NEW YORK TIMES, IN RARE FRONT PAGE EDITORIAL, CALLS FOR OUTLAWING SOME RIFLES!
By Alex Dobuzinskis 7 hours ago
(Reuters) - The New York Times, in its first front-page editorial in nearly a century, on Saturday called for outlawing the kinds of rifles used in the California shooting massacre this week that left 14 people dead.
The newspaper's editorial comes three days after Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik, a married couple, carried out the mass shooting in San Bernardino with legally-purchased, .223 caliber assault-style rifles. FBI officials have said they are investigating the shooting as an "act of terrorism." The couple also had semi-automatic pistols, and U.S. officials have said Malik is believed to have pledged allegiance to a leader of the militant group Islamic State.
"Certain kinds of weapons, like the slightly modified combat rifles used in California, and certain kinds of ammunition, must be outlawed for civilian ownership," the New York Times editorial said.
The editorial went on to argue that an act to outlaw such weapons would "require Americans who own those kinds of weapons to give them up for the good of their fellow citizens."
The piece made brief mention of other U.S. mass shootings. "Let's be clear: These spree killings are all, in their own ways, acts of terrorism," it said.
'president' Barack Obama has called for legislation to make it harder for 'criminals' to get guns. He has noted mass shootings do not happen as frequently in other advanced countries and said the United States should address the problem.
Republicans in Congress have mounted heavy opposition to gun control measures.
The debate over gun control has long been one of the most contentious political issues in the United States, with the right to gun ownership enshrined in the U.S. Constitution's 2nd Amendment.
In a post on the website of the libertarian magazine Reason, senior editor Brian Doherty criticized the editorial, and in particular the call for citizens to eventually give up certain rifles.
"What the Times is calling for is, beyond its countable costs in money and effort and the likely further erosion of civil liberties, also (as they surely know) calling for a massive political civil war the likes of which we haven't seen in a long time," Doherty wrote.
It
is the first time The Times has run an editorial on the front page
since 1920, when the newspaper expressed dismay at the nomination of
Warren G. Harding as the Republican presidential candidate. Harding went
on to win the general election that year.
(Reporting by Alex Dobuzinskis; Editing by Simon Cameron-Moore)
http://news.yahoo.com/york-times-rare-front-page-editorial-calls-outlawing-071431605.html
THE GUNS ARE NOT THE PROBLEM. THE FOLKS THIS 'GOV' PROGRAMS WITH MKULTRA TO BE VIOLENT AND TO TARGET CERTAIN GROUPS - THAT IS THE PROBLEM. ELIMINATE THIS ROGUE CABAL 'GOV' AND PROBLEM SOLVED. AMERICA, TAKE YOUR COUNTRY BACK!!!
4 comments:
No corporation has the legal authority to confiscate guns or anything. The UNITED STATES federal government is a corporation with no constitutional authority to make law, prosecute anybody, have a commander-in-chief, tax anybody, etc., etc., etc. Does Safeway, Inc., Microsoft, Inc., or General Motors, Inc. have any of those constitutional authorities?
I'm not sure there was any violence in the San Bernadino incident, just a staged event, no blood, no bullets, etc. Therefore, no MK Ultra programming.
Another FALSE FLAG perpetuated on the American people, they won,t stop with this latest either. Prepare, 'cause 'they' are just getting started. Look for a False Flag to rival 911,.... so sad, but 'they' don't care who dies to accomplish their goal of dis- armament of the good people of this nation. MOLON LABE, my friends. And don't ever,... ever give up your guns,... never. Let ' them ' come and TRY to take them, and WE will give 'them' a resistance not seen in this country for a long, long time.
The New York Times is asking law makers to break the law. The law is the 1902 Dick Act and is also asking them to violate their Oaths of Office by violating the Constitution. They are trying to get lawmakers to conspire with them in breaking the law. Someone at The New York Times should be going to prison for trying to sponsor a crime against the public they are suppose to be serving.
They should not have freedom of speech to promote illegal acts and actions against Americans.
I can tell you now that the controllers of The New York Times are soon to be going to prison for this and other nonsense they expound on through their newspaper.
You can see by this article what they stand for. It's not for us or the rule of law.
The New York Times sure wants their freedom of speech but are quick to take the freedoms from others that are highly valued to them. Remember The New York Times is carrying out the desires of the Cabal/Illuminati.
They are not on the publics side as they operate for only their own benefit politically and for profit. Ken T.
Post a Comment