 5:25 am

    Inquiring minds don't like such logical questions, Mike Bellew!!!

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Paddy O'furnitureDecember 29, 2012 - 7:35 am

    From the Sac Bee: CALIFORNIA GUN SALES JUMP, GUN DEATHS, INJURIES FALL http://www.sacbee.com/2012/12/27/5079151/california-gun-sales-increase.html Richard, put that in your pipe and smoke it (or whatever it is you do that would make you fail the whiz quiz).

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardDecember 29, 2012 - 1:14 pm

    Like many Furniture, I feel so much better knowing that guns only took 2,800 lives in California last year, but was sadden to see that suicide by gun remains about the same. Unfortunately gun sales have increased from 300K to 600k units in California. No doubt it’s a direct result of the marketing methods of the 25 US gun manufacturing companies increasing availably of product, offering incentives to increase sales punctuated by the code word Hussein, and gun collectors looking for a big payday on potentially ban guns. After President Obama proclaimed during his reelection campaign that he wanted to get the assault weapons ban re-introduced to help stop gun violence. Also, did you happen to notice that under the Obama Administration the California statics on violent crime dropped considerably from a decade of George w, Bush’s leadership. The fact remains Furniture, 31940 died in our nation from the availability of guns in 2011. I believe all guns should be taxed, licensed, and insured, and that each gun owner submit to a mandatory annual medical check and evaluation. Additionally records should be maintain for the national data base of those who own multiple weapon which isn’t currently done.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardDecember 29, 2012 - 2:18 pm

    McClintock fights to lossen restritions on the sale of guns making them more available. Why would anyone want to do this?............. McClintock co-sponsored Firearms Interstate Commerce Reform Act Congressional Summary:Amends the federal criminal code to: allow licensed firearms dealers to sell or deliver any firearm (currently, rifles or shotguns) to any state if the licensee meets with the purchaser and the transaction complies with the laws of the state in which the transfer is conducted and the purchaser's state of residence; and eliminate the requirement that a licensee must conduct business at a gun show only in the state that is specified on the licensee's license. Nothing in this Act shall prohibit the sale of a firearm or ammunition between licensed firearms dealers at any location in any state................................... Currently: Virtually all interstate transfers directly between private citizens are banned; so are nearly all interstate handgun sales by licensed dealers. Firearms dealers may only do business at their licensed premises or (since 1986) at gun shows in their own state. Dealers may not transfer firearms to one another face to face, away from their business premises.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Evelyn VeerkampDecember 29, 2012 - 2:28 pm

    32,310: That's the number of people who died in 2011 in automobile accidents. And Obama is responsible! Yes, you heard me. If we're into causation -- tricky -- then we'll have to say that under Obama's leadership vehicular deaths are declining. The decline most likely results from increasing poverty.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • arnold langeDecember 29, 2012 - 8:42 pm

    A lot of numbers have been tossed around here but not the number of people who fired their weapons in self defense.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynDecember 29, 2012 - 8:57 pm

    True, Arnold. In addition, there's just about no way of knowing how valid any of the numbers are. HERE we have, "Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology, U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year." That figure looks ginormous, but certainly is impressive. If it's anywhere NEAR accurate it (in my opinion) strengthens the argument FOR gun ownership.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Ken SteersDecember 30, 2012 - 7:18 am

    The best argument for gun ownership is the Constitution. The best case studies regarding gun controll and it's failures is California. California has the strictest state laws and cities like Stockton, Oakland and L.A. have some of the most draconian. Progressives ignore their failures and double down on their policies. And regarding the right to overthrow a tyranical regime. Those who say it's impossible? Very few muskets were used by the Rebels in Tunesia, Lybia and Syria. Just normal folk standing up and fighting for their liberty.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • M. SchumannDecember 30, 2012 - 8:15 am

    According to the Sac Bee California gun related injuries declined 25% since 2002 and gun sales are up from 350,000 in 2002 to 600,000 last year. That is a big plus for the NRA, the more guns the less crime. Quote Snopes.com: The first year results are now in: Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2 percent, Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 percent; Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent. In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up - 300 percent-. (Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not and criminals still possess their guns!)

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardDecember 30, 2012 - 8:30 am

    Evelyn, its difficult to believe the 989883 number and even harder to believe because of your source of information , Just Facts. Which is a conservative non-profit organization that claims to be unlike many other conservative organizations and media outlets that give preference to facts that coincide with their opinions and meet their criteria. Just Facts who received thousands from the GOP PACs during 2010 election efforts claims to also report facts regardless of their implications.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynDecember 30, 2012 - 8:51 am

    Richard, that number really does seem out of the ball park. It's implication is that nearly 1 out of 3 Americans might have used a gun defensively in the year 2000. Unlikely!

