Ex Navy SEAL wants your 'salt rifle banned

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'd say that he has earned his right to have his own opinion.
Click to expand...

If you are basing that on his supposed credentials, then you are fooling yourself until they are actually vetted.

Besides, you don't have to earn a right to an opinion. It is called the 1st Amendment.
 
What ex-Navy MOS would refer to himself as an "automatic weaponsman," and what ex-Park Service type would refer to himself as a "federal law-enforcement ranger"? Odd choice of words, to me.

I'd say that he has earned his right to have his own opinion.
Click to expand...
One's right to an opinion has nothing to do with whether or not one has served in a particular unit in the military.

The thing is, the abject ignorance of Federal firearms law revealed by his opinion makes it clear that he doesn't really deserve to be taken seriously. He appears to know even less about civilian guns and gun law than I know about undersea commando ops using rebreathers, and that's saying a lot...
 
Just about ALL of the "high speed,low drag types" I had the pleasure of meeting when I was a grunt seemed to not speak on matters they were not versed in...Hey,I could be wrong;but this guy just does not remind me of any PJ's,SEALS,Army SPecial Ops or Marines that I met...hell;those guys were the definition of closed mouth-they could teach omerta to the old time Sicilians.
 
Thank you GP! With on quote and a single sentence ;you summed it all up more eloquently than I ever could have.
This guy ( must have been mentioned already!) gets me thinking about the old "Rastanarc"("I am the ONLY ONE IN THIS ROOM QUALIFIED TO HANDLE A .40 (BOOM! OWW!)clip from a few years back.
 
He certainly has a right to his opinion. and I have a right to ignore him. And I especially ignore people who trot out their qualifications from 40 years ago as a preface to their opinions.
 
This is my opinion:

Espousing or claiming to be a U.S. Navy SEAL is fine by me as long as you are prepared to prove documentation IE DD214.
If I walk up to you and ask you what kind of medal is that you are wearing and your reaction is that of terror then it can be plain as day that stolen valor might be present. I have walked up to supposed veterans and witnessed stolen valor before.
 
More than I wanted to know about him. Pages.

www.gcrg.org/bqr/8-1/crumbo.htm

"You wanted to capture them, because they provided more information. And if that didn’t work out..."

"Then you would just shoot them?

"Then you’d just shoot them, yeah."
_____________

"Well, we lost a good friend on the first tour, but we... Most everybody came back, we didn’t lose anyone besides my friend, the corpsman. The second tour was when I went over as a combat cameraman-type. It was good that I could go from platoon to platoon, I wasn’t stuck in one particular place. "
 
No, not my 'salt rifle!





173711.jpg
 
This guy doesn't seem to understand the simple fact that one of the reasons we still have a free republic is that we are a heavily armed society. IMHO
 
:barf:

I see nothing that purports him to be an expert on firearms or the constitution (the 2nd amendment specifically). If he had anything more than his feelings that certain firearms didn't belong in law abiding citizens hands, then I may read more into this guy.

Until then, his tactless, asinine, and ignorant remarks will be taken with a grain of salt.


That's akin to....

I've built and owned several hot rods, and I urge you guys to not buy or own any cars that I don't like, I see no reason to have them.

Very asinine and very tactless.
 
The thing is, he's already got his 10 minutes of media spotlight. He's already going back into the darkness as a butthurt, disenfranchised nobody. We need to spend less time attacking this guy and more time getting our own positive media attention.
 
assualt weapons serve no purpose to help an individual protect themselves..... but it was the tool of choice he used to protect himself on over 70 combat missions....


seems that even people familiar with firearms are still hypocrites when it gets down to the details of gun control
 
Ex-RAPIST backs preventitive castration laws

35 commentsApr. 24, 2009 12:00 AM

I'm a veteran pimp, a former Rapist with over 70 rapes, most of which I commited as an uneducated angry male with an overbearing mother and weak father.

I'm also a former child molestor for NAMBLA and a known pedophile who is a nationally reknown registered sex-offender. I clearly understand how dangerous Penises and Testicles are.

While necessary for the reproduction of society and certain bodily-waste activities, such appendages have absolutely no place in general American society. They are antithetical to responsible child planning, afford no realistic additional advantages for middle-class individuals, and in spite of the shrill rhetoric of some ideologically blinded male-rights groups, are not protected by the Constitution.

For the greater good, safety and sanity of the American people, I urge Congress, particularly Arizona's delegation, to support the reintroduction of a preventitive rape through chemical castration law that was introduced by fanatical femminist groups in Florida in 1997.

-- Jim Umbo, Not So Grand
 
There are probably more people who claim to be "ex" U.S. Navy Seals than there ever were seals in the first place. It's a curse attendant to the SpecOps community.
I have no reason to either believe this guy was, or was not a real Seal.
But assuming he was, that doesn't make him any more "one of us" than if he was a butcher, a baker or a candlestick maker.
He is quite wrong about so-called "assault weapons" not being protected by the second amendment, but lots of otherwise smart people can be wrong.
Getting through "Hell Week" without "ringing the bell" doesn't make you a Constitutionalist, or a liberal, or a conservative.
It makes you a U.S. Navy Seal.
It probably won't change you political opinions though.
 
"vets are entitled to be wrong about guns just as much as anyone else."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
There's an old saying ignorance of the law is no excuse. We're well past the time we're ignorance of the Bill of Rights 2nd Amendment RTKBA's is simply not acceptable. It comes down to it's not about shooting ducks and what part of "...shall not be infringed" don't you undertsand??

sent it as a email.
 
for those of us that would like to know if he is legit or not, I have some Quite Professionals looking into it. We should know by the end of tomorrow hopefully if this guy was really a seal or not.
 
Quote:
I'm a Vietnam veteran, a former Navy SEAL with over 70 combat operations, most of which I served as an automatic weaponsman.
I'm also a former federal law-enforcement ranger for the Park Service. I clearly understand how dangerous machine guns and assault rifles are.
We should add "and yet, I still don't know the definition of "assault weapon".
Click to expand...
I wouldn't have put it so tactfully. "...and yet I still don't know *** I'm talking about" is more like it. Too many people don't understand the relationship between the 1st and 2nd Amendments. Read about the Battle of Athens (1946) if you're not familiar with it (I reread it once or twice a year.) http://www.americanheritage.com/articles/magazine/ah/1985/2/1985_2_72.shtml

It's no coincidence that the right to bear arms *immediately* follows the right "...to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." in the Bill of Rights.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top