I find it quite shameful that the Arizona Tea Party would hold a rally at our state Capitol and call it “.223 Second Amendment Rally.” To have a rally named after one of the guns used in the Sandy Hook Massacre is shameful.
Then to top it off, Arizona Congressman Matt Salmon lowers himself to be a speaker at this rally. Without any regard for the victims and their families of that tragic shooting, the Tea Party shows high disrespect for the total situation of gun control.
Using the .223 as their rally cry is quite appalling and low. Even more than that is to have our elected officials such as Kelly Townsend and Matt Salmon to actually be a part of this disgraceful display of ignorance. The government is not coming after their .223 Bushmaster rifles with 30 rounds in it like the killer in Sandy Hook had, nor is the government attacking our Second Amendment. These rallies are producing nothing but false paranoia throughout the country and now we can add disrespect to victims of a tragic mass shooting.
Shame on the Tea Party and the elected officials that participated!
John Chiazza
Gilbert
valleynative posted at 1:05 pm on Wed, Feb 27, 2013.
If children were killed by a Chevrolet Tahoe, would it be shameful for people to continue to own, and to fight for the right to own, Chevrolet Tahoes?
The .223 wasn't to blame. It was a maniac.
Don't kid yourself that there aren't people, including Feinstein, who would like nothing better than to enforce a "buy back" law forcing everybody to turn in their .223 rifles, despite the fact that they kill fewer people every year than Chevrolet Tahoes do.
Leon Ceniceros posted at 1:42 pm on Wed, Feb 27, 2013.
Folks,
If the President, John Chiazza, of the...."GREATER EASTERN MARICOPA DEMOCRATS....wants to write a Letter to the Editor, he has a Constitutional Right to do so.
BUT, MR. CHIAZZA, DON'T YOU THINK THAT IT WOULD BE ETHICAL TO TELL THE READERS EXACTLY ............WHO YOU ARE ???
Bluepoet posted at 3:24 pm on Wed, Feb 27, 2013.
If there was such a rally, I agree that it was about as tasteful as a Coke float at a Pepsi parade. But, you know, John, they had the right to do it. Just as you have the right to call them on it, and Leon has the right to troll about it.
The only way to control guns is to buy them all...
The only way to stop violence is to stop the violent.
It's probably impossible to do either...
Meanwhile, I'd be saving up my $$ for those personal attack drones we'll all need...
valleynative posted at 4:32 pm on Wed, Feb 27, 2013.
I wasn't impressed by the invitation I received to the rally. Although .223 rifles got a lot of undeserved bad press after the tragedy, rubbing it people's faces isn't the best response and the whole point of the rally seemed to be to protest Obama's Executive Orders, none of which seemed inappropriate or to overstep his authority or to threaten my rights in any way.
valleynative posted at 4:33 pm on Wed, Feb 27, 2013.
I will say again though, that "assault rifles" are not the enemy. They're a profoundly poor choice for the maniac mass murderer and other than crazy people, they're almost never used in violent crime. More people are clubbed to death every year than are shot with any type of rifle. Rifles are just a stupid choice for crime.
Despite what you'll hear from anti-gun experts who know nothing about shooting sports, they absolutely are used for hunting and for target sports.
onerebel posted at 5:05 pm on Wed, Feb 27, 2013.
John, I didn't see you on here chastising the Obama Administration when they used those little kids as political puppets to announce their gun control agenda. Just because YOU don't think the government will take our guns or infringe on the 2nd Amendment, does not mean it can and will happen. In many of our minds that's exactly what YOU on the far left are determined to do, some have even admitted it. The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms..."
-- Samuel Adams
Accuracy posted at 6:40 pm on Wed, Feb 27, 2013.
All lies by John Chiazza about the “.223 Second Amendment Rally” and the .223 Bushmaster rifle.
The rally/event to support our Second Amendment rights was held in Phoenix by the Phoenix TEA Party. The aptly named .223 resistance rally gave Second Amendment advocates a chance to publicly express their opinions at the ‘Day of Resistance’ rally.
The .223 is significant because that is the cartridge that goes in a semi automatic . . . NOT because of any .223-caliber Bushmaster XM15-E2S rifle that John Chiazza prevaricated in his letter.
The rally, named for the .223-caliber ammunition, was a show of support for gun advocates (nation-wide) who oppose President Barack Obama’s recent 23 executive orders that will limit high-capacity magazines, ban military-style assault weapons.
valleynative posted at 9:31 pm on Wed, Feb 27, 2013.
Accuracy, I'm on your side in the gun control battle, but you need to check your facts.
None of the executive orders have anything to do with banning anything. He doesn't have the power, and this time at least, he hasn't tried to exceed his authority.
DemocraticDad posted at 10:16 am on Thu, Feb 28, 2013.
I fully support the First Amendment of the Constitution which allows even total idiots to gather and babble insanities in a public forum, as long as they do so in a peaceful manner.
chatmandu002 posted at 10:55 am on Thu, Feb 28, 2013.
The liberal/progressives blame everyone or everything but the crazy trigger puller.
Accuracy posted at 12:20 pm on Thu, Feb 28, 2013.
Wrong valleynative…..
