Are we sending Bombs to Trejbal's home?

[Warren]

If these anti-gun types really thought we were dangerous, unstable and prone to attacking those who anger us, they wouldn't anger us.

It would be like taking a baseball bat to a hornet's nest.

But yet they keep on with their rhetorical and political attacks, why? Because deep down they KNOW we are not going to go ape poo on them and, in fact, aside from letters or phone calls no action will be taken against the anti-gun zealot.

So it is not fear of us that drives them, it is their sick desire to have everything under their control to make every activity possible need a permit and to be the ones who give out the permission slips.

They consider us misguided children who need to be shown a better way. That patronizing and condecending tone oozes out of almost everything they write and say.

And this is why they do not listen to any of the pro-freedom arguments. They cannot believe that our arguments could have merit due to our child-like level of maturity.

To them we are nothing but toddlers found with a pair of scissors. We explain why we want them, but it only sounds like babble to the antis.

"Look! How cute is that? He is trying to talk like a big boy!"

So I think this guy knew the package was not a bomb, but he could not resist making an issue out of it. He knows that there will be people who will believe it was a bomb, regardless of what is said in the media and that this will get imbedded in the local psyche. In a few years many people will "know" that gunnies send bombs to people who anger them. Just like there are many folks who "know" GreenPeace blew up a French warship in Auckland harbor and when presented with proof that it was the other way around still hold on to their idiotic belief.

With one column he gets us twice. Not a bad job of proagandizing.

[/rant to the choir]

 

[vis-à-vis]

Bob, if you like Christian theology I spent the last three years of my life in full time study of the scriptures in school and have been involved in ministry for quite some time now. I would be more than happy to discuss 1 Corinthians with you especially the concept of Charity. The idea that Paul puts forth about us now looking through a glass and seeing the world, indeed ourselves, with distortion means that we do not yet have full understanding. As we mature we put off childish things, and ultimately with the return of the Lord (or in Glory) we will see with perfect clarity all things. And the word "charity" rendered by the King James Version is better rendered "love," which is the true meaning found in the Greek (agape). And if God's attribute of love is the definition of love, then love is mercy for those who deserve it not (see also Matthew 22:34-40). Perhaps your biggest problem with what I've said is that it is a snare to your pride (see below)?

But if you would read my posts I do not definitely state anything one way or the other except to examine the events of the last few days and draw some reasonable inferences and primarily say "we ought not do that."

If you examine my posts with a decent level of reading comprehension you will understand how I am using the word "we" especially when further explained with the concept of being each others representative to a greater or lesser degree. I will not engage that discussion any further. It is as plain as I can make it. But more than that I have not damned anybody (and no, there are no good people cf. Romans chapter 3). I have said non-Christians are not held to the high standard the Lord has laid forth. I do not expect most people to share my view (Most people are not Christian). Without Christ all manners of iniquity are possible. With Christ all manners of iniquity are possible. The difference is that the Christian recognizes he has sinned against the Lord who has saved him. He is forgiven because he is a child of God being made perfect.

So what Law Enforcement Officer would not draw as a reasonable inference that gun owners, enraged and emotional, have threatened Trejbal as a possibility? And someone here may certainly do such a thing, which is a concept you find absurd. Why is it possible? Because we all have the ability to fail and fail greatly. Please, will the perfect man here who is free from irrational behavior please acknowledge yourself?

I got a reply from Trejbal asking as to whether he is being threatened. Here it is:

Thank you for your concern, [Vis-a-Vis]. While I cannot go into specifics since I do not know who you are, I have indeed received a number of threats up to and including death.

I am inclined to believe him. I didn't do what he did and I'm receiving a high level of hostility. I cannot begin to imagine some of the responses he has received.

Bob, are you my enemy? I feel you are more angry at me than you need to be. I do not intend to offend any of you, nor definitively say you're trying to blow up Trejbal. Perhaps to save people the energy of wanting to throw eggs at me, we should close this thread? It is clear I am being more misunderstood than not. Otherwise I wouldn't have to clarify myself when I read your responses.

