For years, ATV-riding, gun-toting sport shooters have flouted gun laws in part of Idaho’s high desert by taking pot shots at ground squirrels and other animals. Now, officials say, they’re also setting their sights on National Guard tanks that train in the area.
The federal Bureau of Land Management is considering expanding the gun-restricted area by 41,000 acres to try to limit shootings at Idaho Army National Guard troops who report slugs bouncing off their tanks on a regular basis.
“There’s a segment of the shooting community that will shoot at anything that moves,’’ said John Sullivan, the area’s manager.
“It’s like World War III on the weekends,’’ he said.
Ah, the price of freedom.
“Say hello to my little friend”
Me thinks the problem would go away if the tanks would just shoot back.
#2. Exactly. Just as the “sport shooters” have an inalienable 2nd Amendment right to shoot at the tanks, the tank gunners, well, they did not give up all their rights when they joined the Guard ….
#2 I could not agree more.. a couple of .50 slugs would solve the problem
I think the NRA should do some re-education Idaho.
I’m starting to think a $2000 tax stamp per weapon, per decade, is the solution.
Raise the bar on weapon ownership, eliminate those that don’t really value their ownership responsibilities. And make violations a minimum of a 10 year sentence in a federal prison.
Enforce this and this problem will halt.
#2
I agree as well. sooner or later some take commander is gonna stop his tank, turn the muzzle around, and fire off a shot of depleated uranium at thier pickup truck.
heres hoping one of them is dumb enough to film it and post it on youtube.
#5 What is wrong with you? What, specifically, about freedom don’t you understand? You would penalize everyone for the actions of a few morons? Think about the freedoms YOU actually take advantage of, and then consider those folks who don’t like the things YOU do. We have to watch out for each other’s freedoms in order to preserve our own.
Laws/regulations which deal with individual behavior consistently have TWO NET EFFECTS for individuals:
LESS FREEDOM, because once it becomes a law, it is one more thing you must do, or one less thing you are permitted to do, and
LESS MONEY because, at every stage, we pay through the nose for laws, (inception, enactment, implementation, enforcement and correction.)
A third and incidental effect of laws is that each one becomes another item in the exclusive toybox of lawyers.
We have way too many laws as it is. We have lost so many freedoms in just my lifetime that it’s alarming. And yet there seems to be no short age of shortsighted people who espouse the battle cry, “THERE OUGHTA BE A LAW!”
I believe we should have to get rid of two laws in order to pass a new one.
And it’s not just the federal government, either. We have at every level (neighborhood, town/city, county, state and nation) factories if you will, engaged in the production of nothing BUT laws, regulations, rules, etc. We are giving our freedoms away at an unbelievable rate without even knowing it.
If there were some way to bring the founding fathers back today to see what we have done with gift they gave us, it’s difficult to imagine they would be pleased.
I’m a strong RTKBA guy but these guys need to go to jail.
That is not to suggest that we should have NO laws – but I wonder if we couldn’t get by (and be better off) with some version of the ten commandment and the golden rule, but with VERY SHARP TEETH.
#8 – I respectfully disagree. I agree with #2, seriously.
“Now, officials say, they’re also setting their sights on National Guard tanks that train in the area.”
Officials say? Not real credible go figure. Funny they don’t name the source that says these people are shooting at the National Guard. Nothing more than baseless accusations until proven otherwise.
We also need to have a $1000 up front cost for starting a blog, because some people might misuse that responsibility.
Like yourself
Please, please read the 10 commandments before blathering about enforcing them. They’re not even up to the Dark Ages dweebs who accept that crap.
No doubt the trigger-happy incompetents in Idaho already consider themselves devout and patriotic.
Maybe some day Americans will understand that owning a gun doesn’t equal “freedom”.
I live in a country that has gun laws and low and behold I have just as much if not more “freedom” than in the US. Don’t give “the constitution” crap to me either. Do a little research.
#14 – Right you are. I am duly and appropriately chastised. Too much about the actual ten commamdments don’t apply. I had in mind specific commandments, such as thou shalt not kill, steal or covet thy neighbor’s ass, etc.
The point being, we have way too many laws already. We should be seeking simpler solutions to problems like these pinhesad taking potshots at the National Guard.
Looking closely at your picture, it’s apparent that NONE of the individuals have their weapons pointed at the bodies of the others (but instead to the rear or to the front of them) and that all of the shooters have their fingers outside the trigger guards.
From a gun handling perspective – nothing wrong here.
Or is it that anyone with a gun is a “dipshit” in your book?
That said, anyone who shoots at NG or NG vehicles is dangerous and needs to be arrested.
#5 I’m starting to think a $2000 tax stamp per weapon, per decade, is the solution.
Raise the bar on weapon ownership, eliminate those that don’t really value their ownership responsibilities.
Lets try it with voting first, it would solve a lot of problems.
Guns are evil don’t you know? We must ban them to help Nth of the 49th with his irrational fear. After all it’s safe if officials have guns because only the government can be responsible with fire arms.
The right to bear arms is an important part of a democratic country, since it makes it possible for the citizenry to overthrow a government that is getting too powerful or oppressive.
However, some gun laws are also required. There must be some restrictions on what people can do with the guns they are allowed to own. Guns ought to be used for defending one’s home and family. Taking potshots at animals, and worse, military hardware and personnel is not only a very bad idea, but it’s probably illegal.
The right to bear arms was intended with responsible, sane people in mind. People like those described in this article are certainly not responsible, and their sanity could be questioned.
While I will agree that Americans seem to be a lot more sensitive about losing the right to bear arms than their other rights, the question should not be why that is, but why they don’t care as much about the other freedoms.