Anti-gun nuts
There has been loads of asshattery on the internet since the tragic Oregon shooting, like this half-wit from Chicago Now, no less, who says that we should rescind the 2d Amendment to make the country safer. More than 2300 people have been shot in Chicago this year so far in one of the most heavily regulated areas of the entire country.
The Baltimore Sun comes right out and titles their opinion today “Repeal the Second Amendment“, you know, as if that would make us all safer tomorrow morning.
Then this crap from liberal Raw Story that’s entitled Armed vet destroys gun nuts’ argument on mass shooters by explaining why he didn’t attack Oregon killer. That’s not what the story about John Parker does, actually. He didn’t want to go charging into a scene about which he knew nothing and possibly end up being a target for SWAT, who would also be newly arrived on the scene. He showed cool and calm reasoning, certainly not what one would expect from a “gun nut”. You know, just like the rest of us who get lumped into that category.
The New York Times published a piece entitled “27 Ways to Be a Modern Man” which is really a bunch of foo-foo BS, but down there in number 25, after telling us how we should consider buying a shoe horn and drink only regular colas, it says that “The modern man has no use for a gun. He doesn’t own one, and he never will.” So those of us who own guns are ashamed that we don’t live up to the image of a “modern man” at a newspaper where squeezing the testosterone out of everyone on the staff couldn’t fill a thimble.
CNN reports that the president is “Physically sick” because he’s been unable to grab guns. The New York Times reports that John Hanlin, the sheriff now leading the investigation into the horrific shooting at the small community college warned Oregon legislators that the laws that they passed in the wake of the Sandy Hook shooting wouldn’t do anything to affect crimes or keep guns out of the hands of criminals.
That’s really what it’s all about – government can only do so much. Jeb Bush is being criticized for his fairly inelegant statement that “stuff happens”, but yeah, stuff does happen. Let’s say that it’s actually possible to retrieve every legal gun in this country, the 300 million that are out there, does anyone honestly think that the criminals will meekly comply with the new law? Their guns are already illegal because of existing laws and I don’t see a rush of folks turning in their illegal guns to the nearest constabulary. Will stuff really stop happening with new gun laws?
Let’s say that we passed a law to force all private sales of firearms to be subjected to background checks – every grandfather who gives a war relic to a grandson, every father who buys a shotgun for his son’s birthday must first subject the receiver to a NICS check. What will that change? The FBI says that interviews they conducted with criminals indicates that less than 1% of the guns that they used in commission of their crimes were bought at gun shows or from legal owners. Mostly their guns are purchased in back alleys and dark parking lots – those sales aren’t likely to be reported even with a new law. Criminals don’t mind breaking laws – that’s why we call them criminals.
The only people the President, the Baltimore Sun, Raw Story, the New York Times, that neck beard in Chicago want to regulate are those folks who will follow the law, the folks who already bend over backwards to jump through the legal hoops to own a firearm now – the folks who aren’t making “stuff happen”, the John Parkers of the country who shelter in place and secure their immediate surroundings.
The president should stop making himself “physically ill” – he can only do so much and he’s done all that he can, if his real goal is to not interfere with legitimate gun owners’ rights, you know, like he says. Governments can’t regulate what is in peoples’ heads. The government can only get out of the way and let the law abiding citizens control their immediate surroundings. They could even try to make prosecutors do their respective jobs in the law enforcement realm for a change, rather than blame legal gun owners for every real nut job who thinks that being a mass murderer buys them a place in heaven.
Category: Gun Grabbing Fascists
Spot on Jonn – if you forward this to the NRA, I almost guarantee that it’ll be published in the next mag issue.
Mass shootings stopped by armed civilians in the past 30 years: 0. For every time a gun is used in self-defense in the home, there are 7 assaults or murders, 11 suicide attempts, and 4 accidents involving guns in or around a home.
In 2010, nearly 6 times more women were shot by husbands, boyfriends, and ex-partners than murdered by male strangers. A woman’s chances of being killed by her abuser increase more than 5 times if he has access to a gun. One study found that women in states with higher gun ownership rates were 4.9 times more likely to be murdered by a gun than women in states with lower gun ownership rates.
In states with Stand Your Ground and other laws making it easier to shoot in self-defense, those policies have been linked to a 7 to 10% increase in homicides. Among Texans convicted of serious crimes, those with concealed-handgun licenses were sentenced for threatening someone with a firearm 4.8 times more than those without.
Drivers who carry guns are 44% more likely than unarmed drivers to make obscene gestures at other motorists, and 77% more likely to follow them aggressively.
