- Home
- Politics
- Entertainment
- Sports
- Health
- Religion
- Society
- Tech
- Money
- People
- Science
- Galleries
Politics
Video: New Hampshire Sheriff Candidate Frank Szabo Promises to Use 'Deadly Force' to Stop Abortions
Frank Szabo, who is running for Hillsborough County Sheriff in New Hampshire, has promised that if elected, he will arrest anyone involved in an abortion and will even use deadly force (video below).
When asked by a reporter about his position, Szabo told WMUR-TV: "I would respond specifically by saying that if someone is under threat, a full-grown human being, if they’re under threat, what should the sheriff do? Everything in their power to prevent them from being harmed."
"I would hope that it wouldn’t come to that, as with any situation where someone is in danger, but again, specifically talking about elective abortions and late-term abortions, that is an act that needs to be stopped."
Szabo also told CBS News: “Deadly force is the last thing law enforcement should be using, if a citizen’s life is in danger they should be protected. If there is no other choice, that’s what’s needed to protect the citizen.”
"Why is there a difference between someone who is 20 years old and their life is in danger and someone who is nine months in utero."
Szabo is running against sheriff James Hardy in a Republican primary next month.
Sign up for the OV Daily Newsletter
Comments
What is ironic about the
What is ironic about the entire abortion issue is that 25 to 50% of all pregnancies end in spontaneous abortions. If you follow the religious arguments against abortions, that means god is the biggest abortionist/. Is this fool intending to arrest god and use "lethal force?"
It has already been tried,
It has already been tried, but he got away three days later.
FYI, first trimester is when
FYI, first trimester is when abortions are performed under normal conditions.
If you don't know what a trimester is, keep yapping about abortions at nine months. Idiots.
Except for the person
Except for the person compaining about guns, all I see here is men giving their opinions on a health issue not one of them is capable of physically experiencing. IF these ANTI-Choice advocates are so concerned about developing fertilized eggs they would be focusing & funding research that allows a fertilized human egg to develop to full-term outside a woman's body. This would not only allow unwanted children to grow to term, it would save the lives of hundreds of wanted babies when the parent has developed a disease, been injured or her own body cannot carry a fetus to term. But this kind of research and technology doesn't force punishment on a woman. That's the real reason Anti-choice advocates will never accept that every woman has the right to decide what is best for her mental, emotion, physical & economic health. 100% reliable, non-regulated contraception would be the best option, but on demand abortion with no loss of life would be the next. The anti-choice bullies would not stop trying to punish young woman for enjoying their own bodies and the freedom every citizen is entitled, but they would be forced to admit that they care nothing for these growing embros or the unwanted children they will become. They care about forcing their morals & religious views on all women. Ask any of them if this technology was available now, inexpensively, and every aborted fetus would survive, would you let women make this decision for herself? Every answer I got showed their motive was punitive, never humane.
In high school some coach
In high school some coach told us that cramps were psychosomatic. Of course he was a man and had no fucking idea what he was talking about.
One does not need the ability
One does not need the ability to physically experience something to have a valid opinion about it. No one is trying to punish young women for enjoying their bodies. They are trying to save a life that results from bad choices in birth prevention.
What's the difference? Can
What's the difference? Can that 9 month thing do anything on it's own? Can it breathe?
I've got my opinions about abortions... I'll leave that there. However, to say he'll kill someone to stop an abortion is like shooting someone because they have a cold.
I'd vote for him in a
I'd vote for him in a heartbeat if I lived there, if only for the pleasure of putting the cat amongst the pigeons, and curiosity to discover what would happen next, and to watch the reactions here. The novel election platform he has chosen raises interesting questions of subsidiarity. It could lead to interesting court cases.
I'd have been worried if I thought he really was really intending to use deadly force. But he was clearly only giving a hypothetical answer to a hypothetical question, when pressed.
I don't have a vote in Hillsborough County though. I am not even a citizen or resident of the USA.
Unfortunately, the last
Unfortunately, the last couple years have shown nationwide that when these wacko anti-choice Republicans are voted into office they follow through on their insane ideas. Just take a look at the personhood amendments, anti-gay ammendments, restrictions of voting rights and voting hours for people they disagree with, etc etc.
I can no longer give them the benefit of the doubt. Even here in MN where Republicans repeatedly said during the election that despite their beliefs on the social issues those would be their lowest priority and their highest priority would be jobs. Instead they haven't done a single thing for jobs and have instead put anti-marriage and anti-voter amendments on the ballot and constantly pushed social issues over economic issues.
Based on experience. If this guy says he's going to shoot people over abortions we can't afford to give him the benefit of the doubt.
This idiot should nor only
This idiot should nor only lose the election, not just for this stance but for his failure to know what is an appropriate amount of force to use in law enforcement. All he has done is demonstrate his unfitness to hold any LEO position.
I was going to write
I was going to write basically the same response. Thank you. I concur with you entirely.
... but abortions aren't
... but abortions aren't legal at 9 months any more than they are at 20 years.
This whole statement is just to let all the other crazies know what his particular brand of crazy is - and that he'll let his opinions override the civil and constitutional rights of the public.
"but abortions aren't legal
"but abortions aren't legal at 9 months"
I think that was his point. If there is a chance for him to prevent an ILLEGAL abortion by arresting those about to perform it, he will try to do just that, he promises. Obviously, the power to prevent perfectly LEGAL abortions by arresting people, isn't one of the powers of the office to which he is seeking election. Obviously, the chances are small of his ever learning, in time to thwart it by making arrests, of a plot to conduct an illegal abortion. In his dreams, and now ours. But if he did learn in time, he'd do his duty unflinchingly, in this race against time, he assures us.
His candidacy is a piece of pure theatre, and we are the audience, enjoying the show just as much whether we cheer or boo when this fantastic character walks onto the stage.
Recently, we've had a cop injured ditching his motorcycle shooting dead in self-defence the enraged father of a child the cop's bike had knocked over, and another cop allegedly banging a drunk's head against her car for disobeying an order when under arrest. Opposing Views is going to get interesting, when a sheriff pulls the trigger of a gun he has trained on a nurse whom he has told that he or she is under arrest, when the nurse tries to disobey his order not to press the plunger on a syringe, injecting a mother with a drug that will kill her baby unlawfully. The whole scenario is pure fantasy, of course, but who are the bigger fools? The guy who got the media and us suspending disbelief in the far-fetched fantasy long enough to get his 15 minutes of fame? Or the media, and us, for playing along with his entertaining little game?
By the way, are you glad that abortions aren't legal at 9 months any longer, Cityboy? (Assuming that this is the case.)