PANIC! They're Armed, Dangerous And Next Door

Status
Not open for further replies.

publius

Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2003
Messages
1,489
Location
Punta Gorda, FL
They're Armed, Dangerous And Next Door

This guy really has his panties in a wad because
if you ever needed a reason to install the mother of all panic rooms, consider this certifiably insane statistic: At the moment, across our fair beloved state, there are 354,552 Floridians with concealed weapons permits walking among us.

OH NO! One of us is sure to go postal very soon! Happens all the time! ;)
 
Hmm, and they passed numerous background checks, are considered law abiding by the powers that be, and are generaly good people.

Damn, what do they know that I don't?

Maybe I, as a thinking, tool user should buy a gun, get trained, get permited(spit) and stand shoulder to shoulder with my fellow Citizens.

The most setient thing the reporter said was "Bleat!"
 
If you are CCW then you are dangerous.

If you have a gun then you are going to go postal.

This guy is a pansy waste.... This is a really lowdown pathetic piece of sloppy journalism. Writing the edtior would do little to shed light on his discrepensies as I am sure the editor read this before it was published.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Uh, for the record, Daniel Ruth is a fixture at that paper, and is not going anywhere. He's kind of their lefty George Will imitation, and occasionally both amusing and correct on the issues.

Write to him! You'll probably get a snotty reply! It's good fun!
 
That guy seems able to write propaganda with the best of them. What a jackass.

Note the way that he has to resort to massive exaggerations in order to attempt to discredit gun owners. He refers to "NRA-approved death rays" and "surface to air missiles". He can't argue evenly, using the facts, because the facts are not in his favor. Besides that, his writing strategy seems to be to incite fear into readers (many of whom might be neutral on the issue of gun control, but the odds are they're easily swayed with a bit of liberal razzle-dazzle.)

Careful now! I'm armed and dangerous! Approach at own risk!
 
Just for Fun...

Purely, as a general principle, can you make some kind of abstract Second Amendment argument that law-abiding citizens ought to be able to take their bazookas, their Uzis, their 50-caliber armor-piercing rocket launchers with them wherever they go
Certainly I could, but it was made quite clearly a long time ago.

``The project of disciplining all the militia of the United States is as futile as it would be injurious, if it were capable of being carried into execution. A tolerable expertness in military movements is a business that requires time and practice. It is not a day, or even a week, that will suffice for the attainment of it. To oblige the great body of the yeomanry, and of the other classes of the citizens, to be under arms for the purpose of going through military exercises and evolutions, as often as might be necessary to acquire the degree of perfection which would entitle them to the character of a well-regulated militia, would be a real grievance to the people, and a serious public inconvenience and loss. It would form an annual deduction from the productive labor of the country, to an amount which, calculating upon the present numbers of the people, would not fall far short of the whole expense of the civil establishments of all the States. To attempt a thing which would abridge the mass of labor and industry to so considerable an extent, would be unwise: and the experiment, if made, could not succeed, because it would not long be endured. Little more can reasonably be aimed at, with respect to the people at large, than to have them properly armed and equipped; and in order to see that this be not neglected, it will be necessary to assemble them once or twice in the course of a year.

``But though the scheme of disciplining the whole nation must be abandoned as mischievous or impracticable; yet it is a matter of the utmost importance that a well-digested plan should, as soon as possible, be adopted for the proper establishment of the militia. The attention of the government ought particularly to be directed to the formation of a select corps of moderate extent, upon such principles as will really fit them for service in case of need. By thus circumscribing the plan, it will be possible to have an excellent body of well-trained militia, ready to take the field whenever the defense of the State shall require it. This will not only lessen the call for military establishments, but if circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little, if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens. This appears to me the only substitute that can be devised for a standing army, and the best possible security against it, if it should exist.''
What Mr. Hamilton is saying in oh so many words is, law-abiding citizens ought to be able to take their bazookas, their Uzis, their 50-caliber armor-piercing rocket launchers with them wherever they go because they might need them to kill hostile soldiers, possibly from the federal government.

Hey, he said it, not me! ;)
 
WHEW! Anti-gun U.S. Senators Boxer and Fineswine BOTH have California State CCW permits, which are extremely difficult to obtain if you're a "common" citizen....but I guess that they're "special"!

I don't recall the name of the model-turned-actress who made several anti-gun commercials back in the 1980's, but I do recall that she accidentally shot herself while cleaning one of her pistols!