I don’t believe you Gun Nutz understand what the opposition is mounting as argument. These are only a few of their recent talking points.
Dave you are wrong about civilians stoping mass shootings a incident up in Portland Oregon. in 2011 at a mall would be my argument a guard member stopped a nut with two shots because his weapon Jammed up
as I was. as I was should have read the whole comment Opps sorry 🙂
I am just grateful you didn’t quote HONDO.
yea, that guy, who ignored the “gun free zone” sign at the Clackamas mall and stopped the nut at the food court of shooting up the place more than he already had. In full disclosure, we went there a week afterward, and it was crawling with State Patrol officers.
Those liberal talking points rank right up there with the long-discredited “study” that says 90 percent of us want stronger background checks and registration of firearms, etc.
Ask the folks in CT and NY how eager they are to register their guns. Estimates are that over 95 percent of the weapons in those states WEREN’T registered.
The libtards on MSNBC got asked, point blank, what any of the proposed gun controls they want would have done or would do to stop these assholes.
Even Howard Dean had to admit it would do little to nothing.
http://dailycaller.com/2015/10/02/msnbc-panel-cant-name-single-policy-that-would-have-prevented-oregon-shooting-video/
right on point MSBC did a poll on gun control and quietly removed the poll because even amongst there very left leaning crowd 75-77 percent were in favor of gun rights. it’s odd how they use tragedy to try to get what they want and it always back fires. people nowadays seem to have woken up a little to the BS they love to put out there…
This CT resident complied and only because my ideal America is a place where wrong is eventually righted.
I grit my teeth, I signed the forms, and the bitter taste of that envelope is still in my mouth.
I looked at it like a shitty order from a shitty Commander, ya don’t havta like it, ya just havda do it.
“you just have a do it.” No. No you don’t. 95% didn’t. You just don’t have conviction. You’re a wimp.
Dave, if you feel someone humping your leg, his name is C Long. Just a head’s up.
isn’t that the new name for Lars TAYLOR ????
BHWHahahahahahhahaha
Следи за своими врагами, ибо они первыми замечают твои ошибки.
Я хочу, чтобы он найти новое место, чтобы болтаться
The art of war teaches us to rely not on the likelihood of the enemy’s not coming, but on our own readiness to receive him; not on the chance of his not attacking, but rather on the fact that we have made our position unassailable.
Or, for those who tend to see the world a bit differently than I do on these issues:
sʇlnɐɟ ɹnoʎ ʇno puıɟ ʇsɹıɟ ʎǝɥʇ ɹoɟ ‘sǝıɯǝuǝ ɹnoʎ ǝʌɹǝsqo
that’s cool. How did you do that? lol
Its really very easy, just try to see the world through their eyes. It makes you kind of dizzy at first, but before you know it you won’t remember which side is up.
Dave, here’s the link to a study out of Harvard (you know, Barry’s alma mater) about how gun control is counter-productive to murder and suicide.
http://valorguardians.com/blog/?p=37307
Hondo also has a fancy .gif map that shows how as gun ownership increased, crime decreased. It was posted in the previous story about the Oregon dirtbag.
According to the FBI homicide statistics page, use of various types of firearms has gone down between 2008 and 2012.
https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2012/crime-in-the-u.s.-2012/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/expanded-homicide/expanded_homicide_data_table_8_murder_victims_by_weapon_2008-2012.xls
And where are these “statistics” coming from anyway?
Oh dear Lord, you expect me to source my information? This is the internet, all information is well vetted before it is posted.
Here you go quoting Hondo, as if I don’t get enough of that around here. I am beginning to think he is the demiurge. This one has been around for a while, I am sure the girls are wanting to do some new form of worship.
I think hondo is being selfish and is way too lucky. Bastard…
It looks like she is packing a pair of 38’s and some sort of semi-auto.
Wait, there’s a gun in there somewhere? I didn’t notice…
There’s nothing “concealed” in that carry. lol
I usually actually appreciate your contrarian viewpoint but this one falls flat on its ass. Correlation is not causation. I could likewise say that for every incident a gun is used in self-defense there are 5 deaths from drunk driving and 22 from heart disease. What does that prove? Absolutely fucking nothing. Your “statistics” don’t prove anything that justifies denying the Constitution. There are many things that contribute to violence in the US… a culture that glorifies violence, a media that spotlights mass shooters (gives them the notoriety that they want), and many different opposing viewpoints (it’s called freedom). I do think that none of it has to do with most NRA members. The people that commit drive bys are not the same people that go to gun shows. They’re not the same who shop at your local gun shop. They buy their guns from other criminals and that will continue.
