Flag officers for disarmament
This ad was paid for by Nanny Bloomberg’s Mayors Against Illegal Guns and stars some flag officers who apparently don’t give a tiny rat’s ass about the Second Amendment;
Featured in the ad are Rear Admiral (Ret.) James A. Barnett Jr., USN; Brigadier General (Ret.) Stephen A. Cheney, USMC; Major General (Ret.) Paul Eaton, USA; RADM Malcolm MacKinnon III, USN (Ret.); Lieutenant General (Ret.) Charles P. Otstott, USA; and Brigadier General (Ret.) Stephen N. Xenakis, MD, USA.
“These generals and admirals are warriors, defenders, heroes and gun owners. They have witnessed the devastating effects of assault weapons, and more than anyone, they know that these weapons have no place in our neighborhoods,” said Mayors Against Illegal Guns Co-Chair and Boston Mayor Thomas M. Menino. “We are grateful to have these heroes join Americans across the country in the battle for legislation that will save lives and protect our children.”
Yeah, they’re real heroes, because Bloomberg and his gang of morons don’t want to disarm criminals, they want to disarm legal gun owners. Real f’n heroes. More like cowardly political animals.
Thanks to JP for the link.
Category: Gun Grabbing Fascists
***Third sentence should read “I don’t think any one of these gentlemen is more of an expert than anyone else, including guys like us who toted these weapons on a daily basis.”
Ironically, I’m distracted because I’m trying to type and clean my Sig in between thoughts.
#49: Anon – what is your definition of an assault weapon?
I would also like to point out that “POG” and “fobbit” are not the same thing. fobbits never leave the wire and have access to things us grunt would kill for. POGs will leave the wire in support roles to help out us grunts, be it bringing us parts or supplies and I have a lot of respect for them.
DaveO – I’m using the media’s definition of assault weapons — the ones that look scary and have high-capacity magazines. I think banning the weapons or the magazines is useless given the future of 3D printing. I think it would be more logical to focus on laws which prevent ammunition from reaching the wrong hands.
Its more logical to actually enforce existing laws and after a set frame collect data and find which ones work and which dont; scrap the nonworking ones and strengthen the ones that do. New laws with little to no enforcement are as useful as existing laws that are not enforced.
OK, Twist, what do you guys call the Navy’s EOD teams over there? And I don’t mean that bit of fluff cinema title “Hurt Locker”. I mean the real EOD teams.
I preferred the term “prima donna blowhards” myself, but that’s Marine EOD. Bunch of doucherockets who will soon go back to stacking up UXO on Arty ranges throughout the US. Navy EOD, never had a problem with them.
ComancheDoc – I said we should focus on laws that prevent ammunition from reaching the wrong hands. That can entail enforcing, modifying, or scrapping old laws; writing new laws; or a combination of the above.
Yeah, well, ammunition isn’t getting into anyone’s hands lately, wrong or otherwise.
Okay, Anon how do you stop a thief from getting whatever they want the”Black Market ” or just taking it? Just enforce the 20,000 Gun laws on the books already.
“I think it would be more logical to focus on laws which prevent ammunition from reaching the wrong hands.” Okay, I’m focusing. Really hard. Hurting my eyes. What now?
These are the type of officers that prefer Troops to carry unloaded weapons than be trained that “every weapon is loaded,” that fear the teaching of Troops in weapon proficiency, and ultimately led to situations like a platoon of maintenance getting lost with dirty weapons that wouldn’t fire in Iraq, ala Jessica Lynch.
These are the type of officers that want pretty “soldiers” to parade in the street, with choir boy resumes, starched uniforms, and stolen black berets, than scruffy Warriors, covered in dirt and grime returning from a successful Raid.
These are the kind of officers that ended the use of military terms such as “search and destroy,” “raid,” and “ambush.”
These are the kind of officers that ask a local judge for a warrant to “arrest” an enemy combatant, and then demand the terrorist gets a hearing 30 days later, releasing him for a “lack of evidence,” to try to kill Our Troops later.
These are the kind of officers that start a 15-6 investigation, because a Soldier fired his weapon in battle.
These are the kind of officers more concerned with the enemy’s feelings, than his troops well-being.
Not all officers are these kinds of officers, but there’s enough of them, in the wrong places, that the military has become significantly less capable than is the sum of its parts.
Jonn – That’s for sure, haha.
Joe – I never said I had the solution. I do, however, pay taxes so that elected officials (among other things) can deal with issues such as these. I don’t expect those officials to pander to the right or the left, I expect them to make solid policy decisions that achieve two goals — reducing gun violence and maintaining civil liberties. I don’t believe these to be mutually exclusive goals and I think we can do a better job than what we’ve been doing.
