too young for an Uzi? - sheriffs picking laws to enforce
Wed Aug 27 00:10:29 EDT 2014
A shooting range instructor in Arizona was accidentally shot and killed by a 9-year-old girl who was learning how to shoot an Uzi, authorities said on Tuesday.
I'm not pro-gun nor anti-gun, but I try to be pro-common-sense - and I can't see any common sense to giving a 9-year-old an Uzi. I know I'm not a parent, and I don't spend a lot of time with children, but I once was a child, and can now view that experience with perspective.Ronald Scott, a Phoenix-based firearms safety expert, said most instructors usually have their hands on guns when children are firing high-powered weapons. "You can't give a 9-year-old an Uzi and expect her to control it," Scott told the Associated Press.
I have to wonder whether this was the child's idea or the parents'.... Or the shooting range's. Whatever the case, it is often a parent's job to say "No." This child is probably scarred for life. And if she's not, I really don't want her around guns (unless she joins the Secret Service or the military).
But on the subject of gun control,With more states passing stronger gun control laws, rural sheriffs across the country are taking their role as defenders of the Constitution to a new level by protesting such restrictions and, in some cases, refusing to enforce the laws.
"The role of a sheriff is to be the interposer between the law and the citizen," said Maryland Delegate Don Dwyer, an Anne Arundel County Republican. "He should stand between the government and citizen in every issue pertaining to the law."
Since when should there be anything between the citizen and the law? Where do Republicans get these ideas? If there's something wrong with a law, change it!A handful of [New York]'s 62 sheriffs have vowed not to enforce the high-capacity magazine and assault-weapon bans. "If you have an (assault) weapon, which under the SAFE Act [state legislation that broadened the definition of a banned assault weapon] is considered illegal, I [Sheriff Tony Desmond of Schoharie County] don't look at it as being illegal just because someone said it was," he said.
Don't these guys take oaths to uphold the laws of their jurisdictions?"It's not (the judge's) job to tell me what I can and can't enforce," Weld County, Colorado Sheriff John Cooke said.
Ahem, I think maybe it is the judge's job. I don't think it's your job to decide.Maryland Sen. Brian Frosh, a sponsor of the Firearms Safety Act and a gun-control advocate from suburban Montgomery County, said Wicomico County, Maryland Sheriff Mike Lewis' understanding of a sheriff's role is flawed. "If you are a sheriff in Maryland you must take an oath to uphold the law and the Constitution," said Frosh. ".... It's not up to a sheriff to decide what's constitutional and what isn't. That's what our courts are for." Frosh also noted that sheriffs are generally not lawyers or judges, which means they often are following their convictions instead of the Constitution. "We had lots of people come in (to testify against the bill) and without any basis say, 'This violates the Second Amendment,'" Frosh said. "They can cite the Second Amendment, but they couldn't explain why this violates it. And the simple fact is it does not. There is a provision of our Constitution that gives people rights with respect to firearms, but it's not as expansive as many of these people think."
[This entry was originally posted as https://syntonic-comma.dreamwidth.org/691685.html on Dreamwidth (where there are
comments).]
A shooting range instructor in Arizona was accidentally shot and killed by a 9-year-old girl who was learning how to shoot an Uzi, authorities said on Tuesday.
I'm not pro-gun nor anti-gun, but I try to be pro-common-sense - and I can't see any common sense to giving a 9-year-old an Uzi. I know I'm not a parent, and I don't spend a lot of time with children, but I once was a child, and can now view that experience with perspective.Ronald Scott, a Phoenix-based firearms safety expert, said most instructors usually have their hands on guns when children are firing high-powered weapons. "You can't give a 9-year-old an Uzi and expect her to control it," Scott told the Associated Press.
I have to wonder whether this was the child's idea or the parents'.... Or the shooting range's. Whatever the case, it is often a parent's job to say "No." This child is probably scarred for life. And if she's not, I really don't want her around guns (unless she joins the Secret Service or the military).
But on the subject of gun control,With more states passing stronger gun control laws, rural sheriffs across the country are taking their role as defenders of the Constitution to a new level by protesting such restrictions and, in some cases, refusing to enforce the laws.
"The role of a sheriff is to be the interposer between the law and the citizen," said Maryland Delegate Don Dwyer, an Anne Arundel County Republican. "He should stand between the government and citizen in every issue pertaining to the law."
Since when should there be anything between the citizen and the law? Where do Republicans get these ideas? If there's something wrong with a law, change it!A handful of [New York]'s 62 sheriffs have vowed not to enforce the high-capacity magazine and assault-weapon bans. "If you have an (assault) weapon, which under the SAFE Act [state legislation that broadened the definition of a banned assault weapon] is considered illegal, I [Sheriff Tony Desmond of Schoharie County] don't look at it as being illegal just because someone said it was," he said.
Don't these guys take oaths to uphold the laws of their jurisdictions?"It's not (the judge's) job to tell me what I can and can't enforce," Weld County, Colorado Sheriff John Cooke said.
Ahem, I think maybe it is the judge's job. I don't think it's your job to decide.Maryland Sen. Brian Frosh, a sponsor of the Firearms Safety Act and a gun-control advocate from suburban Montgomery County, said Wicomico County, Maryland Sheriff Mike Lewis' understanding of a sheriff's role is flawed. "If you are a sheriff in Maryland you must take an oath to uphold the law and the Constitution," said Frosh. ".... It's not up to a sheriff to decide what's constitutional and what isn't. That's what our courts are for." Frosh also noted that sheriffs are generally not lawyers or judges, which means they often are following their convictions instead of the Constitution. "We had lots of people come in (to testify against the bill) and without any basis say, 'This violates the Second Amendment,'" Frosh said. "They can cite the Second Amendment, but they couldn't explain why this violates it. And the simple fact is it does not. There is a provision of our Constitution that gives people rights with respect to firearms, but it's not as expansive as many of these people think."
[This entry was originally posted as https://syntonic-comma.dreamwidth.org/691685.html on Dreamwidth (where there are
comments).]