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynDecember 30, 2012 - 9:29 am

    (Video, 6 min) - GUN CONTROL (Australia) - WATCH WHAT HAPPENS WHEN GUNS ARE BANNED: HERE. The following are reported increases since Australian gun bans took effect: • Armed Robberies: 69% • Assaults w/Guns: 28% • Gun Murders: 19% • Home Invasions (a new phenomenon): 21% ********** As poverty increases and more people become increasingly desperate, home invasions will become a reality here as well.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Paddy O'furnitureDecember 30, 2012 - 9:44 am

    America is mourning the Sandy Hook massacre and Obama, the ever opportunistic scumbag politician, is railing on about guns and protecting our kids. Why is nobody speaking up for the thousands of innocent kids that the Peace Prize Prez killed with drone strikes in the Middle East? The latest is a 16 year old kid who was born in America, but currently living in Yemen. You have a much greater chance of being killed by a US drone strike in the Middle East than being killed by a gun in the US. "Obama administration needs to explain drone strikes" http://www.stltoday.com/news/opinion/columns/obama-administration-needs-to-explain-drone-strikes/article_5222640e-5db9-500f-8b82-1b68fca0c57a.html

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynDecember 30, 2012 - 10:29 am

    Thank you, Paddy. I've been longing to make that point but have been too timid.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynDecember 30, 2012 - 10:32 am

    "I would like to suggest that the tragedy in Newtown is a direct result of the psychological operations that were put in place by military planners, to change American culture to accept the idea that War, any War supported by our military, benefits our country and to condition the American public that violence with a purpose in not only necessary put the preferred way to create peace." ~ John Phillips (link not yet available)

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampDecember 30, 2012 - 11:35 am

    Please, don't bother yourself trying to provide a link to the 10:32 text - please

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Ken SteersDecember 30, 2012 - 1:14 pm

    What is this governments policy regarding mental health? Do they even care? It provides a new visual to the term "bleeding heart liberal"

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Concerned CitizenDecember 30, 2012 - 3:09 pm

    The 2nd Amendment is not about hunting, nor is it necessarily about protecting yourself from a lone gunman. The 2nd Amendment as written by the Founding Fathers, was meant to insure that the Common Citizen be armed equivalently to the Standing Army, such that citizens of the United States could protect themselves from a potentially tyranical goverment who would use the Standing Army to coerce citizens into situations similar to the one that caused former British subjects to break away from the British Empire. Keep in mind, the Brown Bess musket was the "assault rifle" of it's day, much as the AR-15 family of rifles, roughly equivalent to the military's M-16/M-4 family of rifles, are the "assault rifle" of the modern era. As for banning all such firearms, keep in mind that no previous "assault weapon" ban, wether at the State or Federal level, has ever gotten "assault weapons" off the street, whether you're talking about grandfathered firearms still being legal, manufacturers changing their firearms to no longer fit the legal definition of an "assault weapon," or, most importantly, getting "assault weapons" (or any other firearms, for that matter) out of the hands of criminals who aren't legally allowed to posses them anyway.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Ken SteersDecember 30, 2012 - 5:10 pm

    Mexico is a fine example of Government gun control. Historically Mexico's reigning governments had reason to fear their general populous being armed. Oppression can not survive opposition. Now in Mexico only the government and the criminals possess firearms. And only the Government and the criminals run their country.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Happy Holidays and the budgetDecember 30, 2012 - 5:48 pm

    This makes good sense to me, but see below how the republicians spin it to their party members: President Obama on Monday proposed to limit the percentage of income that wealthy donors can write off for gifts to colleges and other charitable organizations as well as for other purposes, such as medical expenses and housing costs.The plan, which is included in the president's 2013 budget proposal, would limit the value of the itemized deduction to 28 percent for couples with incomes of $250,000 or more and individuals with incomes of $200,000,000 or more............. GOP verson: Incredibly, in this season of giving, President Obama is seeking to limit charitable deductions as part of the budget deal. Limiting charitable deductions for organizations, from the American Cancer Society to the Jewish League , this would jeopardize their good works if not the very existence of smaller charities. Don’t be confused as to why this White House is conducting a war on charities. This isn’t about the deficit. Plain and simple, big government doesn’t want the competition when it comes to people’s welfare.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • MarineDecember 30, 2012 - 6:46 pm

    Drone Control, this is nuts, By Paddy Furniture: Why is nobody speaking up for the thousands of innocent kids that the Peace Prize Prez killed with drone strikes in the Middle East? The latest is a 16 year old kid who was born in America, but currently living in Yemen. You have a much greater chance of being killed by a US drone strike in the Middle East than being killed by a gun in the US. "Obama administration needs to explain drone strikes". You seem to be more concern about an Afghan kid than you are about our US Marines. Drones are good, they save US lives, would you like the Military to stop saving US lives?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Foamie Mouth®December 31, 2012 - 3:28 am

    marine and foamie got somethinig in common ..... both don't have real names

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynDecember 31, 2012 - 9:28 am

