Narrow Search

Comment Archives: stories: Columns

Re: “Lamborn's campaign, Indy Give!, global warming, and more

So... I have a machine called a "guitar". If you load an artillery shell, lock the breach, turn the crank and pull the trigger.... It is a machine, like any other gun, except maybe a zip gun. To the hate mail coward, don't get caught up in what constitutes a machine, the survival of four babies is what surprised me. The next time you send a cowardly letter to my home, without a signature, you will meet my machine.

Posted by vitreol on 02/25/2015 at 6:54 PM

Re: “Pale, male and stale

As a former "old guy" who served on Council, I have a little bit of perspective on this. I completely agree with John's comments here but it is very hard to recruit women, or minorities, or young adults to serve in elected office when the demands are so great and the rewards are so little.

And it's not just elected office - the City sometimes has a hard time achieving a diverse mix on many of its Boards and Commissions. Several years ago, we on Council were called out (almost to the point of being labeled racist) for not appointing any minorities to one high-profile Board. But not one minority member of the Community had even applied for the Board position.

Over the ten years I spent on Council, I spoke to many individuals with a widely divergent mix of ages, ethnicity, and gender and encouraged them to run for Council. More times than not, I was told, "I can't afford the time away from my real job". And since Council only pays a very minor stipend, it is a sacrifice that most people can't make.

We do need a more diverse group of elected officials. But until we can adequately compensate them for the time they will have to invest in the job, we will be stuck where we are now.

Scott Hente

14 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by Scott Hente on 02/25/2015 at 11:08 AM

Re: “Pale, male and stale

geezers voting for geezers... what a surprise. the young will continue to abandon this old age home of a city... not a surprise. anyone who proposes any changes will be villainized as a... LIBERAL... the horror.

9 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by happyfew on 02/25/2015 at 9:32 AM

Re: “Pale, male and stale

John, you hit the nail squarely on the head with your assertions about the Springs. I just don't know if I can live with that bad comb over for four years.

8 likes, 2 dislikes
Posted by Solar Sam on 02/25/2015 at 5:44 AM

Re: “Hemp store to open, Jamaican alliance made

HEMP is not scheduled, therefore; the DEA has no authority to regulate it ►… VIA:… • got hemp?™

Posted by Christine Kringle on 02/25/2015 at 3:55 AM

Re: “Local company takes on, Cannabis Cup approaches, more

Here is a Marijuana Travel Guide and Information site. I find it useful, as do others. I agree this site stinks... no pun intended.

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by Colorado Ironlungs on 02/24/2015 at 9:10 AM

Re: “Save up for a better boyfriend

Hang in there, love will find a way. It might not be with him, but someone out there appreciates and loves you. You just have to find them.

Posted by Rick in Scottsdale on 02/23/2015 at 6:56 AM

Re: “Dogs and guns, government watchdogs, cuts at Carson, and more

“Tote”: to carry, wield, or convey (something heavy or substantial).
I’m so sorry Mr. Wyman, that you find dictionary words so offensive, but that’s not my problem. My wife totes a purse. Students are book toters.
And, by the time you get around to objecting to my word “toter”, you’ve already called me a “socialist” and a “bigot” . . . and you object to MY name calling?
And then demeaning business owners as “merely someone that owns a business” demonstrates YOUR low regard of business owners. It seems to me that YOU are the person who wishes to limit the rights of business owners. Then you turn your attention to your hatred of “our ever burgeoning economy choking government”. Ok, we get it. You hold business owners in low regard, and hate government. What’s new?
And I have no more power to “create government” than you do.
I put the word “rights” into quotations when they are mistaken for privileges. You indeed have a right to bear arms, but to hide it in your armpit is a PRIVILEGE granted by the state. There is NOTHING in the Second Amendment that gives you a “right” to carry concealed.
Then you descend into a rant about Socialism that has nothing to do with concealed carry OR the Second Amendment. (BTW, Socialism is an economic model that can work perfectly well within our own Constitutional government.)
That I “do not like firearms” is an ignorant personal attack as I am a gun owner. (And before you take offense . . . “ignorant”: lacking knowledge, information, or awareness about something in particular.)
And, apparently, you really believe that your privilege to carry a concealed gun trumps the rights of everybody else. But in no way have you refuted my contention: “If gun advocates insist upon their “right” to carry a firearm, the citizenry and business owners should insist upon their “right” to know it.”
But your most TELLING question is: “how can you be frightened and so concerned about something that you cannot see and only imagine is or is not present?” To that I can only answer: I am NOT the person who is compelled to carry a hidden firearm. What are YOU frightened of? Perhaps, it is you who is fearful of “something that you cannot see and only imagine is or is not present”? For what other reason are you carrying concealed? A wild boar attack?
Again, carrying concealed should once again be illegal in Colorado.
Is your last sentence a veiled threat?

