Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Contact Us | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

A ‘bunch of lies’

January 15, 2013

A ‘bunch of lies’ To the editor: Pick up a newspaper or turn on the TV and all you hear or read are a bunch of lies. Obama said that our taxes will not go up one dime....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(134)

Pirate

Feb-06-13 3:56 AM

Bob and weave hartman. I did read the entire article along with a number of others that come up when you Google him. I have to admit I didn't place a lot of faith in his employee supporting him. The best he got from others were "do no harm" comments and worse. Did you see the FBI position? Bob and weave hartman. Cry out for something to be done (gun grab) but defend someone who doesn't believe prosecuting gun crimes is a priority.

1 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

hartman75

Feb-05-13 11:32 AM

"There ya go, asked and answered." Pirate, perhaps you should have read the whole article instead of just the first couple of paragraphs.

"Cooney said the sentencing figures in 2012 reflect the priority Jones set to go after the worst offenders. In 2012, a record 41 percent of defendants sent to prison got more than five years, compared to 6.3 percent in 2006. She attributed the lengthy terms to prosecutions of child ***********, certain gun cases and conspiracies."

"We can't be taking on smaller cases," Cooney said. "We just don't have the resources."

5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Pirate

Feb-01-13 3:55 PM

Hartman - as usual you purposely miss the point. A prize fighter would applaud your ability to bob and weave. You asked for non performance of prosecution. Here it is. It's just not important. He has the easiest conviction using the easiest tool. Federally prosecuted felon in possession. If you can't support that you have no reason to whine. Almost on cue in the Strib today is the FBI going off on him for lack of prosecution. There ya go, asked and answered.

2 Agrees | 8 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ProdigalSon

Feb-01-13 1:20 PM

If my inability to offer pipe dreams as a solution. I suppose your right. Pride compels me to stick to the high road with facts, reason and logic.

1 Agrees | 8 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

hartman75

Feb-01-13 12:10 PM

Good point Pirate. It’s unfortunate that law enforcement budgets at local, state and federal levels have been cut leading to shortages of manpower and services. However, that does not mean criminals are not being apprehended and prosecuted. In that same article, “Jones acknowledges that his prosecutors are rejecting some "street-level" cases they might have taken in the past, leaving them to county attorneys.”

Actually, what you brought up Pirate is even MORE reason to eliminate private sales, perform background checks and require registration and licensing of guns. All those measures would make it more difficult for guns to get into the wrong hands AND make it easier for law enforcement to prosecute those who violate the law. Regardless of budgets, crimes should always be investigated and criminals held accountable.

7 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

hartman75

Feb-01-13 11:19 AM

"Do you have any objection to starting with existing laws BEFORE initiating bans and confiscations?" -Prod

"Prod, what existing laws are NOT being enforced that would reduce gun violence?" -Hartman

"It's illegal to kill people in most Minnesota jurisdictions." "More laws won't keep a head case on the edge from going over."

Its obvious Prod, that you have NOTHING to offer in the argument for or against gun laws. You can't even answer a simple question based on one of your own assertions. Give it up!

7 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Pirate

Feb-01-13 5:21 AM

BTW - this the same Todd Jones who is also the acting director of BATFE who has been called out on the botched sting operation in Wisconsin that again put guns in the hands of criminals including a full auto M4. Now there is a real assault weapon for you to worry about.

1 Agrees | 9 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Pirate

Feb-01-13 5:09 AM

Here's some non-prosecution for you hartman.

Please read the article in the StarTrib on current Minnesota U.S. Attorney B. Todd Jones. In part, on his differences with predecessor, "Tom was all about guns and drugs. We could do that all day, but we've chosen not to because that's not the best use of our resources."

MdotSTARTRIBUNEdotCOMslashLOCALslash?ID=185235672&C=Y

1 Agrees | 9 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ProdigalSon

Jan-31-13 4:27 PM

You've become a cherry picker hartman.

It's illegal to kill people in most Minnesota jurisdictions. Enforce that one h75.

More laws won't keep a head case on the edge from going over.

2 Agrees | 9 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

hartman75

Jan-31-13 3:28 PM

"Do you have any objection to starting with existing laws BEFORE initiating bans and confiscations?"

