Fudds are dangerous to your rights

[rick newland]

The tennessean news paper is nothing but liberal trash. The only thing I would use it for is toliet paper...Well maybe not since I would never buy one.

 

[meef]

Posted:

They're far too trusting and naive to realize what the Democrats are actually up to.

Responded:

I hate to break it to you but the Republicans, as a party, are not any better than Democrats on the RKBA.

Although I'm not the original poster of that comment, I'd have to disagree with you on that one.

Over the last six years with a Republican congress and president, how many bills have you seen proposed by them to restrict/remove your right to firearms?

Now that the Democrats are back on top in congress, how long did it take for AWB II to become a favored item?

Like the Republicans or not - I haven't seen them itching to end the Second Amendment. Unlike those other guys.

 

[bogie]

WE are dangerous to OUR rights. Unless we can band together, and that means that AR boys partnering with old fat hunters, we're essentially sunk.

 

[Phyphor]

Over the last six years with a Republican congress and president, how many bills have you seen proposed by them to restrict/remove your right to firearms?

How many did they repeal? Why is it whenever they were in power, people were bitching about them not repealing those bills, and passing other stuff that was 'dangerous to our other rights,' and now that it's dems in power, suddenly everything was great back then? :banghead:

While they're nowhere near as bad on gun rights as dems are, they sure weren't beacons of goodness and light on that subject either.

Myself, I'd rather throw the whole lot of 'em out (dems and repubs) and put some libertarians up there. Enough of this 2 party childish "his side is worse than my side" - "No, your side is worse than mine" crap.

As to the Fudds, Cali's got it's share of the type, unfortunately. I wouldn't call them outright dangerous to our rights, at least not as much as internal bickering!

 

[ssr]

Check out this guys opinion, same paper.

http://www.tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070227/OPINION01/702270341

Give positive feedback if agree.

 

[meef]

How many did they repeal? Why is it whenever they were in power, people were bitching about them not repealing those bills, and passing other stuff that was 'dangerous to our other rights,' and now that it's dems in power, suddenly everything was great back then?

Didn't say it was great back then, just that it's likely to be much worse now.

While they're nowhere near as bad on gun rights as dems are, they sure weren't beacons of goodness and light on that subject either.

There. That was my point, too.

And I'll take lack of being beacons of goodness and light over being active rabid anti's when it comes to guns.

The lesser of two evils, as it were.

 

[Phyphor]

I'd...

Just like to do without the evil part. :banghead:

 

[hso]

My letter supporting Mr. West's article.

Thank you Mr. West. Good to see facts presented instead of Mr. King's earlier fearmongering fantasies. I can only wonder what the real objective of gun bigots like Mr. King and Congresswoman McCarthy may be if the facts don't support what they keep repeating over and over again.

The FBI's national violent crime statistics for 2005 (the latest year available) show less than 5% of the deaths due to firearms in Tennessee were due to rifles. Not "assault weapons", but ALL rifles combined. The same data show that over 3 times as many people were killed by being punched and kicked as were killed by rifles. Somehow I don't see rifles, even those with scary cosmetic features, as being any threat to the citizens of Tennessee.

 

[ArfinGreebly]

A Little Harsh

I'm afraid I was a bit harsh with the lad.

Let's see, do you think pretty much anyone who wants an assault weapon should have one, or do you think that's something that should be limited to law enforcement agencies and the military?

Why on Earth would a free people want to disarm themselves while their police and military carry machine guns? What idiot, after watching decades of genocides, would propose that??

Stupid man. "Assault weapon?" You think we're going to fall for this fallacious term a second time?

If you think that's a no-brainer, so did Congress when in 1994 they passed the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, which required domestic gun manufacturers to stop the production of assault weapons. This ban applied to 19 highly specific types of semi-automatic weapons and ammunition clips holding more than 10 rounds. The ban did not apply to weapons for the military or for use by police units.

Stop the production of assault weapons? Moron. They weren't making any. Congress applied a made-up label and outlawed perfectly ordinary rifles.

No Brainer? Yup. They were brainless then, and they're brainless now.

The ban on assault weapons made such good sense that when the law came up for renewal in 2004, the smart money was that it would be extended. Even President Bush announced his support. Without going into the excruciating details — boil them down to a tight election, partisan politics, and a hyperactive NRA — the president did nothing to assure the law's continuance, and it was allowed to "sunset."

The president did nothing to . . . abridge our rights further? How sad. Imagine, a president failing to trample the rights of the common citizen. What next?