WOTN – Unless you provide evidence for your claims, you’re merely speculating. And some of the claims you made are absurd.
Well, dream on, #63/54. Laws don’t prevent guns OR ammo from getting into the hands of criminals.
You can ask any kid in Chicago who has been shot by gangbangers while they were sitting in their own yards or playing volleyball with their friends, or just walking home from a convenience store or school.
Oh, wait! You can’t. I forgot. Those kids are dead.
If you ever understand that laws do not stop criminals from doing bad things, never have and never will stop them, let me know, OK? Because I don’t think you have the vaguest understanding of criminal behavior.
So I’ll help you out: It’s simple. Criminals do not obey or pay attention to laws. They do whatever they want to do and they don’t give a rat’s teeny-weeny ass who gets hurt in the process.
This is why they are called criminals.
Is that simple enough for you?
Anon: My evidence is experience, with THESE TYPES of officers.
YOU may vote in politicians to make decisions you don’t have the time to contemplate, but after deep contemplation, the Founding Fathers realized that they actually needed to write up the specific Rights politicians could not infringe, as they were granted by God, not government.
YOU may trust politicians to make decisions in the best interest of “the people,” but the Founders noted that government is given only authority by “We The People,” and MUST be constrained by the Constitution, written and approved by the People, or they would run amok as all other governments of the day had, enslaving the people, with burdensome taxes, and no means of resisting that government.
“Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
Ex-PH2: When I was in the military, we used to call guys like you MOTO (Master of the Obvious). That being said, thank you for breaking down criminal behavior in such simplistic terms.
WOTN: Your “experience with THESE TYPES of officers” means absolutely nothing to me. Provide one shred of evidence (i.e. an article with a quote, memorandum, etc.) that one of these officers engaged in any of the activities that you claimed. When I was in the military, we used to call Constitution, officer-hating guys like you “Shit House Lawyers” — the type who gave all sorts of idiotic legal advice to shitbags in the barracks.
so how
much do character assassins cost again? lol
Anon, I see you have a reading comprehension problem, as well as general lack of situational awareness, and general propensity towards hypocrisy.
In the future, you may wish to direct your personal attacks at those that have a greater propensity to earn other’s ire, such as myself, than those that are generally well-behaved and accomodating, such as PH.
And yes, therein lies your hypocrisy, as you are so ignorant that you haven’t figured out the gender of those you attack, and now have a 50-50 chance of getting even that right, while attacking others for character assassination.
Further, you fail the reading comprehension of “these types” in what you quote. And fail on what Troops call a “shit house lawyer.”
Then again, perhaps, “these types of officers” is just a little too close to home for you. Perhaps, it was just an uncontrollable, personal need for you to lash back?
Oh, do get snide with me, Anon@67. Please do. But while you’re at it, remember this.
These are your words: I think it would be more logical to focus on laws which prevent ammunition from reaching the wrong hands.
And my response was: Laws don’t prevent guns OR ammo from getting into the hands of criminals.
What part of my response to your opinion do you not get? I don’t care how many laws you pass. None passed so far have prevented guns or ammo from falling into the hands of criminals. How hard is that to understand? What is that makes you think more laws will be more effective, when those in place now have accomplished nothing.
In regard to elected officials, you are very naive. If you actually expect elected officials to do anything more with your tax money than sit on their behinds and talk, you will never want for moonshine.
They all run great PR and ad campaigns, don’t they? And I’ll bet you fall for them, hook, line and sinker, and then you wonder why all they do is cost YOU, Joe Taxpayer, more and more money and nothing gets done that was promised to you. And I’ll bet you’re whining about it, even now.
We have more than enough laws in place already. We don’t need more laws. We need some fricking common sense.
And does anyone on this board besides Anon64 think I look like a guy?
Just so you know, Anon64, when I was in the military, we called guys like you dumber than barnacles on a cast iron skillet and more boring than warmed-over Black Label beer.
Aw, crap — that should be Anon67. Oh, crap, who cares?
I’ve never even heard of them. Get some names I recognize on their and perhaps I will care.
And for the record, these mayors gathered into one group by Mayor Bloomerbutt are nothing more than military academy grads who have spent their days before retirement getting their tickets punched in Washington, DC, political circles.
Mackinnon – engineer
Ostott — logistics
Xenakis — psychiatrist
Cheney — artillery trainer
Barnett — logistics and communications
I see nothing that indicates even one of these retired senior officers has ever actually been in the field in the line of fire or faced being shot at by an unseen enemy.