Sean Penn armed w/ a shottie!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yeah, good old Sean has a CCW issued in Marin county in the bay area. According to the S.F. Chronicle article, he was given an exemption from the CA Dept of Justice, since he had a criminal conviction for beating up his wife, to get the CCW. His 1980's Monte Carlo was broken into while he was having lunch in Berkely. A revolver and a Glock were stolen.
Funny, I haven't seen Sean out there campaigning for 2nd amendment rights. Hmmmm, wonder why?
 
outlawing guns is a liberal idea
That is such an obviously oxymoronic statement, that I can't believe you made it. The 2nd amendment is a liberty.

Gun-grabbers may call themselves liberals, but if they are trying to curtail my constitutional liberties, then they are lying.

Please also note that Iraqis shooting at our soldiers and Marines call themselves "freedom fighters." The continued used of liberal as an epithet makes just as much sense as saying all freedom lovers are terrorists.

As for Penn, he is definite elitist when it comes to firearms. The fact that he can have a CCW with his violent past when I, as a veteren cannot have a CCW just kills me.
 
The fact that he can have a CCW with his violent past when I, as a veteren cannot have a CCW just kills me.

Penn is a veteran, he was in "Casualties of War" which showed him starring in the Vietnam War and somehow he also starred in the 2nd World War at Guadalcanal , as shown in "The Thin Red Line". He must have been pretty old in Vietnam. I'm sure he got his military training in "Taps". He might have starred in other wars too...I'm not sure.
That's the reason he got a CCW and you didn't. ;)
 
Penn is a veteran, he was in "Casualties of War" which showed him starring in the Vietnam War and somehow he also starred in the 2nd World War at Guadalcanal , as shown in "The Thin Red Line". He must have been pretty old in Vietnam. I'm sure he got his military training in "Taps". He might have starred in other wars too...I'm not sure.
That's the reason he got a CCW and you didn't.
_______________________________________
Hey Rick, thanks for explaining that to me! :rolleyes: I only have 4 years in the Army and no combat experience, so compared to Sean's war film experience I'm just a wannabe. Plus I'm nowhere as rich as he is, so I just don't deserve my CCW. And to top it all off, I'm not in New Orleans defending the rights of gun owners and incompetent boaters everywhere! so I really shouldn't even think of ever getting a CCW.
 
By the same token, there may be some conservative Christians out there who are pro-choice;

Being a conservative Christian rules out being pro-choice.

I am not sure but isn't Penn the one who some years back fired a few rounds at a helicopter at he and Madonna's wedding.
 
It's not enough to be a veteran, I'm one of those (disabled, Vietnam). I couldn't get a CCW when I lived in Kalif either. Let's face it, veterans are a dime a dozen. Apparently, you have to STAR in a war or two. Being a STAR in two wars is probably better.
 
As much as I hate that idiot

I'm fully supportive of his right to keep and bear despite his past transgressions.
 
Well did Sean at least remember to plug up the hole in the shotgun before venturing out? Damn! Zero for two. :D

Third time's the charm.
 
He might have starred in other wars too...I'm not sure.
Thanks for clearing that up Rick. :) I feel much better now.

No need to get excited fellas. He's just waiting for Clinton and Kerry to show up so they can go duck hunting.
You win at the internets :D I spit peas from laughing.

I actually liked FastTimes at Ridgemount High and Taps, but the only good part of The Thin Red Line was Woody Harrelson berating himself as a n00b, right before he blows his ass off.
 
Let's see here...Mr. Penn has guns but doesn't want others to have guns. Therefore he's an elitist. We have guns but we imply that Mr. Penn shouldn't because he's an elitist. :confused: :rolleyes:

I'm fully supportive of his right to keep and bear despite his past transgressions.

Bingo!

<jumping up and down>

We have a winner! Everybody should be able to carry a gun anywhere.
 
Penn

Does anybody know if he owns property in NO?? There's probably a good reason why he's there,,with a shotgun.
 
What's he carrying?

John G asked if that shottie was an 870?

Kinda hard to be sure by the photo quality, but I make it to be an Ithaca or Mossberg... maybe in 20 gauge or .410, based on the skinny barrel. The receiver doesn't look right for a Rem 870.

Maybe he can't handle a 12 gauge's recoil... due to all the prior ** combat injuries ** he sustained while making those war movies...
 
Who is Sean Penn? My hero's are guys like RICK RENO!! The guys in my town's KIA/POW Memorial!! The WALL in Washington!!.... Those are my hero's!! THATS WHY I ENLISTED!!!... REAL ROLE MODELS!!!

