The NYTimes wants your guns so BAD! Makes it easy to make another Holocaust, especially in Washington State

Labels: » » » » » » » »
(nytimes.com) In February 2005, Erik Zettergren came home from a party after midnight with his girlfriend and another couple. They had all been drinking heavily, and soon the other man and Mr. Zettergren’s girlfriend passed out on his bed. When Mr. Zettergren went to check on them later, he found his girlfriend naked from the waist down and the other man, Jason Robinson, with his pants around his ankles.
Enraged, Mr. Zettergren ordered Mr. Robinson to leave. After a brief confrontation, Mr. Zettergren shot him in the temple at point-blank range with a Glock-17 semiautomatic handgun. He then forced Mr. Robinson’s hysterical fiancĂ©e, at gunpoint, to help him dispose of the body in a nearby river. It was the first homicide in more than 30 years in the small town of Endicott, in eastern Washington. But for a judge’s ruling two months before, it would probably never have happened.
...wait stop! The NYTimes wants to take away the rights of people to protect themselves from government because some guy was threatened in his own home after another guy cuckolded him? So essentially the NYTimes is asking America to become like Adolf Hitler's Germany (where the Jews could not own a gun... like anyone else who wasn't a soldier)... all because some Alpha Male decided to talk shit after f#(%ing some guy's slut girl? and get this... it is a story from none other then Washington State... where any person with testicles is a threat to human decency! The Paper of FEMINISM is now completely on crack. It is pretty obvious that no one is even paying attention to the paper anymore. I found a copy and looked it over just for laughs and I could not believe the logic of this. It is too bad no one takes the NYTimes seriously... because no one bothers anymore to keep writers like this in check

.....The federal firearms prohibition for felons dates to the late 1960s, when the assassinations of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Senator Robert F. Kennedy, along with rioting across the country, set off a clamor for stricter gun control laws. Congress enacted sweeping legislation that included a provision extending the firearms ban for convicted criminals beyond those who had committed “crimes of violence,” a standard adopted in the 1930s.
“All of our people who are deeply concerned about law and order should hail this day,” President Lyndon B. Johnson said upon signing the Gun Control Act in October 1968.
Even the N.R.A. backed the bill. But by the late 1970s, a more hard-line faction, committed to an expansive view of the Second Amendment, had taken control of the group. A crowning achievement was the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986, which significantly loosened federal gun laws. When it came to felons’ gun rights, the legislation essentially left the matter up to states. The federal gun restrictions would no longer apply if a state had restored a felon’s civil rights — to vote, sit on a jury and hold public office — and the individual faced no other firearms prohibitions.
...Criminologists studying recidivism have found that felons usually have to stay out of trouble for about a decade before their risk of committing a crime equals that of people with no records. According to Alfred Blumstein, a professor at Carnegie Mellon University, for violent offenders, that period is 11 to 15 years; for drug offenders, 10 to 14 years; and for those who have committed property crimes, 8 to 11 years. An important caveat: Professor Blumstein did not look at what happens when felons are given guns.
(the NYTimes clarifies that the accused asked his alleged victim to leave) bottom line: If some guy were screwing my girl in my own home without my knowledge... and then started arguing with me in a threatening way ... in my own home.... I'd probably shoot him in the head as well... and I'm not a felon... or not yet... because the standards of what is a felon are getting very strange.

The state of Washington is like BIG BROTHER... extraditing people from their homes because they don't like their opinions on the internet.  Yeah... I have first hand experience. They make arrests for saying things they don't want to hear... without a previous arrest... and then intimidate you in jail. Once Washington State declares someone a felon... and they are so aggressive on the term... then they want to take your right to protect yourself away. You can see where Washington State is going with this.

Google+ Badge

Google+ Followers

Translate