Tuesday, March 18, 2003

It amazes me how unbiased, fair & even handed The Rocky Mountain News can be. This is an article about lawmakers & law enforcers urging the Governor to veto the pre-emption bill that just passed the legislature last week.
Again, very little was said about the pro-pre-emption side. As a matter of fact, the only thing that was said in support of pre-emption was that it would make the laws across the state unifrom conerning weapons. That was the last sentence of the second paragragh. The rest of the article was devoted to voicing the reasons for vetoing the bill. Mike Patty of The Rocky Mountain News wrote the article.
Wasn't it Glenn Reynolds who said that it was sad when a news story can be turned into a press release for an activist organization with minimal change?

What they aren't saying is that this pre-emption bill would be a first step in declaring that the Right to Arms is not subject to a city or county's whim. They fail to mention the Denver law which allows seizure of your weapon & automobile if a firearm is found inside of it. They don't dare bring up that they'd prefer you to be raped in killed in Denver than to shoot a rapist/murderer & take him out of circulation. They forget to mention that if citizens started to take their defense & the defense of their communities seriously then the cops wouldn't be quite as necessary. Or more accurately, the illusion of police necessity would be shattered if citizens realize they can & should defend themselves instead of being on hold for a 911 operator while they get stabbed.
Denver, a few other cities, & the police chiefs want you to depend totally upon the state & the city for your protection, even though they cannot provide it. This bill directly challenges their authority & a little thing like respecting the peoples' Rights won't stop them from trying to eliminate it. & thanks to the Rocky Mountain News & Mike Patty, that particular truth will be replaced by fictions designed to convince you of their good intentions.

Wasn't the press on our side once?

No comments: