Yeah, not sure where these guys get their view of the Constitution from. And no one action will be a silver bullet to stop everything but if you could cut the number down it seems more than worth it.
Actually, with that logic why have laws at all? People break them? So, they do not work and that means it has to be an all or nothing game. Wouldnât that mean he would have no job thoughâŚstrange. Very strange.
2 Likes
Yes, but the real problem is that theyâve reached the point where nobody even attempts to call on them to do it anymore.
2 Likes
The rational sheriffs like to fuck with him
4 Likes
Hanlin is obiously a fan of Sheriff Rick, and follows Rickâs manual religiouslyâŚ
He and his deputy look like mountain men in âDeliverance,â . When you hear banjos, paddle faster.
What is comes down to is competing rights of citizens. On the one hand one group of citizens demands the unfettered right to own firearms and on the other hand we have the right of citizens to live secure in our persons. The former is addressed rather ambiguously in our Second Amendment and the latter is addressed explicitly in our Declaration of Independence and in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
It seems bizarre that an armed, elected peace officer would come down on the side of arming the crazies over protecting the innocent.
He was let off too easily. This is the true test of his argument. Letâs see if he can still stand by his beliefs when it is quite possible that either the shooter selected this jurisdiction because of the Sheriffâs public pronouncements or (worst case) the Sheriffâs unwillingness to to follow federal or state law that he disagreed with allowed the shooter an unobstructed path to illegal gun ownership. At this point in the investigation neither of these scenarios are knowable but the Sheriff must at least concede that they are possible. And if they are possible then let him take his âprincipledâ stand (in public; right now!) while bearing the burden of knowing that the victimâs blood could be on his hands too.
3 Likes
This is rich. This guy now gets to live with the outcome of his thinking. And apparently he is too stupid to admit he was wrong.
Parents and voters of Roseburg, OR, boot this guy out. Vote him out. Get rid of him. He is part of the problem.
2 Likes
The second amendment is the only place in the Constitution where government regulation is specifically required.
2 Likes
âAny actions against, or in disregard for our U.S. Constitution and 2nd Amendment rights by the current administration would be irresponsible and an indisputable insult to the American people who feel unlimited 2nd Amendment rights outweigh the rights of other citizens to be safe from gun violence.â
There, FIFYâŚ
1 Like
Sheriff Hanlin you failed to protect those students
1 Like
This bastard has the blood of innocents on his hands. And he doesnât even give a damn.
Iâm always curious why the 2nd Amendment is the âSuper Amendmentâ. The rights enumerated in the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, 8th, 9th, 14th, and 15th Amendments to the Constitution have been repeatedly limited, yet the 2nd Amendment is immune to logical interpretation despite such need for the public good.
How horrifying these spectacles are. The actual crimes are horrendous enough, but the fealty that is given to these gun fetishists is even more grotesque, sadly enough.
3 Likes
When Cuomo pointed out that Hanlin previously said gun laws arenât the
answer to mass shootings, the sheriff responded: âI want to stay focused
on completing this investigation and focus on the families of the
victims The discussion over firearms and control of firearms will occur.
Iâll dime in at a later time but now is not that time.â
When the fuck will it be time sheriff? Tomorrow, next year, when your own family gets wasted? When?
WHEN??
Iâll dime in at a later time but now is not that time.
âŚtotally irrelevant but âdime inâ whens the last time anyoneâs seen a dime pay phone?
3 Likes
So, this is working out well for him!
Wouldnât have helped in this case. What we have here is a weird, awkward guy who lived with his mother, and liked to wear camo - not a diagnosed schizophrenic, not a commitable psychopath. In short, I donât think he showed signs of being any more mentally ill than hundreds of thousands of other people. And AFAIK, no one ever tried to get mental health help for this guy. His mother protected him. Remember, it was Adam Lanzaâs mother who made sure he had guns, and knew how to use them. She wasnât desperately seeking help - she thought heâd be fine, as long as he was heavily armed.
And can you imagine the frenzied screaming if anyone were to propose that before you can buy guns, you not only have to go through a background check, you have to submit to a psychological evaluation?
Itâs actually simpler than that. If you think that you need a gun - for protection, to impress others, because you think theyâre âneat,â whatever - then youâre delusional, and shouldnât be allowed to have one.
Yeah, I know - itâs Catch-22. But I think all talk about âmore reasonable controlsâ based on background checks, based on mental health, and so on, is just wishful thinking. History has shown us over and over again that those kinds of controls arenât good enough. They require perfect clairvoyance, the ability to determine, in advance, who might use a gun to do something horrific.
Outside of law enforcement and the military, no one needs a gun.
1 Like
Actually no, it isnât the only place in the Constitution where government regulation is required. With every Constitutional right comes responsibility. That is the substance of the old âyou canât yell fire in a theaterâ chestnut. The NRA and their supporters seem to think it is the only place in the Constitution where government regulation is impossible.
I am not sure you are right about the âneedâ for a gun, but that boat has sailed. The Supreme Court has ruled the government canât simply deny all citizens the right to own a gun. The government can regulate guns if they apply the normal Constitutional standards.
In fact since the existence of laws has not totally eradicated crime there should be no laws at all. That is one wise sheriff.
No. Check it out. In the actual text of the US Constitution, several topics âmayâ be regulated, but only one topic where regulation is necessary to the security of a free stateâguns.
(Also, it is perfectly fine, even admirable, to yell âfireâ in a crowded theater. If there is a fire.)