A well-known newspaper columnist (again, don't recall his name) had written several anti-gun pieces for his syndicated column. On one particular day, when his local newspaper delivery boy tossed a newspaper that hit his window, that columnist SHOT at the kid with one of his guns!

Even Geraldo Rivera, who has spoken negatively about firearms in the past, BOASTED about carrying his .32 auto pistol when he was in Iraq! (Firearms for news media personnel is forbidden when they are "embedded" with U.S. troops).

"It's better to HAVE a gun but not use it, than to NEED a gun but not HAVE one!"
 
Oldtimer you are so right!!
In chicago it's illegal to have a gun or ammo even if you are on your way to a gun show and just passing through.
But all the alderman are allowed to carry. It just makes me wonder what they are doing to need a gun when no one else should have one? or Why do they need a gun when no one else has one?









It is better to have a gun and not need one than to need one and not have one!!!:uhoh:
 
I wonder what it is about getting a permit that gives people like this the heebie-jeebers. I had guns for years before I got a permit. (We won't talk about rather I ever "carried" them or not.) Haven't killed any neighbors, co-workers, family members, ex-wives, or aliens from another planet.
 
I have heard this ****** on the radio in the Tampa area, and he is a real wheezer,lol... Here is my e mail to him....


Hello, I almost never e mail writers about the things they write, but I just had to this time out. I just saw your column online “They're Armed, Dangerous and Next Door” and you could not be more off base than you are.

I do realize trying to change the viewpoint of an anti Gun person is as likely as an anti gun person changing my viewpoint, but come on, you’re totally sensationalizing this. I have been a CCW holder for 12 years, and I came from a super gun restrictive state of New Jersey. I have to say, I prefer it here, and would never venture into North Trenton NJ at night, regardless of the ultra restrictive gun control laws there(They don’t work, FYI).

The statistics in Florida for CCW holders committing crimes is there, and it just doesn’t happen. Just because a person is armed, does not make them dangerous (Implying dangerous is synonymous with Murderer or violent criminal). A CCW Holder IS more dangerous to a criminal that will try to victimize him.

In regards to workplace Violence, do you realize how little it really matters if there is a law restricting gun possession in a car in the parking lot?? I mean, if a person has made the decision to kill a person or a lot of people they work with, do you think that a rule restricting gun possession in your car on company property will make any difference to him?? He has decided to MURDER people. A lot of times, historically, the disgruntled worker will go home to get their weapon of choice anyhow, so what’s the point in infringing my 2nd Amendment rights even more??

I would suggest you ask the Veterans of our Military about what they think should be done, especially wounded Vets, that gave part of their health for our great nation. I’m sure they would not want their sacrifice to be in vain, all for nothing.

Also, remember, the 1st Amendment stands on the shoulders of the 2nd ..so you’re right to blather mindlessly hinges on the fact that you have the right to be armed and defend the freedoms you are afforded in the Greatest Nation on Gods Green Earth.


J.T.A.

Sarasota Fl
 
Did you notice that the article starts with the writer referring to working for the Ministry of Truch (Minitrue?). To say the least, that is somewhat Orwellian.
 
This hysteria must be stopped. The womanly screeching is hurting my ears up here.

1. Far fewer than the 354K legally carry. Florida licenses are held by many out of state residents who have never set foot in Florida.

2. If someone is to commit murder at the office and risk the consequences of the death penalty, why do you believe that this murderer will obey a administrative rule which will merely result in their being fired?

3. How many Florida CCW holders have committed murder in the workplace? 5,000? 5? Maybe . . . Zero?

4. If the pistol is left in the car, left at home, or on your co-workers hip, how are you endangered? Do you cry and whimper and roll up into the fetal position when you see a police officer?

The good news is that this is all the Left has--hysteria. They have no reasoned rational argument left only womanly hand-wringing. Hoozah, boys, we have them now--put the steel to them down there, Florida!:cool:
 
CDingintion,

Good letter rebuttal...

If this guy would of just thought about the co-worker that left and then they found out afterwards he carried... that no one was ever threathened or killed at his work place while this person was employed... He just might of realized how much safer he was because he was present.

Sarcasim Moment!
Gee, today I just found out that I have been working around a can of gasoline and a couple bags of fertilizer... Potential BOMB... Federal Building style... I'm in a unsafe area... They are sitting there and I will be killed.... Ban everything, its all bad....

"Chicken Little" says: "The Sky is Falling" While the little boy cried "Wolf"
Sarcasim Off...
 
We live in an imperfect world -- filled with very, very strange people [strike]who hear voices;[/strike] write screechingly ill-informed opinion columns; who have issues; who really don't like you just ... because.

