Front Page  »  

Ian Parkinson does not speak for me

March 12, 2013
Ian Parkinson

Ian Parkinson

OPINION By ALLAN COOPER

Ian Parkinson is my sheriff but he does not speak for me when he opposes gun control. He argues that the problem does not lie with the over-preponderance of guns in our society but rather with the untreated problem of the mentally ill.

Though I fully agree society has not fulfilled its obligation in the latter case, I am almost certain that teenagers with too much time at their disposal and an oversupply of guns and testosterone engaging in gang killings are not mentally ill.

I am convinced that accidental killings committed by minors are not committed by the mentally ill and I am convinced that momentary fits of rage on the part of those who possess and use guns against their loved ones are not acts committed by the permanently mentally ill but rather by those who need classes in “anger management.” Go ahead Ian, “pass the buck” and do nothing in the area of gun control.

But the rest of society is “fed up” with this obscene gun fixation that presumably began with TV cowboy westerns in the 50’s and remains to this day a “sacred cow” among conservatives.

 


Loading...
Subjects:         
Related:


98 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Guns are not the problem.


50 years ago anyone could order a handgun or a long gun and ammo through the mail. No background checks, no expensive transfer rites. Boys brought rifles to school so they could hunt afterwards or so they could take part in junior rifle programs. Historic arms from WWI and WWII were sold by the pallet-load to collectors, hunters and shooting enthusiasts.


Children learned to understand and respect firearms — not to fear and loathe them.


The anti-gun faction needs to stop blaming inanimate objects for the decline of society. What has changed that has made today’s society so violent and dirty? Certainly not the availability of guns.


0

Because if they stop blaming something else, they might actually have to face inward and realize what progressivism truly is.


0

Very well put samlouis…

And I having grown up in that time here in CA, was part of that of which you speak, the time when all boys played army or cowboys and Indians knowing it was just pretend, had a .22 rifle or at least a BB gun and having respect for it and what it could do( not a toy), listened to our elders, showed respect for all others regardless of race, religion, sex or age, and was able to distinguish between right and wrong .

We have witnessed a decline in morals, manners, respect for others and the law, especially in the last 20 years, that IMHO has led us to the sad state in which we are today. And the current crop of legislators being in constant campaign mode, is too quick to force legislation on us in the wrong minded name of political correctness. It seems to be more important to protect us from ourselves instead of protecting our rights and liberties. It seems more important to author bills or amend them instead of doing the peoples work.

We here in CA have some of the most numorous and onerous gun laws of any state in the nation yet criminals still get weapons and commit horrible crimes.

We here in CA have some of the most rabid legislators who put party above common sense, the law and the public, which they swore to serve.

I congratulate Ian Parkinson for cleaning up and turning around the sheriffs dept and taking it back to that time which you describe.


0

SamLouis…..WELL SAID!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


0

Every thug in LA or Oakland has at least a handgun and in many cases an assault weapon. No permit to carry, not registered, obtained illegally. Pass some more laws to further restrict us law abiding gun owners and that will make some silly fools feel good. The cops can’t protect you on some dark city street when some thug decides to mug or kill you. They will always show up after and do the required paperwork. Wake up


0

Hey Mr Cooper, here’s gun control for you –


Murder Capital of America?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XdKeuvIY0Uo


0

Also, keep in mind that of the 70,000 people who failed a Federal background check when trying to buy a firearm (thus making them a felon) only 44 have been prosecuted…

How’s that for enforcement?


0

Ian Parkinson has taken a number of courageous stands, including upholding the Constitution…. which actually shouldn’t be all that difficult… but this is California. Some have failed to realize as the line goes… “bad people do bad things because they can.” Our challenge as a society is to reduce the opportunity for bad people to find soft targets. The more trained and certified armed people that are out there… the safer things would be.


In any event, Ian speaks for me.


0

If Mr. Parkinson wanted more trained armed people out there he has full discretion and capability to permit the people of SLO County to do so. As he continues to deny CCW applications fairly unilaterally I’d say this is nothing more than lip service


0

Allan, the Bill of Rights is just that…the Bill of RIGHTS. These rights are protected by the Constitution and every public servant from Obama to Ian Parkinson SWORE AN OATH to protect them…NON-DISCRETIONARY. So what’s your point? Are you saying you want Ian to break that oath? Are you AGAINST the Bill of Rights and the Constitution that protects them?


Are you really that naive to think if someone wants to kill or injury someone else the only method is a gun? Get real! People kill people. Did Cain use a gun to kill Able?


Guns are a tool just like a knife, explosives, cars, alcohol, drugs, etc. all are used to kill people. Do you want to government to hold your hand and regulate your life into safety so no one can hurt you?


