Dear President Obama,
I read your recent editorial calling for “agreement on gun reforms,” assuming that “almost all gun owners in America are highly responsible.” I did so with a barrel of salt next to my desk. During the campaign, you derided my fellow firearms owners for clinging to “their guns and their bibles.” It is also highly disingenuous that the same man in charge of enforcing the present firearms laws—which permitted hundreds of guns to flow into criminal hands via “Project Gunwalker”—is now advocating for “consensus” to “prevent future bloodshed.” I remind you that one of those ATF-enabled guns in the hands of a criminal killed a federal officer . . .
You base your call to action on the murders committed by this deranged fellow in Arizona. But the law is not to blame. Considering his past history, Jared Lee Loughner should not of been able to buy razor blades, never mind a lawfully-purchased firearm.
Mr. Loughner’s attack was due to a breakdown in what society is supposed to do with an obviously “troubled” young man; a man who had prior interaction with the local police department.
Remember Mr. Obama: Loughner made his classmates so nervous that one of them felt the need to sit closer to the door “just in case.” One of Loughner’s professors felt so concerned for his safety that he also made comments about the spree killer’s behavior.
Addressing the obvious danger posed by Mr. Loughner did not require a NICS background check. It required a law enforcement and judicial system that takes action when notified of a continuing problem with an at-risk citizen. A citizen who wrote letters to politicians threatening their life.
Had liberals like your self not hamstrung both the police and the courts in an effort to “protect a perps’ rights” it is highly likely that this fellow would have become an officer’s “special project.” In today’s litigious environment, if an officer touches one hair on this kid’s head, even after all the evil he has perpetrated, he or she loses their job, pension, everything. And society pays the price.
As for Mr. Louhner being rejected from the service in the United States Army, it’s wrong to focus on the fact that the decision to show up on the NICS system. Any such policy would discourage young men and women from apply to the armed services, just as a mental health qualification would discourage gun-owning Americans to seek psychological help.
The more important questions: why did the Army turn away Mr. Loughner?
The reason the armed services reject people like Loughner is not so much their drug habits or mental state. The military used to have methods to “fix” people like this, and give them jobs appropriate to their capabilities. The reason why they’re deemed unsuitable is that these methods are no longer considered politically correct; the Army rejects an entire class of individuals out of hand.
Finally, it has been two months since this terrible attack occurred. Why has Jared Lee Loughner’s trial and execution not been fast-tracked? Is their any doubt he did it? Is there any doubt of the motive or the opportunity and the murder weapon? All we need is a jury, a judge, couple of lawyers, and an electric chair.
This is also part of the problem. How can we fight gun crime when there are no immediate consequences for horrendous acts involving guns? Nadal Hassan Malik and Faisal Shazad will likely live long lives and become pen pals. Loughner will no doubt join this club, if only for a decade or so.
We spend massive resources incarcerating human waste like this that have abdicated any right to draw breath. Absolutely he and they are innocent until proven guilty. But he is guilty and this is not 1902. We’ve got the video. The receipt. The email. The threatening letters. All we need now is the extension cord and the correct amount of amperage.
Not to be too cold-hearted here, but who really deserves our limited resources Japan or these dirtbags?
In closing, your call for more laws and more complete NICS data will fail. The lawless ask permission from no one before they harm innocent people.
Respectfully,
Joe Doakes
Be careful – “protecting a perp’s rights?” You should find a way to rephrase that.
That “perp” could one day be you. You may have just ventilated an assailant in a perfectly justified self-defense situation but the jackasstical antigun district attorney who is up for re-election wants to see you get smashed – those very perp rights might be the next-to-last line of defense against that State-sanctioned creep.
If you defend yourself in one county or another in a perfect world we would all be innocent until proven guilty and the police would never make a mistake. That’s not reality. The police are human beings who must protect the peace and enforce the law. The NRA as well as other gun organizations work hard(as well as all of us who take the time to write to politicians) to make it so we can exercise our rights without fear. But from their perspective they have a job to do and in the past, someone like Mr. Loughner would have been handled differently. Hope that helps, if not I’ll try again.
