Ann Coulter on Gun Control

Status
Not open for further replies.

GRAYRID3R

Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2009
Messages
198
Location
Lawrenceville, Georgia
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=31406


The rash of recent shooting incidents has led people who wouldn't know an AK-47 from a paintball gun to issue demands for more restrictions on guns. To be sure, it's hard to find any factor in these shootings that could be responsible -- other than the gun.

So far, this year's public multiple shootings were committed by:

-- Richard Poplawski, 23, product of a broken family, expelled from high school and dishonorably discharged from the Marines, who killed three policemen in Pittsburgh.

-- Former crack addict Jiverly Wong, 41, who told co-workers "America sucks" yet somehow was not offered a job as a speechwriter for Barack Obama, who blockaded his victims in a civic center in Binghamton, N.Y., and shot as many people as he could, before killing himself.

-- Robert Stewart, 45, a three-time divorcee and high school dropout with "violent tendencies" -- according to one of his ex-wives -- who shot up the nursing home in Carthage, N.C., where his newly estranged wife worked.

-- Lovelle Mixon, 26, a paroled felon, struggling to get his life back on track by pimping, who shot four cops in Oakland, Calif. -- before eventually being shot himself.

-- Twenty-eight-year-old Michael McLendon, child of divorce, living with his mother and boycotting family funerals because he hated his relatives, who killed 10 of those relatives and their neighbors in Samson, Ala.

It might make more sense to outlaw men than guns. Or divorce. Or crack. Or to prohibit felons from having guns. Except we already outlaw crack and felons owning guns and yet still, somehow, Wong got crack and Mixon got a gun.

After being pulled over for a routine traffic violation, Lovelle Mixon did exactly what they teach in driver's ed by immediately shooting four cops. Mixon's supporters held a posthumous rally in his honor, claiming he shot the cops only in "self-defense," which I take it includes the cop Mixon shot while the officer was lying on the ground.

I guess Mixon also raped that 12-year-old girl in "self-defense." Clearly, the pimping industry has lost a good man. I wish I'd known him. I tip my green velvet fedora with the dollar signs all over it to him. Why do the good ones always die young? Pimps, I mean.

Liberals tolerate rallies on behalf of cop-killers, but they prohibit law-abiding citizens working at community centers in Binghamton, N.Y., from being armed to defend themselves from disturbed, crack-addicted America-haters like Jiverly Wong.

It's something in liberals' DNA: They think they can pass a law eliminating guns and nuclear weapons, but teenagers having sex is completely beyond our control.

The demand for more gun control in response to any crime involving a gun is exactly like Obama's response to North Korea's openly belligerent act of launching a long-range missile this week: Obama leapt to action by calling for worldwide nuclear disarmament.

If the SAT test were used to determine how stupid a liberal is, one question would be: "The best defense against lawless rogues who possess _______ is for law-abiding individuals to surrender their own _______________."

Correct answer: Guns. We would also have accepted nuclear weapons.

Obama explained that "the United States has a moral responsibility" to lead disarmament efforts because America is "the only nuclear power to have used a nuclear weapon."

So don't go feeling all morally superior to a country whose business model consists of exporting heroin, nuclear bombs and counterfeit U.S. dollars, and of importing Swedish prostitutes, you yahoo Americans with your little flag lapel pins.

On the other hand, the Japanese haven't acted up much in the last, say, 64 years ...

Fortunately, our sailors didn't wait around for Obama to save them when Somali pirates boarded their ship this week. Stop right now or I'll ask the U.N. to remind the "international community" that "the U.S. is not at war with Somali pirates."

Gun-toting Americans are clearly more self-sufficient than the sissy Europeans. This is great news for everyone except Barney Frank, who's always secretly wondered what it would be like to be taken by a Somali pirate.

Police -- whom I gather liberals intend to continue having guns -- and intrepid U.N. resolution drafters can't be everywhere, all the time.

If a single civilian in that Binghamton community center had been armed, instead of 14 dead, there might have only been one or two -- including the shooter. In the end, the cops didn't stop Wong. His killing spree ended only when he decided to stop, and he killed himself.