Absolute knowledge of threat

Just last week, USA Today quoted Scott Knight, chairman of the firearms committee of the International Association of Chiefs of Police, who noted that more and more police departments were adding powerful semi-automatic weapons to patrol units and replacing existing weapons with military-style arms. Knight spoke of the upgrade as a response to "the absolute knowledge that more higher-caliber weapons are on the street since the expiration of the ban."

Yeah, that's what we want: a police force that's just an extension of the military. Fabulous. Officer friendly, with his helmet and machine gun. The very image of community security.

More higher-caliber weapons on the street? Wow. Since they were NEVER PURCHASED ON LEGAL CHANNELS, I WONDER WHERE THEY CAME FROM?? Completely not a function of the stupid ban one way or the other. 'Red Herring' and 'Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc' fallacies. Try again, lying twit.

Hunters and sport shooters are rightfully concerned about any law that might adversely affect their sport. Designed for accuracy and fired from the shoulder, semi-automatic hunting rifles fall outside the assault weapon definition, as do some 670 specifically exempted hunting firearms. Assault weapons, spray-fired from the waist and using magazines with scores of bullets, are what the ban can take off the streets.

Hunters and sport shooters?? Another red herring. Why not golfers? Golf isn't constitutionally protected either. Or fishing. Yeah, fishing. Also not protected. Ownership of weapons IS protected, you dishonest shill.

Spray-fired from the waist??? Reality-by-Hollywood. Ignorant cretin.

You will hear the argument that there already is an assault weapon ban — that the only assault weapon is a fully automatic weapon like a machine gun, and those are already banned. The NRA likes to call the "semi-auto" a single trigger-pull weapon, implying a slowness of fire that very simply is not the case. A hair trigger, a fast finger, a magazine of as many as 50 bullets, and a violent intent can bring mayhem that other weapons cannot.

Yes, violent intent can bring mayhem. The rest is another red herring, and very irrelevant. With this kind of mis-information, how is it you manage to hold a job?

Every major law enforcement organization in America supported the assault weapons ban when it was first enacted, and again when it was time to extend it. Presidents Reagan, Ford and Clinton all favored the ban and supported its passage.

Argumentum ad populum (argument by the masses) combined with 'appeal to authority' fallacy. Apart from being wrong, it's also quite NOT the point.

Three years ago, a survey by the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania showed that fully 68 percent of Americans supported renewing the assault weapon ban.

You would overturn the constitution with some bogus survey results?

The ban on assault weapons is legislation all of us who believe in the Second Amendment, all of us who love to hunt, all of us who believe in most of what the NRA believes in — all of us — can and should support.

A ban on any weapons is a direct violation of the Second Amendment, you lying sack of O-rings. Do you also beat your wife because you believe in the sanctity of marriage?

You would commit a high crime under the color of law and you think "all of us" should support it?

You are -- evidenced by this missive -- both arrogant and dishonest, a pairing that's common enough, but you manage to be ignorant in the bargain. That's a real accomplishment.

I'm not going to try to educate you: you seem all too comfortable with your ignorance and pride. I can only hope the news of your willingness to lie and shill is more widely known. You certainly deserve to be discredited.

I hope I didn't hurt his feelings.

 

[cheygriz]

" In Germany, first they came for the communists, and I didn't stand up because I wasn't a communist. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't stand up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't stand up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the catholics, and I didn't stand up because I was a protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time, there was no one left to stand up."

Reverend Martin Niemoller, a Lutheran pastor in Nazi Germany
==========================================================

In America, first they came for the machine guns, and I didn't stand up because I didn't own a machine gun. Then they came for the semi-autos, and.......................................

Hunters, target shooters, clay birders,.......Is there a lesson here??

 

[ArfinGreebly]

Mr. West's article

Mr. West's observations could well have been written by one of our own High Roaders.

Well worth the read. Thanx for the link.

Well, Mr. West, I must compliment your analysis.

Reasoned and accurate.

The point about the term being used as a "wedge issue" is spot on. Sadly, it worked rather too well, and there is much work to be done in fixing that state of affairs.

I am encouraged at this breath of fresh air, this venture into truth, especially in today's atmosphere of hysteria promoted by the shills of socialism.

If your voice can be amplified and more widely heard, there is yet hope.

Thank you.

An article well worth repeating.

 

[rickomatic]

They need to be educated, not vilified.

Amen!