It is rumored that there is a conflict of interest in the case – as Loughner’s mom was a state employee. The incompetence lies squarely with Dupnik who did NOT investigate death threats against local officials which I’m pretty sure is a felony.
Try “in an effort to save face.”
We call this behavior “CYA.” This guy went into full throttle kiss Obamas rectum mode after the attack.
Dear Mr. Doakes,
No. There can be no fast tracking of the criminal justice process.
I suppose you approve of former President George W. Bush’s policy of detaining and torturing people without trial or indictment, in a bald-faced violation of the constitution? What of current President Barrack Obama’s desire to be able to assassinate citizens without even presenting evidence?
If you approve of either, you are a traitor to the constitution and to freedom.
We cannot budge an inch on basic rights, for then they are privileges.
Sincerely,
Nicholas Dixon
I think I was pretty clear on this one. He is innocent until proven guilty. But there is no doubt of his guilt. His trial should be set and done. In my view, he should be executed. We have arrived where we are largely because liberals want zero consequences for the perps and they want to lock up the people like you and me who bother no one by possessing arms they think are “scary.” As for President Obamas desire to assassinate citizens in this country who are have been detected as in the final stages of committing an act of violence I’m for arresting them. If they are in a foreign land and have chosen to fight for the other side, or sides as it were, I’m for killing them. As for budging an inch – that ship has sailed long ago. We are in the process of getting our freedom back though. This fight has just begun. One vote at a time.
Joe Doakes, I was a little confused reading your letter. It sounded like you were agreeing with Obama and many gun control folks who’ve been lamenting the fact that Loughner had not been disqualified.
The main thrust of his letter was that we need to close the “private sale loophole.” I’m sure you don’t like that one, but it’s hard to argue against unless you go all the way like your blog host and Nicholas Dixon and start talking that not-budging-an-inch stuff.
Apologize for the confusion. When I write these letters I’m trying get it all out as if the person I’m addressing is right in front of me, and I just let it rip. I’m for the States having the ability to what they think they must do in order to ensure the safety of their citizens. I’m for constricting the ATF and the whole alphabet soup of federal agencies so that they get back to their primary functions of national security and out of intrastate security – unless they are asked – we are trillions in debt and deficit. We’ve got to get out of it, we never will if every school bully becomes a federal case in perpetuity. I’m for States rights. I think that will provide the best chance at preventing the next attack, as you well know, in the final analysis, there is no way for certain to stop any one attack. Only a sharp eye and good aim and some good fortune can do that.
“I’m for the States having the ability to what they think they must do in order to ensure the safety of their citizens.”
This is nearly the same argument made by those who supported the PATRIOT Act and Guantanamo Bay. Be careful.
The State cannot be everywhere at once to protect you, but it CAN subsidize training of civilians once we get this stupid “War on Drugs” out of the way. In a perfect world, there would be more CCW permit holders and one would have been next to Loughner to send him to his wretched maker before he pulled the trigger. A most appropriate death penalty rather than the riskier after-trial version where there is more doubt.
I agree. There was a report I read of a CC person there who drew his weapon, but held his fire because he could not safely take a shot – that is a testament to us. We are not some trigger happy lot. We seek peace. We know that to ensure it men and women of good character must be able to voluntarily possess arms for the purpose of self defense as well as defense of innocent life.
I’m with Joe Doakes on this issue. WE as in everyone who can resposibly own, handle and or buy weapons should take the time to wright an e-mail or letter to their representatives. There are too many criminals on death row or in prison with multiple life sentences wasting our resourses. What? Do they have more than one life? Why is there a “DEATH ROW”?
on a different note HOW do I get a picture next to my posts??????????? I like Ralph’s media arts masks and rifle.
…….Three wolves and a sheep, discussing what to have for dinner….
Only this time the sheep aren’t going to play that game.
Learn to make them and the ammunition for them and then teach others. These people aren’t going to stop and only an idiot could mistake the intentions and outcomes.
It’s not like there isn’t an historical record here.
Comments are closed.