People have the RIGHT to defend themselves and the right to bear arms as Thomas Jefferson said to to protect the PEOPLE from a corrupt government take over. Ian speaks for ALL those who support and UPHOLD the Constitution. If you don’t want to enjoy the rights the Bill of Rights offers you and you don’t uphold and support the Constitution why are you living here? You can always MOVE to another country and we’ll help you pack!


0

‘Love it or leave it’ was the mantra of the aging white conservatives who hated the anti war protestors of the 60’s and 70’s. History has proven the warmongers, Nixonites and others dead wrong. Any true patriot says ‘if the system is broken, fix it’, don’t abandon it. Cooper is attempting to fix our damaged system, I wonder what all the armchair naysayers on this site are doing or have done to maintain our democracy.


Cooper believes in our rights and responsibilities more than most.


You gun mongers just don’t get it, and will employ any methodology to denigrate those who call for sensible restraints on our manic machine gun society. With every massacre you people call for more guns, like lemmings racing to the cliff because everyone else is running that way.


0

“warmongers”, “Nixonites”, “armchair naysayers”, “aging white conservatives”, “gun mongers”, “manic machine gun society”, “massacre”, “lemmings”


Sensible and rational debate?


0

no. have we thrown in Reps & Dems yet?


0

You missed an adjective, ‘accurate’. If you must be mollycoddled with words that suit you you close off other’s passions. You are smart enough to know how accurate at least some of my comments are, how about giving some credence to accuracy and honesty.


Much of the insane public debate is based on personal greed- those who make a ‘killing’ off selling weapons and ammo, and those who want to stockpile an arsenal. We all see that many of the comments here are about simple protection of ourselves and loved ones. No one on

‘my side’ has ever suggested taking any of those rights away. Yet the endless, and dishonest, whining about that just to make those who propose rational controls seem ‘out of the loop’ is typical of the political crooks (like Nixon and his devotees) and others seem in line with society.


Look at the polls, most of US citizens want a more rational approach to this gun violence than we have now. Look at the slamming I will get for pointing out these truths. I guess most rational folks have abandoned this site because of all the childish bloggers here.


0

hotdog, the only lemming here is you. We have not had a machine gun society since 1934. Our founding fathers were genius when writing up the Constitution and Bill of Rights. They knew there would be people like you and allen who do not acknowledge the fact that there are bad people out there. These leaders will take advantage of the governed and take away their rights and abuse them. Throughout history governments have killed more people than all the wars put together. Do you really think we as a society are above that. I am a law abiding citizen who will be the one effected by your shortsightedness.


0

speaks for me too. Thanks Sheriff Parkinson for stepping up & supporting our 2nd amendment rights.


0

On this issue, Parkinson speaks for me. As a woman, I would be defenseless against a male intruder/assailant in my home without my ability to access a gun.


AND, Have you ever seen what happens in a pubic robbery like at a bank or a McDonalds? That wouldn’t happen except for the fact that the perps are counting on the fact that all the honest citizens are following the law and not carrying a firearm themselves. For shame that big men have to lay on the floor and hand over their watches and wallets to a punk.


0

My adult daughter had to go to work today to a lock down situation WITHOUT the ability to protect herself,here in SLO county. Her company announced a employee was being threatened and a private security officer was hired to protect 75 employees and two buildings.

If she had the ability to take her own weapon to work and all the other employees had the RIGHT to protect them selves we might be able to avoid a tragedy.

If this was Utah than several employees would be packing protection.

The you Mr. Parkinson, there are way more of us then the general public thinks that want our rights protected.


0

Well said Allan.

Our sheriff seems to be a crook when he says he will only enforce those laws he agrees with. It is a sign of our tired times that public outrage has not swelled up to throw this bum out of office.


0

Actually, he’s doing the job he’s been elected to do: enforcing only the laws that are Constitutional.


0

What planet are you from? The courts make those decisions.


0

What planet are you from, he took a oath, and he is following that oath.


0

You are confusing “enforcing” with “upholding”


0

Damned if we do and damned if we don’t. I do have a problem with Parkinson picking and choosing what laws he will enforce. I’m referring to the MM issue and all the money he has cost the tax payers because he refuses to follow the law that the citizens of CA passed. But then on the issue of gun control, we already have enough control in my opinion so in that case, I agree with him. I just wish he would issue concealed carry permits, we would all be a lot safer if he did. I don’t want a permit myself but there are plenty of upstanding citizens that should be aloud to have one. There would be a lot less crime if the perps didn’t know who might be carrying.


0

I am for MM, but the Fed law supersedes the state law and there lays the problem.