Did you notice that the article starts with the writer referring to working for the Ministry of Truch (Minitrue?). To say the least, that is somewhat Orwellian.

I think he's trying to be ironically self-effacing. It's so cute when people with sub-standard IQ's try to talk with the smart people.
 
El Tejon
1. Far fewer than the 354K legally carry. Florida licenses are held by many out of state residents who have never set foot in Florida.

Tis true. This is because the State I'm currently stationed in has a total butt hole that has been filibustering our CCW in the Unicam for the last several years!!!:banghead:

Stationed = Can't move..:mad: :mad:
Stationed also = Will eventually move. :) :)

Florida permit has the most reciprocity and is therefor the best value in CCW.. Outside of a pro 2A finding by SCOTUS of course.

By the way I'm trying to get stationed in Florida but they call it a "Dream sheet" for a reason.

Also for bonus points can anyone guess the State and human waste err State Senator I'm referring to????
 
My email response. Probably to be igonred. He will be deluged after writing that in Florida.
First, remember that concealed carrying a handgun is something that anyone can do without a license and without permission and without even being permitted to own a handgun. Sure, they would be breaking the law, but no one would know until they committed a violent crime with the gun.

Scary scenario isnt it? It plays out daily in all areas of the country, regardless of the permissiveness of the local gun laws. Because criminals ignore gun control laws.

Think of what kind of citizen doesnt put the gun in their pocket- instead, that citizen gets a background check, takes a safety and self defense course, pays over 100 dollars and then waits several months for the permit to come back. Doesnt it strike you as obvious that a person willing to jump through all those petty hoops isnt likely to lose discipline and start blasting people at work? FL CCW holders have never used their guns for crime since the law began over 15 years ago.

You dont need special government permission to illegally acquire a gun and take it into a workplace of your choice. However, you do need special government permission to defend yourself from such people and not get in trouble afterwards. This is important to people like me because we value our standing as law abiding members of society. And having workplaces full of responsible gun owners like myself helps to ensure that few will be foolish enough to do another California or New York style shooting massacre (remember that such massacres are attempted but never succeed except in gun-free areas like schools, post offices and blue states).

Also, you might want to consider the possibility that people who can defend themselves place less protection burden upon the local police, freeing them up to pursue fugitives rather than making unnecessary calls to rescue panicked people from a noise in the night.

thanks for reading all that, I hoped I help to open your mind a bit

-Jim
 
The guy needs help - it's that simple. How he can go to work every day, fearing for his life as he does is amazing.

Here's my letter to his editor:
Both the history and the statistics of lawful carry in Florida give lie to the whole thesis of Mr Ruth's article "They're Armed, Dangerous And Next Door".

Since 1987 less than 1800 FL concealed carry permits out of more than 350,000 issued have been revoked due to the permit holder commiting a felony. That's just one half of one percent, a number which is a much lower rate of felony commission than the felony commision rate of the general population.

Gee imagine that! Permit holders are more law abiding than non-permit holders.

Mr Ruth should run, not walk, to the nearest mental health professional because Daniel Ruth has a near psychotic fear of firearms.

His writing shows that he has a lack of confidence in his fellow man to lawfully go about armed without going into a beserk killing range. Most often this view exists in people who know they lack the control to walk about armed without going beserk and losing control if provoked. This is called transferance and is very common among hoplophobes.

Good luck to Mr. Ruth. He's going to need it having to deal with a totally unreasonable fear for the rest of his life because lawful concealed carry is here to stay!
I don't anticipate a response but if I get one I will definitely post it here.
 
I especially like the way he makes his case there, but he's right. Employers are able to regulate all kinds of employee behavior, including how they dress, smoking, using drugs (including outside the workplace). Also there's a property issue. As a property owner don't I have the right to determine who may come onto my property and under which conditions?

Honestly it seems like the NRA is taking on some of the wrong fights. It's fine for the NRA to organize boycotts but they should not try to get laws changed for this.
 
As a property owner don't I have the right to determine who may come onto my property and under which conditions?
Not necessarily. Just because you're someone's employer doesn't mean you can abridge their civil rights. And property 'ownership' is not absolute. You're subject to all kinds of laws, rules and regulations. Like building codes, zoning ordnances, etc. all enforceable with police powers.
 
AF_INT1N0 said:
El Tejon

Also for bonus points can anyone guess the State and human waste err State Senator I'm referring to????

Let's see must be Nebraska, and Chamers is the villian
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top