Posted on 05/19/2005 8:05:09 AM PDT by Fido969
MAINE VOICES: Jim Verdolini
Who are the real bullies in gun ban debate?
Copyright © 2005 Blethen Maine Newspapers Inc. E-mail this story to a friend
About the Author Jim Verdolini is a resident of Portland.
I take considerable exception, and not a small amount of umbrage, at the recent commentary about "Gun Bullies" that appeared in the paper May 11.
Columnist Bill Nemitz writes of recent threatening letters sent to legislators who have proposed a variety of gun bills this year. Despite a token denial, the essence of his piece was that nutty gun owners bully harmless legislators who are only trying to do the people's business.
OK, the writer has a point. Of the hundreds of thousands of gun owners in Maine, a few, a very few, go off the deep end and write very nasty notes to our legislators.
Nevertheless, I want to lay out the other side - to ask instead whether or not there are other "bullies," real ones with real power, who are also involved in this discussion.
We live in a state that has a very precise and clearly written constitutional right to keep and bear arms. As the Maine Constitution says in Section 16: "To keep and bear arms: Every citizen has a right to keep and bear arms and this right shall never be questioned."
IT'S PERFECTLY CLEAR
No ambiguity. No way to misconstrue either the meaning or intent of the Maine Constitution. Yet, in every session, we find ourselves confronted by some legislators who simply act as though the constitution was unimportant. They not only want to "question" it, they want to legislate this right away, bit by bit.
Every year citizens - who are not being paid by taxpayers for their time - must write, speak, and take vacation to go to Augusta to fight these bills.
Time and again we see the same cast of characters use their elected office to push an agenda not wanted by the public or allowed by the constitution, offering a "solution" to a problem that simply does not exist and that has never, ever worked anywhere it has been tried.
Every session we hear exaggerations, made-up numbers, claims of benefits not backed by fact, appeals to emotion and flat- out lies used to reduce a fundamental right. This gets very old indeed. Gun owners are fed up.
Now, Nemitz advises that these legislators get hate mail. Does anyone reading this believe that legislators proposing other controversial ideas do not also get hate mail? Do advocates of gay rights or, from the other side, those who favor limits on abortion, not get mail they consider threatening? Of course they do.
Here is a hypothetical: Suppose some legislators were attacked in the press in their last election. Suppose they created a bill to limit the freedom of the press or proposed a per word tax on the media.
Imagine the firestorm over that little idea. The legislators would get mail calling them every name in the book, and the press would be leading the charge. There would be no commentary calling those writers "bullies."
But to shooters, gun rights are every bit as fundamental as the right to free speech is to reporters.
Who are really the bullies? Well, who controls government? Who can pass laws? Who has the entire power of government behind their legislative acts?
It certainly is not individual gun owners. It is not organized groups of gun owners. It is not even the very few nuts who write threats.
ATTACKS ON RIGHTS
No, it is the legislators themselves who propose laws that attack our basic rights who are the bullies. Then they complain, "Those nasty citizens write mean things about us."
Some legislators even say they fear gun-owning citizens.
Let me make this very clear: There are tens of thousands of citizens outside of Augusta who spend every day the Legislature is in session afraid of what those with the real power to affect all our lives might do.
Our homes, our wallets, our families - and our guns - are not safe while the Legislature is in session.
- Special to the Press Herald
BANG!
The recent scandal I saw regarding threatening emails being sent to legislators over a gun ban indicated that they were NOT sent by the person claimed. That it was an attempt to smear the movement and then punish them in the press.
Can't they impeach these legislators for violating their oath to uphold the Maine Constitution?
indeed!
I would beleive it, it was definately a carefully orchetrated press effort to try to convey the idea of "thratening gun nuts", was your reference to mail sent in Maine? Can you give me a source or reference if it was?
That means that our system of government is working exactly as designed. That is the beauty of it. It was designed precisely so that the people who wield government power must always be in fear of the people. Whenever they lose that fear, history shows that governments have both the tendency and the power to do horrible, destructive things.
The Minnesota House.
bump top check
I think you got it!
The press on this was so carefully orchestrated (see prior posts on this topic) I am pretty sure that the dims tried to pull the same stunt here.
Either that or they took simply angry letters and peddled those to the press as "threatening mail".
The liberal Portland Press Herald, of course, having an opportunity to run a "right wing nut" story would never let a small thing thing like: "the facts" get in the way.
I think you got it!
The press on this was so carefully orchestrated (see prior posts on this topic) I am pretty sure that the dims tried to pull the same stunt here.
Either that or they took simply angry letters and peddled those to the press as "threatening mail".
The liberal Portland Press Herald, of course, having an opportunity to run a "right wing nut" story would never let a small thing thing like: "the facts" get in the way.
The same trick can be tried in different markets because none of the reports make the national news (or stay there long when the hoax is exposed).
There is a widescale corruption of bribes in major (Democrat) cities. Contracts worth billions and the number of affected cities keep rising. The Feds are investigating and getting convictions but everywhere the local angle is treated like a lone instance. There is a bigger picture of corruption to be exposed.
Same with the assaults and vandalism of Bush supporters and their homes in 2004 as the election continued.
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.
Debate should not be tolerated.
Contact her at the following phone number or email before May 25.
Deborah Ann Courtney
Empowerment@NOVICTIMS.org
Gonna be a hot summer indeed friend........:o)
Good post !
Stay safe !
I was thinking that bullets are cheaper than a trial, but on 2nd thought, a rope can be re-used.
The only reason that I'd skip the trial is that their public act of proposing such legislation is proof of their guilt. After all, don't they want to make our mere possession an act that justifies punishment?
You can in some states in which *Official Misconduct* legislation applies to public servants who use their position as public servants to violate the law. The logic for doing so is that they have conspired to violate the civil rights of those in their own jurisdiction, also denying those rights to out-of-state visitors in violation of the *full faith and credit* provision of the US Constitution, or that they have used their offices to commit a Deprivation of Civil Rights under color of law- both violations of federal statutes.
I don't know if Maine has an *official misconduct* provision it its state law code or not. But such statutes have been successfully applied in other states.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.