8 likes, 2 dislikes
Posted by asawatcher on 02/22/2015 at 10:29 PM

Re: “Dogs and guns, government watchdogs, cuts at Carson, and more

asawatcher You are falling a little short in hiding the actual meaning of your comment. You have read and edit your own writing to be able to fool others. You simply are a fearful socialist liberal that believes is total government control over you and everyone else. Sorry but that is not The United States of America.
You should avoid terms such as "gun toters" if you want to be seen as a well-rounded citizen. "Gun toters" indicates right off that you are a bigot and trying to quietly invoke a stereotype in reader's minds. Only those like you buy into it and nobody else will be the least bit swayed by your comment.
Then you speak that the "owner of a business is denied freedom". Business owners are merely someone that owns a business and I believe they chose to do so. They are not an elite sacred group and actually they are not denied freedom but they know full well that they will be opening doors to the public to do the business they chose. Then they know that they will be heavily regulated by our ever burgeoning economy choking government, the kind of government freedom lovers find oppressive but people like you are creating. Suddenly your implication of freedom being so American and violated by The Bill of Rights which takes on your obvious derision of by switching into "rights" of firearm ownership. Quotation marks you add to indicate that we all know "rights" is just some vaporous word misused by the stereotypes. Actually the word is "Rights" not "rights". The other word associated with it is "Freedom" which you knew your use could not be used with "F".

The glaring yet unsaid gist of your comment leaves the question of how can you be frightened and so concerned about something that you cannot see and only imagine is or is not present? Think that through... Do you think business owners should be 100% responsible for my safety and other customers as well? Your socialist government already burdens business owners enough and even stops many from starting a business with regulations. And you are calling that freedom??? You demand more of it too.
You say "Carrying a concealed weapon should, again, be illegal, as it once was in Colorado." You did not say why. And there is no reason it should be illegal as it has caused no problems except one: you do not like firearms. Very unsound thinking and you wish us all to think like you? Thinking alike and calling regulation "freedom" and referencing The Right of the People as "gun toters" sounds like a different form of government I recall reading about in history books.

You just do not like The Bill of Rights, you do not understand them and in the "sucks to be you" department The Bill of Rights are not open for debate or up for vote. You are free to leave anytime and I hope you do, that is unless you wish to learn about our country. If that is the case I will be most gracious and offer to help you.
My Right to self-defense was given me by my Creator and I am guaranteed by The Founders I may keep that Right. I may not nor may others take, attempt to take or interfere with my Rights. That is what I am guaranteed and you wish to void that? That is simply not going to happen. I do not know who you think protects you but I can tell you, and that would be nobody but yourself. You are free to speak and express yourself, but you cannot interfere with others doing so. If you got your wish you would never again be able to speak freely. That is a guarantee. Change your user name to watchyerass.

5 likes, 10 dislikes
Posted by Robert Wyman on 02/22/2015 at 3:38 PM

Re: “Chasing butterflies, again

40's... you were one of the three houses in the village in those years??

0 likes, 2 dislikes
Posted by happyfew on 02/19/2015 at 1:07 PM

Re: “Bush Resume

all doors are open with such resume :)

Posted by tomphson99 on 02/19/2015 at 9:49 AM

Re: “Dogs and guns, government watchdogs, cuts at Carson, and more

Ron Coleman;
WHERE THE GUNS ARE . . . is really not knowable is it?
That’s yet another problem with concealed carry: it deprives citizens from making an informed choice. Perhaps, for whatever reason, an individual might want to avoid a venue where there are a number of gun toters. Open carry would enable such an informed choice to be made. Right now, because the gun is allowed to be hidden, even the owner of a business is denied the freedom to make an informed decision as to whether or not to allow a gun toter into his/her establishment.
If gun advocates insist upon their “right” to carry a firearm, the citizenry and business owners should insist upon their “right” to know it.
Carrying a concealed weapon should, again, be illegal, as it once was in Colorado.