You still haven’t proposed anything that would have prevented this. This animal had a clean record. What would have stopped him that wouldn’t also stop law-abiding citizens? He could have passed a background check for a FAC in England, ownership in Australia, Germany, etc. the dude was crazy but as far as we know, none of it was on paper… He literally talked about how he admired the notoriety that the media gives mass shooters.
How about we take away your 1st amendment right… with nothing to justify it other than the fact that we don’t like it.
Again, I often sympathize with your arguments here…. but you can GFU here. I didn’t do anything wrong. My friends didn’t do anything wrong. Don’t you dare try to take away my rights because of what some fuck head did on the west coast.
Ya might want to check your sarcasm detector, amigo. Maybe after re-reading the last para of DH’s original comment above.
I’ll admit the sarcasm would have been easier to spot had he put those in quotes, though.
Ahhh…. No sarcasm detected. Must send detector to FSC for recalibration.
You have no idea how much I appreciate your post. My day is always a little askew if someone does not get the thrust of “Being a master of bate”, but GFU works.
There is one principle by which, if we live, it will never fail to keep us in everlasting ignorance. That principle is ‘Contempt prior to investigation’.
The ludicrous contents of my initial post are fallacious at best, notwithstanding that fact, they resonate with those that are willingly unknowing.
A Scotched up, cigar toking, porch monkey describe it as, ‘loads of asshattery’. I am good to go with that.
You have my apologies, I really took your post the wrong way
I thought your post was excellent. Feel free to tell me to GFMS anytime. Fighting to remain lucid most of the day is no fun.
A lie is a poor way to start a conversation. Your first sentence is a falsehood, and a famous one. I am not reading any further.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/12/10/colorado.shootings/index.html?_s=PM:US
Similar stories of crimes that get stopped in progress by armed homeowners and shopkeepers are a regular feature of this website, at a clip of about 3 per day.
Lying. Makes. You. Look. Stupid. as well as Dishonest.
Appearances being what they may, I admire you candor. On occasion, appearing stoopid can be the smartest move.
Dave is sneaky like that.
Another sarcasm detector needing calibration, apparently.
You really should have read the entire comment, including the last para, val.
Thank You Jonn, you are point on, I’m amazed at how the Lib’s seem to be having issues with common sense, my wife use to be one of those gun grabbing Nuts for the left-wing. and some of her story’s about how they use the internet and cram laws and scare tactics amazed me I could go on but it seems many here have a good foundation of common sense
I like the fact that the real quest, hidden by so many for so long, is being mentioned. I refer to the repeal of the 2nd Amendment. That’s what this has always been about. The thing is, the amendment’s repeal is not the actual threat. And the gun grabbers with any working brain cells know it. The looming threat to the 2nd Amendment is the Supreme Court. AND WE ARE POWERLESS TO STOP IT. That frightens me. One change in the court could do it. Two most certainly would do it. Stare decisis and protocol be damned. The court is chocked full of progressives and progressive lites who would leap at the opportunity to revisit the 2nd Amendment and reinterpret it into oblivion. And once that happens, then comes the task, not at all impossible, of getting the guns. Suddenly–and I do mean virtually overnight–all guns will be illegal, save for Biden’s shotguns. And when faced with felony arrest, loss of job and income to support themselves and their families, 99.7% of the sheep will ask, “Where do I turn mine in?”
I’m afraid I might be that 0.3 percent, then.
If they can take any part of the Constitution away from us, they can take it all away from us.
Dave Hardin can turn his in to me. Tomorrow.
I think you missed the very tiny /sarc tag at the bottom of his first post.
I’ve heard those talking points as well. I’ve also heard that 84.3 percent of statistics are made up bullshit.
Interesting, 15.7% are true. You are always looking at the glass half empty.
No, I look at it as an engineer. The glass is neither half full nor half empty, it has a design capacity factor of 2.0.
If the glass is for alcohol, unless its capacity is at least 4.0, its design capacity isn’t functioning properly.
Depends on the units, actually – and the form of alcoholic beverage.
If you’re talking fluid ounces and 190-proof grain alcohol, 4.0 is IMO more than large enough. Just refill as necessary – or until you lose consciousness. (smile)
I admire your circular reasoning, so if the glass was a sphere and not a cylinder its capacity would be two thirds of half full? Didn’t Archimedes have a glass like that?
.. Uh… is there Pi 2?
There is indeed, or was, or kind of is one that was. I think she goes by EX-PH2.
That is pomme de tarte a la Normande.
It’s made with apple brandy.