"The shooter will eventually run out of ammo" strategy may not be the best one for stopping deranged multiple murderers.

But it's highly unlikely that any community center in the entire state would be safe from a disturbed former crack-addict like Wong because New York's restrictive gun laws require a citizen to prove he has a need for a gun to obtain a concealed carry permit.

Instead of having Planned Parenthood distribute condoms in schools, they ought get the NRA to pass out revolvers. It would save more lives.
 
Last edited:
That will change a lot of minds.

Ann (and the other blowhards on both sides) are like professional 'rasslers. They just spew a bunch of junk that will entertain simpletons and get people to pay attention to them.

Look at me. I'm controversial! Whatever.
 
I must be a simpleton then, because I agree with the whole rant/diatribe and found it entertaining. It did not change my mind, however.
 
Ann (and the other blowhards on both sides) are like professional 'rasslers. They just spew a bunch of junk that will entertain simpletons and get people to pay attention to them.
.

As opposed to the well reasoned and intellectually stimulating rhetoric coming from the anti's?:rolleyes:

Wow, if Ann Coulture was any stupider or more opportunistic...

Have you read your daily dose from the Brady Campaign? Within hours of blood being spilled those vultures were already beating the drum for more "sensible gun laws".:barf: I'd call that "opportunistic".
 
She is an advocate..., but through her own radical tactics, she has made herself relevant and obsolete at the same time. Want to kiss her on the forehead one minute... then punch her in the back of reality the next.

In the grand scheme of things, I say she is a liability.
 
Ann Coulter is a blight. The only time I mourn her existence is in the rare occasions that I agree with her.
 
The voting public has become more educated on both sides. The "wingers" on both sides will be seen as radicals. IMO, their lives are short lived. The liberal and conservative ideals will continue to be debated, but the Ann Coulter's and Michael Moore's of the world will be less relevant.

I think Ann and Michael have been good on both sides for generating interest and debate in the political process.

I believe that these debates will generate more interest and research in future elections, and render the pundits to the sidelines.

Wishful thinking maybe.
 
The voting public has become more educated on both sides. The "wingers" on both sides will be seen as radicals.

I disagree with this. If it were true, Obama would never have been elected, being the "winger" that he is.
 
Ann (and the other blowhards on both sides) are like professional 'rasslers. They just spew a bunch of junk that will entertain simpletons and get people to pay attention to them.

Wow, if Ann Coulture was any stupider or more opportunistic...

The "wingers" on both sides will be seen as radicals. IMO, their lives are short lived. The liberal and conservative ideals will continue to be debated, but the Ann Coulter's and Michael Moore's of the world will be less relevant.

You know, I consider myself fairly wll educated, fairly committed to right versus wrong principles, instead of political leanings of one way or the other, and I would seriously like one of the people that has a problem with what Ann said in this column, to stand up and tell me what she said that is so doggone wrong.

Any takers?
 
This is really heading into politics and is going to get banned if it doesn't veer back.....

And btw, I agree with the rant, but she still looks like a man.
 
I disagree with this. If it were true, Obama would never have been elected, being the "winger" that he is

And Bush was neutral/centrist/independent?

Give me a break!!!

I did not vote for Obama, but I appreciate his candor.

I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. I may not agree with all his policies, but I appreciate his attempts to keep the public informed and engaged.

Republicans/conservatives have historically touted small government and personal responsibility, yet the Bush administration operated in secrecy and "big brother" mode. This did not promote public engagement and involvement.

He may not get re-elected and you may not agree with his policies, but I think Obama has created an interest and a public sense of involvement that will transcend his administration.

I believe this will render the pundits to the sidelines.
 
This is really heading into politics and is going to get banned if it doesn't veer back.....

Sad if it is closed, because this gets at the heart of gun control, it is a mindset that has no logic, no reason, no reality, just pie in the sky wishful thinking that we can all sit around holding hands and singing Kum-Bay-Yah.

It isn't political any further than simply stating if the shoe fits, wear the damn shoe!

