Comments on: Sheriff’s statement

By: Izzy Madison

Izzy Madison — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 04:12:59 +0000

As we all know, if ken Steers cannot confirm your identity, you do not exist.

By: Ken Steers

Ken Steers — Sat, 02 Feb 2013 23:21:01 +0000

Dink! I have been looking all over this county for you! I can’t seem to find anyone in America with the name Dink Lane. So I guess you are as phony as your arguments.

By: cookie65

cookie65 — Sat, 02 Feb 2013 00:02:12 +0000

Celtfire, I will continue to expose this and all the other leftist nonsense and those who support it for as long as can type. If my exposing it causes you greif and the way I choose to expose it is cause for embarrassment for you then that is your problem. Another 160 pages of regulations to run our lives from the failure in chief. http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch/nutrition/280613-soda-candy-out-under-proposed-school-snack-rules

By: Paddy O'furniture

Paddy O'furniture — Fri, 01 Feb 2013 22:31:00 +0000

Dink, only a buck to try and talk sense to a lefty? Not worth the time. Make it a hundred and it might be worth it. But you’d probably jellyfish out of having to pay.

By: cookie65

cookie65 — Fri, 01 Feb 2013 22:29:24 +0000

Celtfire, let me know when the left quits denigrating anyone who stands between them and other peoples money. They are the most vicious, lying, demeaning, insulting group of people in America. And obama and the crash test dummy owe their re-election to it. Besides, what difference, at this point, does it make. They have used so many words that used to have very important meanings so often as an attack that many of those words no longer have any meaning. I am just an opinion on some tiny little local paper. It was the vice president of the United States that proclaimed to a crowd of low informantion voters that “they (the republicans) gonna put y’all back in chains”. What a disgusting thing to come from the mouth of the second highest ranking official in America. Take your issue up with them.

By: Celtfire

Celtfire — Fri, 01 Feb 2013 21:40:14 +0000

Mr. Cookie, is it possible for you to state your opinion without denigrating those who you perceive to be your enemy? It doesn’t strengthen your point of view to subtlely spell the president’s surname in the lower case or refer to the vice-president as a “crash test dummy”. I’m sure you have some worthwhile ideas hidden behind your prickly facade, but I’m inclined to interpret much of what you say as hyperbole, not thoughtful argument. I believe you are simply here to parrot right-wing dogma, trying to pass it off as genuine knowledge.

By: Dink Lane

Dink Lane — Fri, 01 Feb 2013 21:26:14 +0000

For two weeks I have offered $1 to any Tea-Party, Libertarian, Militia member who can come up with ANY PROOF that Pres. Obama is “Taking guns away from legal owners.” I will up it to $2…. Did any of you bother to ACTUALLY read the DOCUMENT sent out by V.P. Biden??? NO… Did anyone bother to LISTEN to NRA’s LaFrenchy’s convoluted double talk? NO!…. This Hyperbolic B%&#$ about “2nd Amendment rights”…. Look at the Actual Constitution! Look at the Bill of Rights…. They both start with “THE RIGHTS OF PEOPLE’S LIFE, LIBERTY, AND PROTECTION FROM AGGRESSION.” It does NOT say the “right to be aggressive” “or Terrorize the public”! The Second Amendment was added AFTER PUBLIC SAFETY! Try reading some of the Federalist’s Papers. You could start with #5… Dangers from Foreign Aggression if it’s REALLY the constitution you are protecting…

By: Jack Martin

Jack Martin — Fri, 01 Feb 2013 18:50:51 +0000

Mr O’Shea, to your point, the Supreme Court has addressed the individual’s right to keep and bear arms, per the 2008 case District of Columbia vs Heller. And the National Academy of Sciences studied and determined that gun control laws do not reduce gun crime. http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2004/12/17/naspanel/ So while you may disagree with Sheriff D’Agostini’s perspective, the law AND logic are both on his side with this issue.

By: cookie65

cookie65 — Fri, 01 Feb 2013 17:22:21 +0000

It isn’t until your last paragraph that you finally mention keeping guns out of the hands of criminals. Why is that? This overreach of government autority by the obama administration has nothing to do with keeping guns out of the hands of criminal and has everything to do with responsible law abiding citizens. One would have to be a pretzel to follow your twisted logic. It seems to me that the Sheriff mentioned in his letter to the crash test dummy something about anti-social behavior, a term used for the criminal element, and a need to focus on them and the mentally ill. Sadly obama and his ilk aren’t interested in that reality, they are focused on the 2nd Amendment rights of law abiding citizens.

By: Anthony

Anthony — Fri, 01 Feb 2013 09:06:27 +0000

How does the sheriff determine what is constitutional and what is not? I see nothing in the US Constitution which empowers government to criminalize agriculture. Further the 9th amendment makes it clear that unenumerated rights are reserved to the people. The 9th amendment makes no mention of the states, only the people.

So if the sheriff is driving past someone’s property one day and observes that person exercising his unenumerated 9th amendment right to cultivate his property as he sees fit with a healthy crop of marijuana plants, will the sheriff also refuse to enforce the marijuana law? Just asking.

And if anyone wants to argue that a landowner planting and harvesting whatever crop they choose and using it in the privacy of their own home is not an unenumerated right protected by the 9th amendment in a Constitution written by men who earned their livelihood in agriculture, let’s hear it.