    CALIFORNIA GUN SALES JUMP; GUN INJURIES, DEATHS FALL: HERE

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • robertdnollDecember 31, 2012 - 9:34 am

    mexican citizens can and do own firearms

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • NathanJanuary 18, 2013 - 2:14 pm

    Ms. Medley utterly fails to understand the intent of the second amendment to the United States Constitution. Too long has the anti-gun advocates used straw men arguments as an excuse to regulate armaments. Questions like: "Who needs an assault rifle for hunting?" Or declarative statements such as "our Founding Fathers, when drafting the Constitution, had no idea that these types of weapons would one day exist" are non-issues and have no place in this debate. The second amendment was not included in the Constitution so that I may hunt. Nor was it included so that I might defend myself from school shooters, or from those that would see to bring me harm. The 2nd amendment demands that American citizes be allowed to arm themselves so that they may defend themselves from a tyrannical government. Anyone that has ever bothered to read "The Federalist Papers", or practically any other body of literature created by the very men that drafted our Constitution, would understand this important point. Our Founding Fathers, having just earned their freedom from the oppressive British, sought to ensure a society that could, at all times, defend itself NOT from each other, but from the Government itself. Yet still, some moderates argue that the 2nd Amendment shouldn't be abolished, but rather regulated, or mitigated. Again, to do so simply flies in the face of the very goal of the 2nd Amendment. Admittedly, when the Bill of Rights was ratified, war was simpler. The government had horses and muskets: The citizens had horses and muskets. But these days, our would-be tyrants have tanks, submarines, and unmanned drones cruising our night skies. And yet anti-gun radicals seek to prevent me from defending myself with a weapon capable of holding more than 7 shots. The lunacy is laughable. I obviously can't speak for those fifty-five men that drafted our Constitution, but I dare say that they would find the thought of regulating the 2nd amendment as insulting as an outright ban. One could logically argue that they would even be disappointed in the citizens for how "under armed" we are in relation to our potential enemy. Are there reasons to regulate and/or repeal the second amendment? Of course there are. The same could be said of most amendments. Unfortunately, Ms. Medley, those reasons simply don't matter. The 2nd Amendment was included for one very specific purpose. And so long as that purpose persists (the threat of tyrannical government), so too shall the 2nd Amendment. Our Founding Fathers intended it that way, and many of us will die ensuring that we retain that liberty.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Sylvia MedleyJanuary 19, 2013 - 6:06 pm

    Nathan, laughable lunacy is wasting time imagining the thoughts of the Founding Fathers in the 1770's and today, as they look down upon us. "Right to bear arms" means right to own guns. The NRA and its followers and believers have 2 arguments: #1, that anyone who advocates gun control wants to see all guns banned. #2, that gun owners need to be prepared for the eventual confrontation with our tyrannical government. You all are dead wrong on #1 and delusional on #2. It's too bad you can't get it in the first case. I don't care about the 2nd, except that I want to see assault weapons banned and I think you're hoping for the day when you'll have access to every damn weapon the military has.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Recent Posts

  • Enter your email address to subscribe and receive notifications of new posts by email.

  • .

    News

    Goodbye LUPPU, hello LRPU

    By Chris Daley | From Page: A1

     
    Past due state taxes bring arrest

    By Cole Mayer | From Page: A1

     
    Sanford trial: Prosecution, defense rest

    By Cole Mayer | From Page: A1 | Gallery

    Woman, dog back from Oso

    By Wendy Schultz | From Page: A1, 6 Comments | Gallery

     
     
     
    DA candidate to remain on ballot

    By Dawn Hodson | From Page: A9

    Dog talk with Uncle Matty: Benji and the Bickersons

    By Matthew Margolis | From Page: A10

     
    CPCSD seat unfilled

    By Dawn Hodson | From Page: A14

    Lew Uhler backs Ranalli

    By News Release | From Page: A14

     
    .

    Opinion

    Something to think about: Teach your children well

    By Wendy Schultz | From Page: A6

     
    Retain Bill Schultz as Recorder-Clerk

    By Mountain Democrat | From Page: A6, 1 Comment

     
    .

    Letters

    District 4 candidate

    By Letters to the Editor | From Page: A7, 1 Comment

     
    Open meetings

    By Letters to the Editor | From Page: A7

    Volunteers and homeless camps

    By Letters to the Editor | From Page: A7

     
    Bicycle events and traffic control

    By Letters to the Editor | From Page: A7

    Evacuation

    By Letters to the Editor | From Page: A7, 7 Comments

     
    .