I think then you’d be looking at 4/3 pi r^3.
Then again, been a while since I took geometry.
There is actually an amazing story on the whole topic. Archimedes anticipated modern calculus and analysis in the third century BC by applying concepts of infinitesimals and the method of exhaustion to derive and rigorously prove a range of geometrical theorems, including the area of a circle, the surface area and volume of a sphere, and the area under a parabola. Other mathematical achievements include deriving an accurate approximation of pi, defining and investigating the spiral bearing his name, and creating a system using exponentiation for expressing very large numbers.
If you ever get a chance to watch this it is an amazing story. If you ever got screwed by Archimedes it was well calculated.
Arhimedes is a useless bimp. Where was he with his fulcrum and lever when I was trying to pry my 18 pound cat off the sofa?
To SEA: I have Dave’s number. No way he’s anti-gun, because… he married a stripper. But he can still turn them in to me. Hoping Hondo’s Angels will make the delivery!
GDC, I am not quite ready to turn over my strippers at this point. When and if that day ever cums, I will require a ‘Hold Harmless’ clause in writing from you first.
I realize that is a bit of an oxymoron as there is almost no way to hold one of them in a harmless manor.
My numbers are 44-34-38 in case you want to check your math. Their numbers vary, but variety is the spice of life.
Now you’re just being stingy.
Yeah BABY!
SCOTUS can’t actually repeal the 2nd Amendment. Constitutional amendments are put into referenda (plural of referendum for blong-dong) for the voting public. That’s the process of approval and repeal, whether the Fearful of Gunzzzz twits like it or not.
I do have one quibble with the article.
This: ‘Mostly their guns are purchased in back alleys and dark parking lots.’
That’s true, up to a point, but since drug cartels like Sinaloa are embedded in cities like Chicago and need to recruit gangbangers, they do it with freebie guns and ammos. We just don’t hear about it a lot because it is always done for the purpose of not transferring cash, not leaving a paper trail of any kind no matter how innocuous.
They can’t repeal it necessarily. But they can say that “our interpretation of the 2nd amendment is that it applies only to single fire rifles of at least 3 feet or longer. Therefore, any modern firearms are not covered by the 2nd amendment.”
Just a reminder of when Government fails to do its due diligence.
http://www.kirotv.com/news/news/father-marysville-pilchuck-shooter-guilty-illegal-/nnq5B/
He was charged with a domestic violence crime. He should have been put on the no buy list in accordance with the Gun Control Act of 1968. He wasn’t by either the Tribal Police or the State Police. He was able to purchase a gun, he lied on the the forms, he purchased a gun. His son did something stupid. Yet, this was buried by all the media? Why because it goes against the idea of doing something. Since the common somethings proposed all failed. There is more to this issue than the folks like Dave up there want to admit. There is government failures to enforce their own laws and rules, there are folks who have yielded parenting to the state because kids are trophies now and not family, there is all manner of other issues with regards to how males are treated and handled in society. The list is long and in some cases very, very sad since there are fixes that could be done but folks don’t want to do them or they are afraid of hurting people’s feelings.
no doubt our freeway shouter here in Arizona had a felony DV and a felony assault and for some odd resone was able to buy and even pawn and redem his fire arm with no issues it begs to wonder WTF is going on here and who is dropping the ball and why ????
The background check system is busted. There was a study done about a decade ago by the National Shooting Sports Foundation that found out of 90% of the registered and reported DV or Felony convictions in 25 states were not registered with the FBI. Why? The most common answer was that the police said it was the judicial branch’s job. The judicial said it was the executive branch job. Finally they had some legal eagles look at the 1968 law and the DV amendment to it. Guess what? Its all voluntary unless you are a federal law enforcement. Guess what as well? The federals are dropping the ball as well. There appears to be strong evidence that the Federal Judicial and the Federal Executive aren’t reporting to the FBI for the national background check system. So how can you enforce a rule when you have no data or bad data?
Some good points made.
Correct. The handful of lawyers known as the Supreme Court cannot repeal the 2nd Amendment. There is a process prescribed in the Constitution for that. But the court can interpret the 2nd Amendment to effectively kill all private gun ownership and possession. In my view, it is neither far fetched nor crazily hypothetical to imagine the scenario. That said. there is a peaceful, legal remedy for it if the Court ever takes that step but, to me, expecting Congress to act in response to such a decision is ridiculous. They will get to that just as soon as they reverse obamacare and stop extending the debt ceiling. In other words, never.