0

There lays the problem indeed but Parkinson and other sheriffs and police LEOs are hired to enforce state and local laws not the federal law. They can’t fight the feds but they don’t have to go out of their way to help them when the State and Federal laws conflict.


0

hotdog, how do you feel about ‘law enforcement’ folks who refuse to enforce our immigration laws? I’ll bet you are all in favor of that. Why are you leftists so happy to take away my civil rights?


0

I don’t see any parallel. I think our laws should be enforced. I think we should have more civil rights, but your rights end at the perimeter of mine.

If someone walks into my cafe wearing a gun I am going out and not coming back. I don’t want guns around in the public sector. Read the article again about ‘rage’. That affects all of us and anyone can have a fit (get overly angry) and most folks will gage their chances of winning an altercation and just forget it. Those with a gun just might lose their mind for a moment and shoot. What If I stepped on your wife’s foot in the store and wasn’t fast enough with an apology for you? Might you just blast me and then spend the rest of your life in jail. how’s that for a cool resolution of your rights?


0

That’s completely fine for you to walk out and not come back, thus voting with your wallet a store that allows firearms. This is your right, and I would not begrudge you them. Likewise, if there was a cafe that said “NO FIREARMS” – I would not patronize the place, and head to the cafe you just walked out of. These are our rights. I am not demanding that you must put up with firearms, nor should you demand gun owners put up with anti-gun laws.


It is not the weapon that you should be focusing your anger on, that is premature and not well thought out. It seems very knee-jerk / reactionary. It’s an old heart vs. mind debate, we should not set policies based on the heart, that is reserved for forgiveness, love and understanding. This one is for the mind.


0

So hotdog, you say the cops should always enforce the law. How about Jim Crow type laws? Laws that are clearly un Constitutional?


0

Like so many other liberals,they don’t believe in capitol punishment, crimes are committed because there is almost no punishment, and a whole truckload of loopholes in the legal system, case in point the nutcase that shot those two women in Atasc last year, he should have fried already, the wacko in Texas that shot up the solders at that army base,he should have fried, the fruit loop that shot Mrs Gifford should have swung, but oh no the legal system wastes time in seeing if they are mentally competent, it doesn’t matter fry them, these are cases where these people were caught red handed so theres not a chance of doubt to weather they did it or not, if they didn’t have access to a gun they very well could have used a knife or a car to do the job.

For the law abiding citizen gun ownership is a problem, we have to go thru license,investigations,FBI you name it and we have to go thru it, then to get a carry permit, its the same thing over again, I’d like to have a permit,I live in the country and with the way the economy is I’m waiting for the day when I drive in my yard and someone is helping themselves to my belongings and here I am with nothing to hold them at bay,I guess I could call a liberal to come stop them.

With out total gun confiscation the criminals and gangs will still have and get guns the only people it will hurt is the law abiding citizen.


0

I guess you haven’t read anything about this issue, and seem to know almost nothing.


No one has ever claimed to remove all guns from society. No one has said anything to prevent you from gaining adequate protection for your family. No one has mentioned anything about gun confiscation.


Maybe you get your info from the crooks and liars like that fat gasbag or beck, or the creepo in Texas. Look into real news to allay your fears. Avoid Faux news and other sources who make their money whipping up the white supremists.


0

Your generalizations and assumptions are as wrong as the strawman you have invented for criticizing. I agree with you on a fair number of other topics so you could hardly call me a traditional conservative. I also rarely get info from Faux News and agree about Beck & a certain “fat gasbag.” (I assume you are referring to a well-known radio “entertainer.”)


So what makes you think that Myself or myself or any other person who opposes increased gun control knows “almost nothing about the issue?” From what I have read in a wide variety of places, gun control opponents tend to include the most knowledgeable people on the subject because the constant attacks by proponents force us to make our case rationally. Yes, there are also those among us who argue from gut feelings and mindless custom but that doesn’t mean there aren’t also good arguments against increased gun control.


There are people in favor of gun control who are equally mindless and emotionally reactionary. I won’t say that all people who support it are ignorant or stupid because of that. It sometimes has to do with relative values and perception of dangers both on a personal and societal level.


By the way, Sen. Feinstein (Plutocrat, CA) has said that she wishes she could ban most private gun ownership but recognizes that may be unrealistic. So have other leaders of the gun-control movement. That may not faze you but it doesn’t make me want to give them an inch in their efforts.


0

I was with you ’till you mentioned liberal; why don’t you leave that part alone? This is one liberal that is not only gun-toting, but a pretty damn good shot, too.


0

Heh, I am no liberal (as progressives have hijacked the definition), but I do not believe in capital punishment. Guess not everyone fits neatly in a box…


0

Ian Parkinson speaks for me, and I’m proud he is my Sheriff!


0
1 2 3 4 5