Just don't think that all will be educated. Only those with open minds will.
My dear 93 year old father in law who is the one who introduced me to guns, through hunting, after I married his daughter, is one of those Fudds. He grew up with guns, hunted all his life, and even to this day has a .38 for home protection. But, he is one with the mindset that those "assault rifles" need to go. It might just be a generational thing. I don't know. But, at this point, there is no point to trying to change his mind. I will allow him his opinion, and spend my "education" time on those with more willing ears.

Besides......I would like, someday, to get my hands on that old Krag in his closet.....hehehe.....

 

[bogie]

For all the geniuses who proclaim that since the Republicans are only 95% on our side, we should vote for someone else:

The Democrats are pretty much 95% against us. Are you actually suggesting that we have a viable choice here? Because a vote AGAINST a Democrat is a vote against gun control, but a vote AGAINST a Republican is a vote that the Democrats don't have to worry about - and a vote FOR gun control.

Remember: Not everyone who is a member of this forum is a fan of the 2nd amendment. Some of them like to see us fragment.

 

[ssr]

People may not like the current Republicans, me among them, but at least we have been pretty safe knowing there was no anti-gun legislation coming, and even had the Crime Bill sunset, despite whatever talking was going on.

In this last election, gun control was not even a topic that was discussed, but now with the Dems gaining power, all we are hearing is more and more about how we need more gun control and enacting another "assault weapon" "ban". Just imagine what we will hear and see and what will happen if a Democrat president is elected.

 

[bogie]

There was a reason why gun control wasn't discussed.

The Democrats had a strategy. It was "vote for anyone but a republican."

That was pretty much it.

And it worked. With a LOT of you guys.

Welcome to the brave new world.

 

[BigG]

For all the geniuses who proclaim that since the Republicans are only 95% on our side, we should vote for someone else:

Bogie - I had to laugh when I read that. That is so true and I think the same everytime I read some guy ordain himself as one of the TRUE FAITH libertarians.

Remember: Not everyone who is a member of this forum is a fan of the 2nd amendment. Some of them like to see us fragment.

Very true and that's why I hardly acknowledge those disruptive individuals any more.

 

[qajaq59]

Life would be so much easier if we could just ban fools instead of guns.

 

[Koobuh]

"For all the geniuses who proclaim that since the Republicans are only 95% on our side, we should vote for someone else:"

If it really were 95% on our side, it wouldn't be such a bone of contention. In reality, the last congress was a cesspool of corruption and uselessness (much as any congress has ever been, one may note, though the latest one especially so), and did not earn our votes by doing what we wanted them to.

So, we booted them, either by staying home or holding our nose and voting for the other guy. The result has been that a large number of supposedly gun-friendly Democrats are now sitting in congress, and what should have been an orgy of legislative efforts toward gun bans, etc. in retribution for daring to depose them from their rightful seats of power, has been near silence. Beyond the continual drumbeat of one or two true believers, the Democrats realize that they carried the day on gun rights, and they are walking a fine edge; at least until they recover full control of both houses and the whitehouse.

For what it's worth, Democrat and Republican has come to mean 'what color do you want the wallpaper to be?' rather than fundamental differences of opinion on governance. Both parties are choking on corruption and statist dogma, clamoring for their piece of the electoral power-pie so they can get back into the ham-fest. Truly loathsome, is all I can come up with to describe the current national leadership- in all three branches.

The complete disregard held by the legislative when faced with the unfettered power mongering of the executive is further inexcusable. I truly hope some new, hostile blood in congress will finally put a leash on GWB's executive abuse.
Though I don't really believe it will happen- they're all cut from the same piece of moth-eaten snot rag, and want the same thing in the end. Total control.

 

[Zero_DgZ]

bogie:
WE are dangerous to OUR rights. Unless we can band together, and that means that AR boys partnering with old fat hunters, we're essentially sunk.

Yes! Thank you.

(I also said this, in more words and a more roundabout way, and was also ignored. Seems it's more interesting to bicker about donkeys and elephants instead of engaging the brain.)

 

[hso]

If you're complaining about articles like Mr. King's without taking the time to send in a calm rebuttal then you're not helping our cause. If you're praising Mr. West you should send support his way in the paper.

The misguided and fence sitters won't be swayed to our side by villifying everyone that doesn't agree with us. Only by using persuasive arguments that they can digest easily will we gain any ground with the folks that aren't hoplophobes or aren't using this issue for their private gain.

The other side of the coin is that our supporters who put themselves out in the open for attack need to be supported by us in turn. At the very least a simple, "Yes! Thankyou! It's a relief that someone is telling the truth about gun control." emailed or snailmailed in and sent to the media supporting them. And it doesn't matter whether it's a "liberal rag" or not. Send it anyway.