Letter: Just like 1936

Let me get this straight, a drone was actually used to aid in the arrest of a suspected criminal? Well I'll be the nerve of infringing on a criminals rights! Just how is a drone any different than using a plane to scour the countryside, that's right, it's technology is more effective, not fair.

Somewhat agree. We have people saying that their way is the best and they are willing to lie, connive and bully over half of the population as progressives try to force their views on others. I can tell you that if anarchy ensues or a dictatorship is established you should be glad that people will bear arms, that will be your only defense.

NHdriver, I'm not so sure. Taking the letter-writer's argument a step further, consider these characteristics of today's far-right, most of which showed up in similar form in pre-war Germany and which routinely show up in TP and Republican writings and strategizing, not to mention finding frequent expression on this site. If you were to put all these together in a larger populist movement than currently exists on the right, it would signal some hard times ahead. 1) A jingoistic and bellicose super-patriotism-- expressed as American exceptionalism and support for an attack on Iran; 2) Disdain for human rights in the conduct of the "War on Terror". 3) Regular scape-goating, name-calling, and paranoia--'Birthers", Agenda 21 paranoia, fear of the U.N. 4) Rampant sexism and hatred of women--continued efforts to restrict, limit, and outlaw abortion, contraceptives, and enact a "human life" amendment; 5) An increasing turn to religious fundamentalism and its corollary-- intolerance of other religions; 6) Worship of corporate power and a corresponding hatred of unions; 7) Attempts to rig elections via deliberate voter suppression measures. 8) Anti-intellectualism--belief in creationism, climate science denial, and anti-vaccine paranoia, and a fondness for medical and dietary quackery. 9) The politics of resentment coupled with economic wing-nuttery-- restoring the Gold Standard, support for a rebirth of Social Darwinism--an obsession with the 47% who are supposedly "takers" rather than "makers", and who have become weak and dependent by virtue of receiving 'lavish' social spending and deficit-inducing entitlements.

I also think it's ironic that, here I was, defending the 2nd amendment from the likes of the letter writer, by saying he was wrong to compare 2nd amendment advocates to Hitler, and along comes TCB . . . a person who is a perfect example of just how "kooky" the hard-right gun-nut fringe has fallen. Perhaps the Hitler comparison wasn't far off in your case?

Hunter Dan, Do I hear you attacking the debater instead of the issues? Is common sense kooky? Is evidence kooky? Do you contend that the volumes and volumes of gun laws, already enacted, have been effective? I do not think so. If, yes - please illuminate the evidence. If they had been, we would not be having this conversation.

Well I didn't mention this because it wasn't pertinent to the discussion of guns but I do also believe that LE needs to be better able to work with mental health agencies(or rather, mental health agencies need to be FORCED to give up more info to LE) in order to keep the "criminally insane" away from firearms. As for criminals, yes I'm aware that they don't follow the laws - that's why they're called CRIMINALS! But the gun show loophole is a common-sense approach which takes away ONE of the avenues by which criminals have been shown to have obtained weapons, Capiche?

The campaign that "criminals get their weapons from gun shows" is another bogeyman. Also, “reasonable compromises” are more of the same of what hasn’t worked by those pushing a political agenda that they could not get to a legislature or pass commonsense voters. Again, a stricter gun laws had ever worked we wouldn’t be having this conversation. In any event the gun debate is now pretty much moot now that three-dimensional printers can produce operational weapons in anybody’s garage. I can conceive of no law that could effectively stopped such activity. Producing rifles and a 3-D printer is just the tip of the iceberg but I will say no more on this: go on a plant any suggestions. To any who would raise their voice and say there ought to be a law about those” well, sadly they still don’t get it. I do salute your call for improved efforts on the part of law enforcement and the mental health community. New York City was able to pull itself out of the worst of its violent crime problems by putting violent criminals in jail on a wholesale level. That’s a sort of thing that works.

"PROGRESSIVES ARE THE PERPETUATORS OF BOGEYMEN"!?!?!?!?!? "OH NOOOOO - IF WE LET GAY PEOPLE MARRY IT WILL RUIN MY MARRIAGE!!!!!!" Care to rethink your claim that Progressives are "perpetuators of bogeymen" itsa???

Uniform national standards that apply to every state regarding background checks and gun show loopholes, as well as limits on the size of magazines and on semi-automatic weapons are reasonable limitations on a right never intended to be absolute in a civilized society. The alternative you imply would turn us into Somalia. As for 3-D printing of guns--single use plastic guns? Anyone who seriously thinks that the 3-D printing of weapons would be other than a threat to civilized society is deluded; it will likely invite draconian measures in response. The gun nut/2nd Amendment absolutists misread the amendment-- and are their own worst enemies. Wayne LaPierre is a fool. Gun rights absolutists are inviting/daring states and the federal government to enact new laws--they don't believe they'll pass. Time will tell. Likewise the technological 'advances' may invite more draconian measures. When you write: "I can conceive of no law that could effectively stop such activity....": Restrictions on bullets?

Progressives are the perpetuators of bogeymen. Guns in the hands of patriotic citizens scares progressives as they know that without guns people would not be able to rise up should progressives and Socialists start to dictate to the majority. If criminals want guns, they will get them. Obama said: "if it saves only one life", well what if self defense saves "only one life", does that count?????