    Sports

    Jennings wins national title

    By Democrat Staff | From Page: A11 | Gallery

     
    Savannah Stephens can swing the bat

    By Jerry Heinzer | From Page: A11 | Gallery

    King of the West roars into Placerville

    By Gary Thomas | From Page: A11

     
    First and goal: Bunt etiquette

    By Mike Bush | From Page: A11

    Oak Ridge suffers tough 2-1 setback

    By Mike Bush | From Page: A11

     
    Roundup: April 17, 2014

    By Democrat Staff | From Page: A12 | Gallery

    .

    Prospecting

    Plantastic sale this Saturday

    By Dawn Hodson | From Page: B1 | Gallery

     
    Spring art brightens government center

    By Democrat Staff | From Page: B2 | Gallery

    Things to do: April 18, 2014

    By Democrat Calendar | From Page: B2

     
    Time out: A grand time at Grand China

    By Earle Camembert | From Page: B3 | Gallery

    Temple Kol Shalom hosts Passover Seder

    By News Release | From Page: B3

     
    Student art featured for Third Saturday

    By News Release | From Page: B3

    Promenade in high style

    By Historic Old Sacramento | From Page: B4

     
    Sac State Presents ‘Gypsy’

    By California State Unversity, Sacramento | From Page: B4

    Friday nights are engaging at the de Young

    By Fine Arts | From Page: B5

     
    Hats On For the Kids raises money for children

    By Democrat Staff | From Page: B6

    See what is inside the vault

    By Center For Sacramento History | From Page: B6

     
    Eggstravaganza

    By Fairytale Town | From Page: B6

    Gallery tips a hat to Dr. Seuss

    By Democrat Staff | From Page: B7

     
    Museum presents ‘Diesel Days’

    By California State Railroad Museum | From Page: B7

    Engagement: Adam Frega and Wednesday Bienusa

    By Democrat Staff | From Page: B8

     
    Duty: Air Force Airman Brian Polk

    By Democrat Staff | From Page: B8

    Cal Stage presents a season of challenging productions

    By California Stage | From Page: B8

     
    Duty: Army Pfc. Kyle W. Beasy

    By Democrat Staff | From Page: B8

    KVIE calls for artists

    By Kvie | From Page: B9

     
    A Couple of Blaguards tell tales

    By Harris Center for the Arts | From Page: B9

    America’s ClayFest II celebrates a rich history

    By Blue Line Arts | From Page: B14

     
    Fine Arts Museums feature two shows

    By Fine Arts | From Page: B15

    See wildflowers on train ride

    By Railtown | From Page: B15

     
    Easter at Northstar is family friendly

    By Northstar California | From Page: B15

    .

    Essentials

    Crime Log: March 28-30

    By Cole Mayer | From Page: A2

     
    .

    Obituaries

    Frederick Wilbur Heymann

    By Contributor | From Page: A2

     
    Arthur W. Cornell

    By Contributor | From Page: A2

    Frank “Bud” Kraus Jr.

    By Contributor | From Page: A2

     
    Roy Cluness Chaix

    By Contributor | From Page: A2

    .

    Real Estate

    Faster sales with spring staging

    By Ken Calhoon | From Page: HS4

     
    Coldwell Banker outsells the competition

    Press Release | From Page: HS7

    Handsome Redmond suits modern families

    Press Release | From Page: HS11

     
    Growing your own

    By Marni Jameson | From Page: HS14

     
    Fraud workshop scheduled

    Press Release | From Page: HS21

    HCD launches assistance program

    Press Release | From Page: HS22, 1 Comment

     
    EZ Mortgages Inc. opens Placerville office

    By News Release | From Page: HS22, 1 Comment

    .

    Comics

    TV Listings

    By Contributor | From Page: A13

     
    Sudoku

    By Contributor | From Page: A13

    Speed Bump

    By Contributor | From Page: A13

     
    Working It Out

    By Contributor | From Page: A13

    Shoe

    By Contributor | From Page: A13

     
    Rubes

    By Contributor | From Page: A13

    Tundra

    By Contributor | From Page: A13

     
    .

    Home Source

    Faster sales with spring staging

    By Ken Calhoon | From Page: HS4

    Coldwell Banker outsells the competition

    Press Release | From Page: HS7

    Handsome Redmond suits modern families

    Press Release | From Page: HS11

    Growing your own

    By Marni Jameson | From Page: HS14

    Fraud workshop scheduled

    Press Release | From Page: HS21

    HCD launches assistance program

    Press Release | From Page: HS22, 1 Comment

    EZ Mortgages Inc. opens Placerville office

    By News Release | From Page: HS22, 1 Comment