Article "Sheriff: Responsible Gun Ownership Means No DWI" Is Not Available At This Time.
Sheriff: Responsible Gun Ownership Means No DWI
Should a DWI conviction mean no guns?
So many things wrong with this.
It won't fly with the rednecks who drink and drive. It's their ethos. It won't fly with the NRA who want more guns, more violence, more massacres of innocents. It won't fly with the gun manufacturers who finance all the lies and propaganda that come out of Wayne LaPierre and your morning mullet. The whole problem is that it's a good idea and a constructive proposal, something right-wingers always hate and always gets them to pout and whine. Socialist, they say, even though they have no idea what the word actually means.
Whom ever wrote "So many things wrong with this"
You Sir or Ma'am are a joke. And thank you for blanketing responsible people under your stereotype of insults.
I am a responsible and well educated fire arms owner. I hold an undergraduate and Master’s degree in Biology/Environmental Science. To depict all gun owners as murders, knuckle dragging, cavemen is ridicules and serves no purpose. Why must those of you on the left respond with angry, name calling, or derogatory messages? The hallmark of the American Society has always been differing opinions with reasonable, hopefully respectful discussion. Gun owners are not opposed to reasonable changes to existing gun laws. The problem with new laws or amending existing laws is trust. We do not trust, based on past experiences, that the progressive, incremental changes are not designed to ultimately control people. We are concerned today it is guns, tomorrow it is religion, weight, family structure, age all of which could be infringed upon. We are tired of the infringement of the left’s agenda on our lives.
Take away their children too....
The logic here between DWI and guns is lost on me. May as well say we need to take away the children of drunk drivers too because they are clearly irresponsible across the board right? What was Howard thinking?
I have been a pistol permit holder since the 70's. Back then I was told if I get any felony conviction including a DWI I would lose my permit. I do not agree with this but do not see why the Sheriff"s comments on wben are any differnet than they were 35 yrs ago.
RE Gun/People Control
"The hallmark of the American Society has always been differing opinions with reasonable, hopefully respectful discussion." Such an ironic statement to appear on a website that promotes Rush Limbaugh and others of his ilk.
And the fact that the Republicans endorsed this moron is even more of an example of why they keep losing elections. They should not support him and should find a law enforcement person who supports the constitution without exception. This guy will loseto a Democrat who will lie about supporting gun rights then vote to take them away. Conservative, law abiding citizens always get fooled by believing the lies from the left.
C'mon now.. we all know better,
Those who think "professional courtesy" does not exist are fools. How many off duty cops that get pulled over, don't just flash their badge and get let go. Even if it's for DWI they just get taken home. So how many cops do you think will lose their guns? ZERO!
When everyone, regardless of their job gets treated equally then I'll think about starting to listen to Mr. Howard.
Learn the Constitution or be voted out
Disagree, strongly. His statement shows a lack for understanding of the Constitution. I would work to remove him from office.
Should only apply to multiple offenders
If you happen to have gone out to dinner or a work happy hour and had 2 drinks the luck of the draw would have it be that you got stopped and hit with a DWI charge. First time offenders I don't think should have their firearms confiscated for the reason I just stated above. If you are a 2nd, 3rd time offender..yes definitely. Often times with first time DWI it's wrong place/wrong time. Not always but often. If you get a 2nd or 3rd DWI it proves you are not a responsible individual and a careless person. You are choosing to dismiss laws that are there for a reason (case in point Dr. James Corasanti). Careless people should not be allowed to own firearms.
Molly Ivins got it right way back when.
"Let me start this discussion by pointing out that I am not anti-gun. I'm pro-knife. Consider the merits of the knife. In the first place, you have catch up with someone in order to stab him. A general substitution of knives for guns would promote physical fitness. We'd turn into a whole nation of great runners. Plus, knives don't ricochet. And people are seldom killed while cleaning their knives. As a civil libertarian, I of course support the Second Amendment. And I believe it means exactly what it says: "A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Fourteen-year-old boys are not part of a well-regulated militia. Members of wacky religious cults are not part of a well-regulated militia. Permitting unregulated citizens to have guns is destroying the security of this free state. I am intrigued by the arguments of those who claim to follow the judicial doctrine of original intent. How do they know it was the dearest wish of Thomas Jefferson's heart that teen-age drug dealers should cruise the cities of this nation perforating their fellow citizens with assault rifles? Channelling?"
Several dwi arrests and crashes for howards Deputies would that mean he would have unarmed Deputies? He should start with his Undersheriff Wipperman, the biggest drunk on the force, hes been let go numerous times for dwi. hypocrite cop.