Dan Shores

Dan Shores 22 hours, 36 minutes ago on Road rage incident results in felony arrest

Guns make little men feel like big men. That really says it all and is at the core of the gun debate. Of course there are legitimate uses of a gun for self defense. Self defense is the key here, rather than self offense. If a person goes around packin heat, they are much more likely to start trouble than if they are unarmed. There are many ways to defend oneself with an empty hand.

0

Dan Shores 2 days, 21 hours ago on Road rage incident results in felony arrest

Chris, we've had this conversation before about the law. Some of the contributors here seem to think that it's perfectly acceptable to brandish a weapon, even if they initiated the contact or could have otherwise fled. They claim self defense, as George Zimmerman did successfully in Florida. But Florida has a "stand your ground law" and even the author of the legislation said that the law should not have applied in the GZ case. This law is even being used, or more accurately misused, in cases of a gun battle over a drug deal gone bad. It is not meant to apply to someone who initiates the contact and then claims self defense. Best practice, don't carry a gun around with you and avoid random confrontation. You don't know who you might be dealing with, some nut with a gun or other weapon, someone with a mental illness or who knows what.

0

Dan Shores 2 days, 21 hours ago on Road rage incident results in felony arrest

It would be possible for a female to defend herself against a rapist if she has a gun. That is assuming she is carrying a gun around with her all the time and is extremely skilled and knows how to use it. The more likely scenario is that the rapist takes the gun away from her and uses it in the commission of the crime. Carrying a gun around is a really, really bad idea unless you are in law enforcement in some capacity. Even then, as we have seen in recent events around the country, police who are highly trained in the use of their weapon, still make mistakes or succumb to emotion and an innocent person winds up dead. It is highly unlikely that any of us are ever going to need to use a gun in the course of our daily lives, and the risk of misuse, and or false bravado, is just too high. Guns make little guys feel like big guys, so true. As in Mark's case, I am absolutely sure that he would have avoided this confrontation if he hadn't been packing heat. And that's the key, avoid the confrontation. The two combatants in the story above could have easily avoided the confrontation, But no, they let their emotions get the better of them, had to prove what tough guys they were, (lack of self esteem), and now they have hospital bills, legal fees, a felony charge. And for what?

0

Dan Shores 3 days, 23 hours ago on Road rage incident results in felony arrest

Yeah just think if they were only both armed, and maybe a passerby would have even seen the guns and drawn their own gun and joined in the fun. Just lovely.

0

Dan Shores 1 week, 4 days ago on Jim Webster: Green needs support

Interesting to learn how all these climate scientists got together and came up with this "climate change conspiracy" in order to keep their jobs. No end to all the amazing the things you can learn here in the comment section.

0

Dan Shores 2 weeks ago on Letters to the Editor: Environmental religion

So interesting Dan K how you continue to "cherry pick" my comments. I guess if you didn't, you just wouldn't have anything to say. You write that I have "no solution other than lefty talking points" even though I gave you the solution. No, I don't have a patent pending for a revolutionary new form of technology. The solution is to accept the science, recognize the problems and continue a robust, all out effort to develop new clean, renewable sources of energy. Mark's entire premise is that environmentalism has become some sort of religion and not based in fact, therefore, do nothing about the problem because there is no problem. Funny how the right thinks addressing environmental issues is based on a religious belief and is therefore wrong, however when it comes to say, abortion, then it's perfectly fine to enact law based on your religious belief. There is no science to prove the exact moment when human life begins. Or why doesn't the right complain about laws against smoking in enclosed public spaces? There is no exact science proving that exposure to second hand smoke causes cancer. The ban is based entirely on the correlation. But when it comes to environmental issues that, oh by the way could have a negative impact on the fossil fuel industry, they demand the exact science to prove the exact process by which burning fossil fuel interacts with our environment to cause climate variation, otherwise, don't worry, be happy, no problem.

0

Dan Shores 2 weeks, 1 day ago on Letters to the Editor: Environmental religion

At what cost is a good question Dan K. What is the cost of continuing to pollute our environment? What I am doing at the moment to reduce my carbon footprint is is irrelevant. I am doing what I can given the access to technology that exists and it is at least as important that I continue to advocate for the need to develop new sources of energy. If you are suggesting a continued and robust effort to find clean renewable sources of energy, then you must be agreeing with me. It is quite obvious however, that the majority of climate science deniers are not at all interested in finding new clean sources of energy. They don't think there is a need to do so and complain that it is to expensive. I am not suggesting immediately shutting down Yampa Station or shutting down coal mines and throwing people out of work, or not allowing poor people in undeveloped nations to burn fossil fuels. I'm talking about recognizing that continuing to burn fossil fuels for energy is damaging our environment and we need to stay focused on finding other clean, renewable ways to produce energy. It's going to cost money up front to develop new technologies, but in the long run, it will pay big dividends.

0

Dan Shores 2 weeks, 1 day ago on Letters to the Editor: Environmental religion

Yeah, too bad the deniers can't be placed in some sort of bubble where they could burn all the fossil fuel and pollute to their hearts content and the rest of us wouldn't have to deal with the consequences. As far as science goes, there is enough correlation between increases in the levels of man made pollution and our changing climate to draw a scientifically based conclusion that the climate change we are currently experiencing is in fact due to the activities of man. It is true that the climate has always been changing, but what we are experiencing cannot be explained by natural climate deviation. The movement toward cleaner, renewable sources of energy continues to grow worldwide and will not be stopped by denying. But go ahead and deny and throw out all the conspiracy theories about dictators and tyrannical gubbamint overreach that you can come up with, you're gonna get cleaner energy whether you want it or not.

0

Prev