Las Vegas Sun

February 27, 2017

Currently: 56° — Complete forecast

User profile

Bob Glover
April 5, 2010

Contact bobglover (log-in required)

Recent Comments

Total Comments: 200 (view all)

Mayors Against Illegal Guns, The Brady Campaign and other organizations promoting the passage of gun control legislation continue to make one critical error: they assume that all gun owners are backwoods, tobacco chewing, pickup driving rednecks, possessed of an IQ in the low two digits. For those who wish to pass meaningful gun control laws, you must first reconsider your opinion of your opposition. You must also develop a well funded effort, far and away above Michael Bloomberg's $12 million advertising campaign to counter the lobbying efforts of the NRA, the GOA and the National Association for Gun Rights.

Don't like that pesky, old Second Amendment? Then, repeal it. Elected representatives not possessed of the political will and moral courage to stand up to the cash and the lobbying muscle of the big, bad NRA? Then, elect new ones.

If you wish to continue to get your heads handed to you on every occasion that a gun control bill comes before that gang of 535 unprincipled thugs we laughingly refer to as the United States Congress, please disregard the preceding message.

(Suggest removal) 4/28/13 at 3:26 p.m.

What Jack Corrick is suggesting is that our president and his advisors are free to murder American citizens at will; and he can do so without that person having been charged, without access to counsel and without access to due process of law. Representative Kevin Yoder, a Republican from Kansas recently asked the director of the FBI if the recent DOJ memo authorizing such drone strikes when approved by our president included Americans here in the United States. The director of the FBI Did. Not. Know! This fascist idiocy flies in the face of two hundred years of American jurisprudence; and moreover places our president on the same level as that paragon of human rights and champion of justice, Bashar al-Assad of Syria. This is wrong; and it does not matter which president began this scurrilous and indefensible practice, Barack Obama, George Bush or George Washington.

(Suggest removal) 2/15/13 at 4:15 p.m.

I know from reading Brian Greenspun's comments since I moved to Las Vegas and the Sun was an actual newspaper instead of an afterthought in that house organ of the John Birch Society, the LVRJ, that he is an intelligent, well read and learned man. This screed of hypocrisy and rationalistic drivel does not do justice to his intellect. It dismisses over two hundred years of American jurisprudence and lays waste the notion that one should be able to face his accusers in open court, not be subject to cruel or unusual punishment; to be judged by a jury of his peers; that he should not be deprived of life liberty or property without due process of law, nor denied the equal protection of the laws. Ceding to our president the right to murder any American citizen he so chooses, anywhere in the world without charges, without conviction or without access to counsel goes contrary to the very nature of our existence as a nation. A president who exhibits the unmitigated hubris to claim such a right reduces himself and his office to that of a La Cosa Nostra Capo regime, presiding over his hit list, assisted by his Consigliore, the attorney general and dispatching his flying, electronic, remote controlled Luca Brasi to whack out a suspected enemy at a whim. Is this the low to which our society has devolved? I don't care who began the systematic shredding of our Constitution and our Bill of Rights; Barack Obama, George Bush or George Washington, this is immoral and it is wrong.

(Suggest removal) 2/10/13 at 9:13 p.m.

Those good folks who say that a citizen militia would be no match for the might of the U. S, military are assuming some things that are by no means guaranteed. One is that our troops would obey a superior officer's order to fire upon their own countrymen. The second is that in a widespread guerilla insurgency, in which small groups of committed fighters employed tactics similar to those used by the Mujahedeen in Afghanistan, that the military would be able to conquer those fighters. As we witnessed during the old USSR's invasion and occupation of Afghanistan that is by no means a certainty.

At best the military would be able to control only the large cities and towns, leaving the countryside, i.e. the desert and rural areas in the control of insurgent groups. I most certainly hope it does not come to this eventuality, but if it did the argument that insurgents would stand no chance against the military is fallacious and disingenuous.

(Suggest removal) 2/1/13 at 7:39 a.m.

Perhaps Mr. Lordahl is unfamiliar with the meaning and the intent of the Second Amendment because is has not read that Amendment. Perhaps he is not conversant with its intent and its purpose because he disingenuously chooses to infer a meaning to the Amendment to suit his own purposes. The Supreme Court has rarely taken up Second Amendment cases; but in the cases the Court has heard they have come down on the side of the founders' original intent.

U. S. v. Miller in 1939, having to do with a convicted criminal in possession of a shotgun with a barrel sawn off to less than eighteen inches, the Court ruled that "militia" meant, "all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense;" and further defined "arms" as, "equipment of the military that would be useful in the common defense." In District of Columbia v. Heller in 2008 and McDonald v. City of Chicago in 2010 the Court held that the Second Amendment enshrined an individual right to keep and bear arms for self protection.

There is nothing in the Second Amendment referring to "need," as in the need to have a black, really scary looking rifle with a thirty round magazine [not a "clip"], a bayonet lug and a folding or collapsible stock, which Mr. Lordahl would doubtless refer to as an assault weapon.

(Suggest removal) 2/1/13 at 7:24 a.m.

(view all 200)

Items submitted by bobglover

  • Photos
  • Videos
  • Stories/Blogs

bobglover has not submitted any photos to Las Vegas Sun

bobglover has not submitted any videos to Las Vegas Sun

bobglover has not submitted any stories to Las Vegas Sun