Too many wildfires caused by gun owners,
says Utah governor
Some of the wildfires scorching the West this year were sparked by unusual culprits: Gun owners. Or, more specifically, gun shooters.
As with the Dump fire in Utah, which flared hard enough on Friday to force the evacuation of 1,500 homes and 9,000 people, nearly two dozen
conflagrations, officials say, have started accidentally by careless target shooters whose bullet sparks touch off dried-up pinon and wild grasses.
“Now is not a good time to take your gun outside and start shooting in cheat grass that’s tinder dry,” Utah Gov. Gary Herbert said
Friday.
According to Reuters, this fire was started by Gun shooters, shooting targets. Now, Im in Canada, specifically, Alberta. Every year, we get a ton of
fires burning here, mostly in the north part of the province. And, from our news and what i've found online, our fires are usually started by
lightining strikes and careless people. BUT, not from shooting guns... mostly from not putting out campfires, throwing still burning cigarettes out
the window into dry road-side grass, etc etc.
This is the first i've heard of Guns being blamed on starting a fire... Thats not to say its not possible just cause I haven't heard of it.
The bigger thing for me here, and it has to do with what starts most fires in my area, is the implication that Guns are bad, and soo bad that they are
starting fires that threaten homes and lives. What concerns me is the potential blame on guns, instead of the blame on poor owners.
For example, I have camped many times, and started many fires in a firepit. I have always controlled them properly, and made sure when i leave so
extinguish them properly. However, there are many MANY fires per year started by careless, lazy people who don;t do things right. This has also led to
extended fire bans, not just because it was dry, but to try to ensure that enough 'stupid' people don't go out and start fires and leave them
unnatended or extinguish them improperly.
reading through the story, it appears that this crisis may be used in the future to implement emergency gun bans(remember, don't let a good crisis go
to waste)
In Utah, for example, a state law prohibits the state from enacting emergency bans on guns, putting Gov. Herbert in a position of instead asking
county governments to issue emergency rules for outdoor gun use as wildfire conditions prevail across the West.
In North Carolina, gun rights activists have successfully fought legal battles to make sure governors can’t ban guns during emergencies
2nd Amendment, right to bear arms right? WHAT IF, a fire is started, say from stupidity, say on purpose (False flag) and the state involved implements
an emergency gun ban... it would be the perfect time to take away rifles and guns from folks under guise that you can't trust them to not use them to
inadvertently start fires. May be far-fretched, AND, it appears that this fire was a result of stupidity, BUT, can you see the potential implications
here?
for example,
Moves to protect gun owners from emergency gun bans is an emerging front in the national debate over gun rights.
In March, a committee in the Colorado legislature killed a proposed bill that would have restricted the state from banning citizen-carry of guns
during an emergency
See what I mean? There is a push to limit/restrict legit gun owners during times of emergency... pretty scary. The whole point of the 2nd amendment is
to allow US citizens the RIGHT to defend themselves, the RIGHT to own a gun....
It is a touchy subject cause they can and have started fires that threaten lives and property, thats bad. I feel for those evacuees in Utah.. BUT, how
far can these gun control restrictions go? I see the point of banning them when the conditions are prime for fires, BUT, what if that FIRE is staged
to take away/punish/charge gun owners?!
Again, possibly far-fetched, kinda. I can easily see governments using this as a tactic to continue to restrict and remove guns from citizens..
Also posted on
RawStory
Thoughts?!