I don't care if you are a Republican, Democrat, Independent, Libertarian, Socialist, Communist, or any other political affiliation. If you can't wrap your head around the idea that guns or any other weapon for that matter, are not the problem; rather than accepting that society with all of its ills, and its mentally unhinged participants are the real problem, then there is little to no hope for you.

And if you or your political party are calling for gun control or more gun laws based on the sick idea that somehow it will stop people from doing bad things, then quite frankly the problem is with you or your political party, regardless of which it may be.
 
You know, I consider myself fairly wll educated, fairly committed to right versus wrong principles, instead of political leanings of one way or the other, and I would seriously like one of the people that has a problem with what Ann said in this column, to stand up and tell me what she said that is so doggone wrong.

Any takers?
Cam,

I don't disagree with anything Ann said, I just don't think she should be the spokesperson for our cause.
 
remander, danweasal


So Coulter stands up for gun rights, points out that the recent tragedies wouldn't have been stopped by gun restrictions, and because you have a political axe to grind you completely dismiss what she has to say? Thats' smart. So why don't you take her place then, and become the standard-bearer for gun rights. Oh wait, this is a forum where you can criticize at will while accomplishing absolutely nothing other than coming off as a ....what was the term used....blowhard? stupid(er)?.:banghead:

I assume that we'll see the press release for your book and get to watch you talk about it on which channel again? Can't wait to see it...:rolleyes:
 
TRGRHPY: +1000

I don't disagree with anything Ann said, I just don't think she should be the spokesperson for our cause.

Love her or hate her she hit the nail right on the head on this one.

Remember a broken clock is right, twice a day. :)

I wouldn't care if it was Michael Moore, Rosie O' Donnell, Barack, Hillary, Joe Biden, Erik Holder, Richard Daley, Bill Maher, Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, Rush, Ted Kennedy, or any other person most of us either despise or love, the bottom line is right is right, wrong is wrong.

Good for Ann for taking action and exposing the root of the problems here, rather than the scapegoat.

I get so tired of the idiotic, and I mean idiotic, approach that the media has towards guns and gun rights. If any of the jackasses would spend a day, a week, or a month learning about guns, associating with other gun owners, and most importantly learning the truth about guns and their uses in the U.S., and then if they still had the same opinions, I would respect what they had to say.

But the regular hatchet jobs are pathetic, frustrating, and redundant.

Thank goodness for people like Ann Coulter, Ted Nugent, John Stossel, Tom Selleck, Glen Beck, Charleton Heston (miss that guy), or other famous people that have a platform, and use it to further gun rights.
 
Wow, if Ann Coulture was any stupider

I have always been amused by those that attack someone like Coutler (or Al Franken if you prefer) as being stupid. One may not agree with their positions but they are clearly not stupid people. Coutler is a graduate of Michigan State Law. She has written several best sellers and is a highly successful individual. I suppose she lucked into all those accomplishments. I dare say that many of those that call her stupid could never be admitted to a school like that, nor graduate near the top of the class if they were. I doubt they have published any works, let alone best sellers. I am not saying that being right and being smart must ever coincide. Calling Ms. Coutler stupid is more absurd than anything she has ever said. Of course we still must address the fact that “she still looks like a man.” After all that is pertinent to her arguments, right? Also I think it is laugable to say people like coutler or Rush etc are irrelevant. The have vast audiences. You may not care one iota what they say. They may not say anythng worthwhile. The fact is there are many people paying attention to what they say.

Rather than resulting to school yard name calling why don’t you address the issues and point out what you believe is mistaken in the piece. I have a feeling why you don’t; it is, after all, much easier to dismiss someone we don’t like as being “stupid.” Sound arguments require more thought and consideration than ad hominem responses. Further dismissing something solely based on the source without full consideration or addressing the arguments made reeks of the extreme partisanship some of you are condemning.
As for those calling her opportunistic, that is an interesting charge since it is a response piece to cries for gun control that have emerged in recent events. It seems laughable to call a policy debate over salient events opportunistic. Political commentators by virtue of their job address current affairs.