12 likes, 8 dislikes
Posted by asawatcher on 02/19/2015 at 9:02 AM

Re: “Going off-duty

I'll miss your stories

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by gregR on 02/19/2015 at 7:15 AM

Re: “Chasing butterflies, again

Sorry Paul but numerous science articles as of late totally " refudiate" your conservative stand.

9 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by longtooth on 02/18/2015 at 9:21 AM

Re: “Chasing butterflies, again

I know John Hazelhurst and he has never struck me as an alarmist. He is offering his own view of the world since childhood and that's a valid observation in my book.

7 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by Solar Sam on 02/18/2015 at 8:30 AM

Re: “Chasing butterflies, again

Article is alarmist BS. Monarch butterflies common in Colorado June - Sept in the vicinity of larger milkweed patches and alfalfa fields that are in bloom. Look at all these Colorado sightings last summer:

Articles like this one that knowingly exaggerate the truth hurt the credibility of the scientific and new reporting professions.

0 likes, 15 dislikes
Posted by Paul Cherubini on 02/18/2015 at 8:27 AM

Re: “Chasing butterflies, again

Birds, bees now butterflies. As a species we are somewhat destructive to this planet.

7 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by Solar Sam on 02/18/2015 at 6:38 AM

Re: “Bad dog owners, Gordon Klingenschmitt, wind farm debate, and more

Mr H;
When you write:
“People who assert that there is no legitimate reason to carry concealed and people who wish to carry should carry openly are woefully uninformed.”
I can only respond that your proclamation is opinion without foundation.
About what, specifically, are they “uninformed”?
And I am genuinely surprised that suddenly a gun proponent expresses sensitivity to the feelings of those whose lives do NOT include the need to carry a weapon. When did that start? Are those people no longer “anti-gun libtards”?
The rest of your post seems to be nothing more than fantasy scenario wherein the hidden gun is pulled to thwart the “bad guy”, resulting in a shoot out, and nobody gets hurt except, of course, the “bad guy”. I’m beginning to think that every gun toter has internalized that delusion of heroism, as the “element of surprise” seems to be the only justification for carrying concealed.
And Mr. Odin;
When you come off Mt. Hyperbole, I will stop “foaming at the mouth”.
When you resort to insult, you lose the argument.
And I still contend that a concealed weapon is a symptom of hoplophobia. If you do NOT fear other people carrying guns, then why carry a gun? A wolf attack?
And let me assure you, I AM a gun owner.

10 likes, 3 dislikes
Posted by asawatcher on 02/13/2015 at 10:15 AM

Re: “Lamborn's campaign, Indy Give!, global warming, and more

Hey Dave, machine guns are used by the military mainly, duh! In this case, and most. I guess I was speaking to warlike people that fly around to shoot poor people. Anyway, so a bunch of Lakota men escaped the evil murderers of hell, and got up to white clay creek, where the tide turned! Now the butchers of the innocent were pinned down after the Brulé' joined the Lakota! Then the stupid freed slave Buffalo Soldiers came and saved the white devils!

1 like, 1 dislike
Posted by lakotaangel on 02/12/2015 at 7:16 PM

Re: “Bad dog owners, Gordon Klingenschmitt, wind farm debate, and more

Concealed carry has been allowed in Colorado for a very long time, as Odin correctly notes. People who assert that there is no legitimate reason to carry concealed and people who wish to carry should carry openly are woefully uninformed.

As any firearm owner knows, there are a great many people who are very fearful of guns and even freak out when they see them or someone with one... this is a reason that many cities in Colorado used to ban open carry. By allowing people with permits to carry concealed, those situations are avoided.

Furthermore, carrying openly acts as deterrent to a criminal act against or near the carrier, but not for anyone else. By having legal concealed carry of a fraction of the population, criminals have to weigh their options and risks that they might unknowingly chose act against or near a carrier, acting as a general deterrent where everyone benefits.

Criminals are going to carry concealed regardless of the law, allowing law abiding people to carry concealed evens out the field.

The idea that people who carry concealed are automatically bad or that those who legally carry conceal are some kind of paranoids, fetishists, or have a hero fantasy is an ignorant personal bias rooted in fear and lack of information.

6 likes, 12 dislikes
Posted by Dave H on 02/11/2015 at 3:41 PM

All content © Copyright 2015, The Colorado Springs Independent   |   Website powered by Foundation