(allow me to begin by noting I am not intending to engage in, or incite violence)
Now, you people need to stop lying. All of you are engaging in dishonesty.
The University of Idaho’s student paper published an article regarding gun control and applied their usual lean to it. My expectations of the Argonaut (which has more editors than pages) have been pretty low since one of their editors referred to the events of Lexington and Concord on April 19th, 1775 as “terrorist acts”. But this isn’t about the Argonaut, but rather two esteemed gentlemen quoted.
First, let us go to the Chief of Police in Moscow, David Duke. Mr. Duke is quoted in the Argonaut thusly:
The letter was based on a memo issued by Moscow Police Chief David Duke that laid out actions the police department believes would limit gun violence. The letter included the following recommendations: defining and limiting assault weapons, stricter requirements for background checks, limiting access to high capacity magazines, increasing documentation of gun sales, controlling and recording the sale of ammunition, support of national standards for concealed carry permits, mandating of a database including a fingerprint for every gun sold and steps to ensure law enforcement can mandate and encourage safe gun ownership.
The Second Amendment exists for a military purpose…that the body of the people be capable of bearing arms in defense of enemies foreign and domestic. Our founders were rarely in lockstep in agreement on anything, but there was nearly no notion more universally agreed upon than that of standing armies being anathema to liberty. Today’s standing army is not the military, but rather the modern police force. They do the policing that was done by standing armies in times past.
Moscow Police Chief David Duke advocates limiting assault weapons. He should. His position is completely understandable, because the purpose of assault weapons are to shoot government agents. Men like police officers. Mind you, the Second Amendment exists as a doomsday provision. I am not advocating violence against government agents. We must do our best to use peaceful means before resorting to arms. As a lawyer, I clearly believe the legal path to be ideal.
A week ago I sat in a courtroom and witnessed a Latah County Sheriff’s Deputy admit to making bigoted statements against a homosexual defendant. I witnessed this very same deputy, who just so happens to be the son of Moscow Police Chief David Duke WHO WANTS TO LIMIT ACCESS TO ASSAULT WEAPONS (in case you’ve already forgotten), admit in open court that the law enforcement profession as a whole is homophobic. During this same hearing I watched as the court uncovered that potentially exculpatory evidence against the defendant was withheld from not just defense counsel, but also the prosecutor’s office.
Take a moment and let this all sink in as context the next time a law enforcement officer makes his opinion about your ability to own an assault weapon known.
As an aside, I’d like to add that I think that neither of these men are necessarily bad people, but that’s a discussion for another day.