People are entitled to believe that Coutler might be more harm than help due to her polarizing nature (which can even be seen in this thread of people who likely would have been applauding such arguments). That is different from her being stupid, a blow hard, looking like a man, or even being wrong. For those that feel that she is a detriment and not an aide I won’t tell you that you are wrong but I will ask what you are doing to preserve gun rights.
 
Thank goodness for people like Ann Coulter, Ted Nugent, John Stossel, Tom Selleck, Glen Beck, Charleton Heston (miss that guy), or other famous people that have a platform, and use it to further gun rights.


You know, I can disagree with each one of these people, either with something that they have said or something that they believe. However until our GunRights Messiah shows himself to the world and starts performing miracles, these people will do just fine. I will stick to speaking to friends and acquaintences about our rights and leave the public appearances to someone more gifted than myself.
 
remander, danweasal


So Coulter stands up for gun rights, points out that the recent tragedies wouldn't have been stopped by gun restrictions, and because you have a political axe to grind you completely dismiss what she has to say? Thats' smart. So why don't you take her place then, and become the standard-bearer for gun rights. Oh wait, this is a forum where you can criticize at will while accomplishing absolutely nothing other than coming off as a ....what was the term used....blowhard? stupid(er)?.

I assume that we'll see the press release for your book and get to watch you talk about it on which channel again? Can't wait to see it...

Dude,

You have missed the whole point!!

No matter how "right on" the argument is, it is only successful if it reaches the people that don't think like you and I do. Ann Coulture has made herself a cartoon character. Nobody on the right takes her serious! It would be like someone on the left listening to an argument from Al Sharpton.

She has marginalized herself and no matter how "right" she may be she has rendered herself ineffective, except to reinforce her base. That's all good and dandy, but that isn't changing the mind of any "anti".
 
i´d rather have Mickey Mouse on my side - than Ann Coulter.
Most of the time it sounds like underinformed oversimplified
frustrated crap.
 
rogerjames: No, I haven't missed the point. You need to think of this as more of a chess game. Is Sharpton a winger? yep, but he gets things done, and people hear what he has to say. And while I don't support him and mostly think that he's a hack, I have agreed with one or two things that have come out of his face. Coulter is the same way. Even if only 5% of what she says gets through to someone, it's still more than if she hadn't said anything at all. She does serve a purpose, ALL the chess pieces do.

Until you can talk someone "pure" into becoming the media darling for gun rights, I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss her.
 
You have missed the whole point!!

No matter how "right on" the argument is, it is only successful if it reaches the people that don't think like you and I do. Ann Coulture has made herself a cartoon character. Nobody on the right takes her serious! It would be like someone on the left listening to an argument from Al Sharpton.

Respectfully, I must disagree. If Al Sharpton had written this column or my absolute all time favorite, Jesse Jackson, I would read it, agree with it, and pass it on to people to read, both to get the shocked look on their face, but also because what they were writing was RIGHT!

As I mentioned before, I don't care WHO the messenger is, the message is what is important. Unfortunately, most times we find people we don't agree with, putting out messages that we don't agree with. :rolleyes: Imagine that.

I would echo what some are saying in regards to the following. If you care about gun rights, but don't care for those that fight for gun rights, care to enlighten any of us on what you have done, currently are doing, or plan to do, to further our gun rights?

Personally, it seems to me as I have been reading posts for a few years here on THR, that there is an inverse relationship that is apparent, which shows the higher a persons disgust with vocal proponents of the 2nd amendment, the lower priority gun rights rank on their list of freedoms.

In this past election it was no different, if I had to hear one more time that someone wasn't a one issue voter, I was going to hit myself in the head. We get it, you may not be a 1 issue voter, but you for sure let us know that the 2nd amendment isn't at or near the top of your list.

Just my opinion, but I get sick and tired of reading whining, belittling posts here on THR about how much damage people like Ted Nugent or this time Ann Coulter do to "our cause".

If you can do better, please stand up and make it happen.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top