Prod, what existing laws are NOT being enforced that would reduce gun violence?

9 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ProdigalSon

Jan-31-13 3:08 PM

"In a civilized nation that has more guns and more gun deaths than any other on the planet, there is an accompanying responsibility to make sure existing laws are followed..."~merioncooper

Do you have any objection to starting with existing laws BEFORE initiating bans and confiscations?

2 Agrees | 9 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ProdigalSon

Jan-31-13 3:06 PM

"Two simple steps that would have saved a life, and not violated the Constitution."~merioncooper

That may seem to be the case on the surface. You haven't explained the depth of background check, or by whom, and who that info would be available to.

Today, in MN, in order to buy a handgun, you need to have a permit. It researches to see if you've been confined for

an emergency mental health or other type of hold order

a result of a court hold order

by a court as mentally ill, developmentally disabled or mentally ill and dangerous

Committed by a court as chemically dependent

Found incompetent to stand trial or have been found not guilty by reason of mental illness

A peace officer informally admitted to a treatment facility for chemical dependency

How much deeper do you think we need to go?

2 Agrees | 9 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ProdigalSon

Jan-31-13 2:59 PM

"what's the seller doing selling him the weapons? If you sell to a prohibited person, your face to face transaction is no longer legal."~merioncooper

I already supplied an example. Is a landlord near a school a heinous felon for renting, unknowingly, to a child predator? Does the violation of moving in lay with the prohibited child predator....or the landlord? I'd find it beyond difficult to hold the landlord liable.

1 Agrees | 9 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Pirate

Jan-31-13 3:57 AM

MC - from a different perspective I understand your position. My end to a similar statement would be, "Please step away from the constitution. The Supremes have sung and it is what it is."

The guys in Idaho aren't unique. Not many in the country likes or has faith in what is happening in Washington. Pick your poll. But I don't think any major assaults are imminent.

And lets ban O from talkin about shootin. I keep getting flash backs of the picture of Kerry with a gun that looked like the before of a shooting accident.

There needs to be a solution to the real issues and it won't be found with the current players need to follow their ego and political aspirations. We aren't any closer today than before all the chest pounding after the last tragedy.

2 Agrees | 14 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

merioncooper

Jan-31-13 3:16 AM

Prod-"Private face to face transactions are legal where he purchased the guns, so the purchase aspect, on the surface, was legal. Shick was, as defined by federal law, a prohibited person." Precisely. If he was a prohibited person, what's the seller doing selling him the weapons? If you sell to a prohibited person, your face to face transaction is no longer legal. Was there a background check before the sale? Was Schick reported after the sale? Two simple steps that would have saved a life, and not violated the Constitution. In a civilized nation that has more guns and more gun deaths than any other on the planet, there is an accompanying responsibility to make sure existing laws are followed, and that we don't skirt laws by transactions that are on the surface legal, but in reality, sometimes lethal.

15 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

merioncooper

Jan-31-13 3:06 AM

Enough with the Nazi stuff already. Before they supposedly disarmed the whole populace, the Nazis rose to power through the thug-work of Hitler's well-armed paramilitary supporters -- the Storm Troopers, or militia, who shot, intimidated and putsched the path open for Hitler. There's some eerie parallels between the paranoia and bullying of Storm Troopers and some of the 2nd-Amendment extremists and compound-dwelling militias in America: they hoard a lot of weapons and ammo and dislike the sitting government. Remember, before the Nazis took away folks guns, they used their own guns to assume power. Promise me, 2nd Amendment advocates in the U.S., you will work to not let those parallels go any further.

15 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ProdigalSon

Jan-30-13 7:22 PM

It'll be hard to just get rid of that Firearm Owners' Protection Act. Feb. 1982, a bipartisan judicial committee reported "The conclusion is thus inescapable that the history, concept, and wording of the second amendment to the Constitution of the United States, as well as its interpretation by every major commentator and court in the first half century after its ratification, indicates that what is protected is an individual right of a private citizen to own and carry firearms in a peaceful manner."