 

[Robert Hairless]

No, vis-a-vis, I've done all I care to do with you.

I'm not interested that Christian J. Trejbal told you he had received death threats. I wasn't interested when he called the police to handle the bomb threat. Nor was I interested when the police said it was not a bomb but a package of shipping materials. I was interested when you assumed that people here were the kind of people who would ship a bomb or fake bomb to Christian J. Trejbal, and I told you clearly why your assumption interested me.

What a question: you actually ask whether I am your "enemy." I've spent a lot of time and thought trying to explain why your thinking is twisted, in the hope that you would understand how badly you're behaving here.

I am convinced now that both you and Christian J. Trejbal are on the same wavelength, so neither of you interests me in the least. Such people make me uneasy. A 23-year-old like you, who knows so much that he is serene in his ability to judge, is beyond me.

You are now officially somebody else's project.

 

[pacodelahoya]

Robert,

I am 43 years old and don't know squat. Can you help me? Be advised, it would be a project of gargantuan proportions!

vis a vis,

It would seem as if you have taken Trebals side on this NON ISSUE. So be it, just don't expect much sympathy from this board.

 

[30 cal slob]

do "f-bombs" over the phone count?

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

(just a joke guys).

 

[3fgburner]

Regarding the boycott note

Here is my first compiled list of advertiser email addresses for the Roanoke Times. There will eventually be a second list, but it may be a day or two in coming because it takes a VERY LONG time to compile such a list. Please notice that at the bottom of the list are RT email addresses. You may want to CC: all of these RT pinheads so they can get a gander at the number of advertisers we are contacting.

CNGERMS, we need to make one set of deletions here. I got a response from one of the agents at radfordrealtors.com:

I want to preface this e-mail with saying that I CANNOT speak for the company and I am not in any position of authority with the company when it comes to advertising, etc. That being said, I personally am very unhappy with Mr. Trejbal’s comments. Specifically, it angered me to read that he likens a concealed handgun permit holder to a registered sex offender! That was a truly outrageous and inappropriate way for him to vent his contempt for the second amendment rights of you and I (and everyone else, for that matter). I share your concerns, but encourage you not to judge the agents based on company advertising. We, as agents, cannot opt out of the “agent page” our company runs in the paper.

I sincerely respect your efforts though; these people with the Roanoke Times need to be held accountable.

I'd say that the prudentialradfordrealtors.com addresses should probably be deleted.

 

[molonlabe]

I find the thread "Are we sending Bombs to Trejbal's home? " Inflamatory and insulting to the members here, I don't know about anyone else. Cindy Sheenan received threats, Bush receives threats, and abortion doctors receive threats. So all the right ring and left wing and Christans are all terroist, right. Go take your broad brush elsewhere.

 

[feedthehogs]

I talked to my attorney, and lawyers here can chime in, about the billboard idea.

He said publishing the guys name and address is one thing. Adding that he is unarmed could be considered an invitation to those less social than most of us to pay him a visit.

If that happens, then who ever initiated the billboard, including the billboard company could be liable just as we have charged.

While the case might not be a slam dunk, its certain some lawyer will take it on a contingincy basis and the poster is left with a hugh legal defense bill even though he won.

If found out it was done by a bunch of gun owners/second amendment people, it would certainly be a black eye on all of us.

What has been done has already sent a clear message to those who would put CCW holders in danger.

 

[shield20]

Warren -
EXCELLENT POST!

Read this crap - and see EXACTLY what you said in practice; we should all take this bull VERY personally - these elitist and naive asses are talking about YOU!


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...031301622.html
(sorry this a re-post - but fits in well here)

On Gun Control, the Kid in Us Can Cost Lives
By Courtland Milloy
Wednesday, March 14, 2007; B01

Perhaps it's my inner child, but a part of me secretly cheers the libertarian. Especially those wild and crazy guys at the Cato Institute. The Washington think tank thinks government ought not try to stop people from using whatever drugs they want -- cocaine, heroin, alcohol, cigarettes, you name it -- or from gambling or watching porn online.