On January 16, 2013, President Barack Obama did sign into law 23 executive actions on gun policy in the United States. These orders were in addition to laws that he also urged Congress to pass: gun laws that would require background checks on all gun sales, restore a ban on “military-style assault weapons,” ban gun magazines with capacities of more than 10 rounds and toughen penalties on people who sell guns to those who can't have them.
In response to these unconstitutional actions by the President, on .223, February 23, 2013 American citizens all across the nation, who value the Second Amendment and our Constitution, stood together as a “Day of Resistance” and in support of their 2nd Amendment right, the right that protects all of their other rights.
In Phoenix, the Phoenix TEA Party, also organized locally, band together neighbor to neighbor, and reasserted their community’s right to determine their own destiny.
John Chiazza stated in the above Letter: “Shame on the Tea Party and the elected officials that participated!”
valleynative posted at 2:54 pm on Thu, Feb 28, 2013.
"Accuracy", the text of his executive orders is available online. None of them involve bans. In addition to the executive orders, which involve such things as improving incentives for States to contribute data for background checks, and ordering the Attorney General to review the gun purchase checklist, he did also "urge" Congress to pass laws that WOULD ban some things, but that's not an executive order.
Urging Congress to do anything at all is not unconstitutional. The bans themselves, if enacted (unlikely) might well be unconstitutional.
Accuracy posted at 6:47 pm on Thu, Feb 28, 2013.
Wrong again valleynative…..
On Jan. 16, 2013 President Obama did sign 23 executive orders that do include a call for restoring a ban on military-style assault weapons, limiting magazines to 10 rounds, and requiring universal background checks.
The 23 executive orders that do not need approval from the government are described as the most sweeping proposals in 20 years.
DemocraticDad posted at 9:30 pm on Thu, Feb 28, 2013.
Those who think Executive Orders by the president are unconstitutional might consider reviewing American History. If they did, they would find examples of Executive Orders of past presidents, including Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation and Truman's integration of the military.
valleynative posted at 7:14 am on Fri, Mar 1, 2013.
I don't think anybody is saying that all executive orders are unconstitutional, but any that usurp power from Congress or from the States certainly are, and historical precedent doesn't make them constitutional.
DemocraticDad posted at 9:05 pm on Fri, Mar 1, 2013.
So valleynative please tell me how the Emancipation Proclamation didn't usurp power form Congress or from the States?
valleynative posted at 12:58 pm on Sat, Mar 2, 2013.
The Emancipation Proclamation wasn't what we think of as an Executive Order. It was really nothing more than an order from the Commander in Chief to the Armed Forces of the United States, telling them how to act against those states with which they were at war. It didn't eliminate slavery or free any slaves. It simply ordered the Northern Army to treat slaves in the rebel states (only!) as if they were free and to take them from their owners.
Slaves freed by the armed forces did not become citizens.
samkat posted at 5:17 pm on Sat, Mar 2, 2013.
I think it is shameful that Obama ran all over the country at taxpayer expense pushing his personal agenda. The least he could have done would have been to let his special interest friends pay for the trips so we taxpayers would not be on the hook. After all, he is lamenting our lack of federal funding to the extent the released thousands of illegals from federal detention centers.
DemocraticDad posted at 10:39 pm on Sat, Mar 2, 2013.
Valleynative:
"The Emancipation Proclamation wasn't what we think of as an Executive Order."
WRONG!
From Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC): "We've seen many big things done in history that way. I've joked with my staff the other day, 'tele me what was the bill number of the Emancipation Proclamation.' It was an Executive Order. We integrated the armed services by Executive Order. We integrated public schools by Executive Order. Sometimes executives must order that things get done."
"It didn't eliminate slavery or free any slaves"
WRONG!
From PBS: "The Emancipation Proclamation did not free all slaves in the United States. Rather, it declared free only those slaves living in states not under Union control."
valleynative posted at 11:28 pm on Sat, Mar 2, 2013.
DemocraticDad, I am right.
Your sources are wrong.
Why do you think Rep Clyburn is an expert on what is or isn't an executive order, or that he would worry about using the term correctly when trying to make a point?
When PBS says it "declared free", they're oversimplifying. The point they were trying to make is that it had no impact on slaves except in the rebel States.
In fact, it ordered the army to remove slaves from their owners, which "emancipated" them only in the sense of helping them to escape, but did NOT make them free citizens.
DemocraticDad posted at 8:46 pm on Sun, Mar 3, 2013.
valleynative, you might not like my sources or agree with them, but at least I gave you sources. Where are yours???????
valleynative posted at 12:12 pm on Mon, Mar 4, 2013.
DemocraticDad, my source is the text of the Emancipation Proclamation itself, and several articles about it. These citations should suffice:
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/featured_documents/emancipation_proclamation/
http://www.history.com/topics/emancipation-proclamation
Accuracy posted at 3:10 pm on Tue, Mar 5, 2013.
"Gun Rallies" by those who value the Second Amendment . . . And women are now becoming the fastest growing segment of gun buyers in the United States.
Gun stores and shooting ranges are cashing in on the trend by offering products and services specifically for female customers. And most of the women will tell you they're buying a handgun for one reason: self defense.