It concluded that seventy-five percent of ATF prosecutions were "constitutionally improper", especially on Second Amendment issues.

See, there's lots of precedence with that 2A thing.

3 Agrees | 14 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ProdigalSon

Jan-30-13 7:16 PM

"You continue to provide examples of situations that can only be solved by eliminating access to guns."~h75

Maybe you're right. So what's the solution.... ban evil black rifles and magazines or all guns? If you don't get 'em all....

You'll have trouble with the registration thing. You do know about The Firearm Owners' Protection Act, right?

"No such rule or regulation prescribed [by the Attorney General] after the date of the enactment of the Firearms Owners Protection Act may require that records required to be maintained under this chapter or any portion of the contents of such records, be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or any State or any political subdivision thereof, nor that any system of registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions or disposition be established."

2 Agrees | 15 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

hartman75

Jan-30-13 5:35 PM

"They are ticking time bombs with vivid imaginations."

So how do you know these "time bombs" even own a gun unless you require licensing and registration? Or take away their ability to access a weapon capable of shooting 30 rounds in 30 seconds. You continue to provide examples of situations that can only be solved by eliminating access to guns. They sure can't be solved by continuing to sell guns without background checks. If you simply want more of what we already have, then its pointless for you to continue posting comments.

14 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ProdigalSon

Jan-30-13 3:02 PM

I see one big problem with your wish list h75.

It doesn't address the problem of protecting our kids and making safe our public places.

Those who are cracking and engaging in rampage killings are not mentioned in your "solution". These aren't "at risk youth". They are ticking time bombs with vivid imaginations.

2 Agrees | 15 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

hartman75

Jan-30-13 12:10 PM

"So what do you want....scary looking guns and low capacity magazines banished.....

Or ALL firearms banished?"

Here is what I would like to see Prod: Limit magazines to 5 rounds. Ban armor-piercing and bulletproof-vest-piercing ammo. Vigorously prosecute gun owners who fail to properly protect their weapons from theft. Allow only licensed establishments to sell guns to adults in person - no private sales or sales via mail, internet, etc. Require gun owners to license their weapons and receive training. Forcefully prosecute owners and sellers who violate the law. Increase funding and services to help schools and communities identify and give support to at-risk youth to reduce gang violence. Improve access for those seeking mental health services. Eliminate conceal carry – guns should be carried openly.

And all that can be accomplished without violating the 2nd amendment.

14 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ProdigalSon

Jan-29-13 10:55 PM

"How do we keep guns away from perpetrators of violent crimes or domestic abuse?"~h75

hartman, the only way you'll ever keep ALL the crazies from ANY guns will be to take ALL the guns.

So what do you want....scary looking guns and low capacity magazines banished.....

Or ALL firearms banished?

2 Agrees | 15 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ProdigalSon

Jan-29-13 7:41 PM

"...it concerns rights to privacy and liberty and public safety."~h75

Ab-so-lutely.

That's why Texas, Missouri, Wyoming, Tennessee, South Dakota and South Carolina all have bills or proposed bills that would block enforcement of federal firearms acts in violation of the Second Amendment, and 12 more states are committing to do the same.

You speak with forked tongue h, as do some others here. You state the problem is with a style of firearm and magazine capacity. And in the same sentence, indicate all firearms need to go.

Will the real h75 please stand up?

2 Agrees | 15 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

hartman75

Jan-29-13 1:43 PM

"Did she die as the result of guns being present, or because of the intent of her son?"

Of course it was because guns were present. Her son couldn't have legally purchased a gun to kill his mother, right Prod? She likely would have been able to defend herself if not for the use of a gun! What steps should we take to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill? Maintain easy access to guns but lock up the mentally ill? How do we keep guns away from perpetrators of violent crimes or domestic abuse? Its not just mass shootings - it concerns rights to privacy and liberty and public safety. The only common thread regarding gun violence is easy access to and the use of, a gun.

15 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rangeral

Jan-28-13 11:30 PM

In Newtown, there were two parents and numerous other friends and relatives who knew the kid had mental problems - no one took the necessary steps to deal with him. All it takes to get started is one phone call.

2 Agrees | 16 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 134 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web