search
top

LA Times Not Liking Endorsement

The LA Times isn’t liking the NRA endorsement of McCain:

Even during the presidential campaign, he hasn’t ruled out “common-sense” efforts to lower the murder rate in big cities. That’s anathema to the NRA, which wants no one to abridge gang members’ right to slaughter one another.

Even if the NRA is right about Obama, he’s still not going to take Americans’ guns away. By striking down Washington’s handgun ban in June, the Supreme Court assured that it will be very difficult for the government to forbid gun ownership by law-abiding citizens in the future. It’s unclear whether the NRA cares; having won its 2nd Amendment battle, it’s now out to block any restriction on gun freedom, even the freedom of felons and the mentally ill to buy guns. There are dangers in such extremism, and they’ll become clearer as the body count rises.

Nothing to see here.  Please move along.  Pay no attention to what the gun loons think and get out there and vote for The Lightworker.

9 Responses to “LA Times Not Liking Endorsement”

  1. Paul W says:

    “Even if the NRA is right about Obama, he’s still not going to take Americans’ guns away.”

    No, because he “doesn’t have the votes in Congress.” Now. What if he DOES get the votes? What if he simply signs Executive Orders banning imports of all guns, ammo, parts and components? What about letting the BATFE loose to harrass FFLs and drive most of the rest out of business? Then our cost to get guns and shoot them will skyrocket – effectively banning them for many people.

    McCain ain’t perfect by a long shot, but he won’t do this kind of stuff. Obama will – count on it.

  2. Carl in Chicago says:

    To LA Times Editors:

    In today’s Editoral regarding the NRA, you stated:

    “That’s anathema to the NRA, which wants no one to abridge gang members’ right to slaughter one another.”

    This statement belies terrible editorial standards. You know as well as I that the NRA supports rights protected by the second amendment, and also works to promote the safe and responsible use of firearms. You also know that the second amendment does not protect a right for “gang members to slaughter each other.” There is no such right, and you are dishonest (and foolish) to suggest that there is.

    Your Editorial is a smear-job, based on blatant bigotry instead of the facts.

    Poor job today. Very poor.

  3. Does the L.A. Times know what is going on south of the border?

    There were shootouts between Mexican authorities and drug cartels.

    Mexico has a handgun ban.

    I guess the L.A. Times thinks that the shootouts were down with crossbows.

  4. BadIdeaGuy says:

    Carl, good to see your comment on LAT..

    I posted, we’ll see if it goes through. Obama wants to give us CA/IL style gun rules and then some- how’s it working out for them?

  5. flashman says:

    There’s a gun show nearby Oct 26 & 27. Guess I’ll buy another AK and some mags just on the assumption that after the election panic buying will set in. Obie will do everything he can to ban guns that look like assault rifles and all the other stuff in the last ban. Plus tort lawyers will harass gun manufacturers, ammo will have to be micro stamped, etc. It’s all coming under the great messiah. Going to be a bad 4 years…..

  6. Carl in Chicago says:

    What many of these people don’t realize is that NOTHING sells guns like gun bans, or talk of gun bans. Nothing.

    And I suppose the vast majority that DO realize this, and still want to ban them, take their position for purely political reasons, or perhaps socio-political reasons (they just don’t like gun owners and everything that “person-type” represents to them).

    Maroons.

  7. Brad says:

    Posted two comments (due to 650 character per post limit) and waiting to see if they appear.

    Here is the complete comment…

    Wasn’t it an LA times editorial which advocated all citizens turn in their so-called “assault weapons” within 30 days or face felony charges? As an avowed enemy of the second amendment I would think the LA Times would joyously embrace Obama as fellow anti-gunner, just as the anti-gun lobby group The Brady Campaign (formely Handgun Control Inc.) has endorsed Obama.

    Just as Handgun Control Inc. changed it’s name to The Brady Campaign, Obama (and the LA Times) is playing the game of pretend. Pretend that Obama isn’t anti-gun so maybe he can fool the public just long enought to get elected. It’s the Kessler strategy used by John Kerry in 2004. The Kessler strategy is a scheme to soothe public opinion by mouthing platitudes about ‘I support the second amendment’ while still advancing anti-gun legislation.

    Just as the democratic party platform of 2008 advocates a national ban on so-called “assault weapons” despite the blatant violation of the second amendment of such a law.

  8. Carl in Chicago says:

    Great post, Brad. It’s all up on the LA Times site.

    Yes, in this post-Heller America, it’s going to be all about “reasonable” and “presumptively lawful.”

  9. Brad says:

    Thanks, Carl in Chicago.

    I wish I didn’t have to split up my comment to the LA Times editorial into two parts, as it dulls the full impact. I see that so far only the first half has appeared, it wouldn’t suprise me if they refuse to post the other half under the excuse of spamming rules. Oh, well. At least something was posted.

top