The way that came out, it looks like I was responding to King Clong in declaring that he has deemed some points good ones. I wasn’t. My reply was to MSG Eric’s 5:03 comment.
sometimes weird things happen here. especially when king clong is let out of his cage.
Where is the little bastige? Someone shoot him with a tranquilizer dart? Is there a Joe Biden fundraiser tonight?
The President got a little slicker yesterday; he used the phrase “gun safety” in place of the term “gun control.”
Just wrapping the same turd in a prettier bow.
I just drop a berry and now I’m wiping my O-Bummer. it feels so good
Mao had gun ownership banned and a mere twenty million were murdered by his regime.
Hitler had gun ownership banned, and look what happened.
USSR Citizens were forbidden from owning guns, and look at the lives they lived.
Castro forbade gun ownership, and look at the quality of life in Cuba…
Fuckin’ A, I’m preaching to the choir…
Okay so the Hitler statement is wrong a little bit. The historical record shows differently.
He first removed gun restrictions except for enemies of the state. Who were enemies of the state? The jews, slavs, romas, and anyone that wasn’t a true German. It wasn’t until much later that he actually started to ban gun ownership as the possibility of rebellion against his rule started to become a possibility near the end of the war. The idea was that with gun ownership in more German’s hands that it would be easier and quicker to have a trained army when it came time for war.
However, the historical point doesn’t really change that much since there are folks that want to strip it from us bitter clingers and only allow the “true Americans” to own guns for their protection and security.
Some nut in Oz got possession of a lead dispenser…
http://news.sky.com/story/1562733/australia-two-dead-in-police-station-shooting
That story must be false. Guns are banned in Australia…
I’ll say it again.
Ted Kennedy and his car killed more people than most legally owned firearms and nobody tried to ban him.
Went out shooting today and committed a private firearm sale.
Nobody was murdered. The inhumanity!
If I was to commit a private firearm sale, not that I ever would of course, but if I were too…..I would use the name Randy Weaver on the receipt.
So if we follow liberal/progressive/gun-grabber/Obama “logic” that guns kill people, there shouldn’t be any Americans left alive what with those 300,000,000 guns just up and killing people…..
Why do I get the feeling that now-retired (thank God!) Bateman is jerking himself silly as he sits at his laptop, banging out another missive like another proverbial monkey?
Why can’t the lefties apply the same standard to this that they insist the rest of us apply to every little stupid thing that they do? You know – if you don’t want to own a gun or be around those who own guns, then just don’t own one or be around people who own them. That’s what they say about we who don’t really want to stumble upon folks making out in the middle of Main Street. We are supposed to avert our eyes. Can’t they do the same just as easily?
Guess not. They refuse to see the hypocrisy of their attitude. Or the insanity of it.
Oh, I think they see the hypocrisy of their position, OWB. They just don’t give a sh!t.
It’s not about guns. It’s about control – them in control.
Liberals always cry for “tolerance”, so WHY THE FUXX won’t they tolerate and accept our 2nd Amendment-loving way of life? Just askin’…
Have come to the conclusion that at best the useful idiots are so self-absorbed that they simply don’t see that they are being abused into spouting rhetoric which is actually not in their own best interest. Or maybe its just that they truly are insane. Either way, they are a destructive force for this country.
The number 0 stated by that dumbass Hardin guy is total bullshit. Never trust a guy that has been known to cite Beer Pong and Nietzsche in the same sentence.
http://controversialtimes.com/issues/constitutional-rights/12-times-mass-shootings-were-stopped-by-good-guys-with-guns/?utm_source=LNL
He was being sarcastic ARCOM.
Dave, you need to start using the sarc font or closing and opening with the sarc tags.
It’s much worse than you can imagine. I think ARCOM is Hobo or whatever his name is.
Or E-8 Moerk, trolling for more Facebook comments. She’s gotta get some bullet points for her next OER.
Yep, sarcasm is just another service Dave Hardin provides. Surrounded by beautiful Russky strippers, he labors mightily in his attempts to offend EVERYone. He is proudly a Godless Heathen! I wanna be Dave when I grow up. 🙂
I understand what Mr. Parker did and why. And I feel sorry for him. He did the right thing. He did the legal thing. But I suspect he may experience doubt and even remorse as to whether he should have obeyed his instincts and conscience and moved toward the sound of the gun fire.
I carry, and I hope to NEVER have to draw and use my sidearm. I hope NEVER to be put in that place Mr. Parker found himself in. And I hope to never have to weigh the decision he made because I suspect that I would feel remorse for not trying to save innocent lives of fellow citizens.
But he did the right thing. Doesn’t sound like a “gun nut” to me and neither do the people I know who also carry.