And now it's won its argument to let you keep a handgun in your home in the District, one of the most violent cities in the nation.

It's as if Cato took its motto from the Isley Brothers' 1969 hit "It's Your Thing (Do What You Wanna Do)."

Right on, says my inner child; you can't tell me who to sock it to.

In shooting down the city's strict gun control law last week, a three-judge panel agreed with arguments by Cato that the Second Amendment gives us the right to own handguns and that we are not too clumsy and ill-tempered to handle them safely. The libertarian view is: Trust the people more than the government.

Thomas Jefferson once said: "Men by their constitutions are naturally divided into two parties: 1) Those who fear and distrust the people. . . . 2) Those who identify themselves with the people, have confidence in them, cherish and consider them as the most honest and safe . . . depository of the public interest."

Catoites, and my inner child, fall into the latter category. But the adult knows better. Several studies have shown that a gun in the home is up to 22 times more likely to be used for suicide or to kill a family member than to fend off a burglar. Surely the Founding Fathers would not have given the right to bear arms to a homegrown militia that was more likely to shoot itself in the foot than stop a British invasion.

Of course, the kid promises never to throw another tantrum and to use his gun only to practice his spin-around quick draw, just in case al Qaeda comes knocking. The adult hopes he doesn't accidentally shoot the neighbor.

Robert A. Levy, a senior fellow at Cato and co-counsel for the plaintiffs in the gun ban case, wrote Monday in The Washington Post: "Anti-gun regulations don't address the deep-rooted causes of violent crime -- such as illegitimacy, unemployment, dysfunctional schools, and drug and alcohol abuse. The cures are complex and protracted. But that doesn't mean we have to become passive prey for criminal predators."

Yeah, listen to that! says the inner child. A poll by MTV in 2001 found that 1 in 25 kids surveyed carried a gun to school because they were afraid they'd have to defend themselves from someone else with a weapon.

But the adult knows where this can lead. As the Bush administration has demonstrated, self-defense can sometimes require "preemptive strikes" -- or murder, as it's called when scared school kids employ the tactic.

It's easy to understand why people would believe that having a gun in the home makes them safe. It's the stuff of television crime shows. The inner child eats it up, too. You hear the footsteps coming up the stairs. The wife is asleep next to you, the kids snoring in the next room. You ease from the bed even as you slide that Sig Sauer .40-caliber semiautomatic from under your pillow, do that quick-draw spin you've been practicing and hit the intruder right between the eyes. You're a hero, and everybody now knows to knock hard before coming into your house.

Except you're more likely to end up like Jennifer Guthrie, a 25-year-old who purchased a gun after someone tried to rob her while walking home in Columbus, Ohio, several years ago. The gun discharged while she was handling it, the bullet punctured her abdomen, and she died a week later. In the District, between 2001 and 2004, police reported 51 homicides attributed to domestic violence, the majority involving guns.

The federal government's National Crime Victimization Survey routinely estimates that each year 100,000 Americans use a firearm to defend themselves. But as David Hemenway of Harvard University's Injury Control Research Center asks, "Who knows what 'self-defense' means?" From interviews that he conducted from 1996 to 1999 involving about 4,500 respondents, Hemenway found that most acknowledged acts of self-defense were, in fact, "hostile gun displays" -- say, a husband pulling a gun on his wife to make her stop yelling at him.

The inner child notes that FBI statistics show that nearly 40 percent of U.S. households reportedly have at least one gun, and the kid figures that this must deter some burglars. But the adult knows that other burglars might be attracted by the prospect of finding a gun in the house and that many firearms end up on the streets after being stolen from someone's home.

Nevertheless, my inner child wants the illusion of power and security, and maybe a 40-ounce cold brew to go with that .44-caliber cold steel. The adult says no way.

E-mail:[email protected]

 

[Cosmoline]

If found out it was done by a bunch of gun owners/second amendment people, it would certainly be a black eye on all of us.

If who found out *WHAT* was done? NOTHING WAS SENT TO HIS HOUSE!