I'll ask again "Who is Sean Penn?" :confused:
 
This guy is a scum bucket FELON with a domestic violence history ( he REALLY DID whack the snot out of a woman, among others weaker than he) that according to Ca. AND Federal law absolutely precludes him from having guns no less a CCW in a Ca. county infamous for not giving CCWs! This makes me so mad I WANT the head of those LIBERAL, left wing hypocrits that rewrote the 'law' for the classes that controls the masses! Really I would off such scum(who circumvented a draconian law) , if It wouldn't put a dent in my life style! AND I am a Christian, who wouldn't lose a nights sleep over it :cuss: :cuss: :cuss:
 
Go Sean, go! Glad to see him openly practicing civil disobedience to an unconstitutional mandate. He is against the War in Iraq and the Bush administration for its "deconstruction of civil liberties" and its "simplistic and inflammatory view of good and evil." I have never heard him state he is anti-gun.
 
According to the S.F. Chronicle article, he was given an exemption from the CA Dept of Justice, since he had a criminal conviction for beating up his wife, to get the CCW.

If he actually has a domestic violence conviction he is a prohibited person under federal law. I don't think he can possess a firearm at all. I don't think CA DOJ can exempt him from Lautenberg....

Jeff
 
It seems that there are quite a few people here who combine "liberal" with "gun-hating". There are a great many liberal gun nuts out there, and they would likely take exception to comments like these.
The far left liberals in any modern society have always been "gun-hating" so long as the guns they hate are in the hands of the opposition. They have always loved guns when in their own hands. While they might not show this love outright, they live it at the least vicariously through the guns in the hands of their armed goon squads. As a case in point, there was no more liberal political and social group than were the Nazis of WWII. Of course they attempted to confiscate guns to make society safer. All they were doing was making it easier to control the ghettos so they could round up and kill millions of people. Likewise there is no more liberal a modern day person than someone like Rosie O’Donnell who reportedly has armed goons (whoops guards) who accompany her everywhere. It is not that liberal are anti-gun per se, they are, or they who are on the left of center liberally are quite the control freak type of person. Guns or other arms in the hands of others aggravate them, and get their panties in a wad. This is seen time and time again when the likes of people like Howard Stern are reported to have concealed carry permits. Of course a recent political example would be Kerry when he ran for president. Read the interviews of him by outdoor writers. Read his description of how to hunt a deer by crawling on your belly. look at pictures of him carrying firearms with his finger on the trigger, while he looks at the camera with a goofy smile yet narry an apparent concern for where the gun is pointed. Guns are great for them when they suit their needs but; they seem to believe that guns are not great for others, is the impression I get from them. That kind of it is ok for me but not for you is a very liberal way of thinking.

This does not only go for guns, it goes for other things too. Take for example animal rights. According to PETA we should treat all animals with respect, we should not put unwanted pets to sleep, we should not use products that were the result of animal experimentation. Yet, the head of PETA is reported to take medication that was discovered only through years of animal experimentation (I believe for diabetes) and, it has been reported that PETA or its affiliates put animals to sleep in shelters they run when the shelters cannot adopt them out. Also look to The Humane Society of the US. This organization went so far as to take a name (at least part of a name) that is affiliated with animal adoption centers/shelters throughout the United States. "Humane Society" being the part to which I refer. Yet this same organization is pretty much anti pet keeping. Read their own literature; they are in no way like a local "Humane Society" from what I can tell.

Members of ALF and ELF to ultra extremist liberal groups reportedly have spray painted people who wear furs (while the person is wearing the fur, so to ruin it). Yet they wear leather shoes and belts and carry leather purses. I have witnessed this personally and as the goon who did the spraying ran off she shouted she was from ALF. It has also been suspected that some of the goons who are suspected members of ELF who were suspects in the torching of a car/SUV dealership arrived at one of these dealerships in an SUV and not on horseback as you might expect (sorry I cannot give further details).

A truly conservative outlook would on the other hand, preclude such action on the part of a conservative. An ultra conservative would allow just about anyone to keep and bear arms because if nothing else, the true conservative is conserving the Constitution and Bill Of Rights and a right that is as old as the first weapon. Of course there are those of a more liberal stint among so called conservatives who do not swing right when it comes to keeping and bearing arms. That is not a good thing. The truth of the matter is though that the left, has for the most part become very loony in recent years in regards to being anti conservative about anything and; an anti-firearms platform has become so much a pillar of left leaning politics, that many right leaning firearms aficionados simply see all liberals or left leaners as being anti-gun. Maybe, if those of the left who were pro-gun pushed harder for all to have arms bearing rights, they would be seen differently.

All the best,
Glenn B
 
Someone said this:
outlawing guns is a liberal idea
And someone else answered with this:
That is such an obviously oxymoronic statement, that I can't believe you made it. The 2nd amendment is a liberty.

Actually the second quoted statement above is an oxymoron when taken in the context in which you used it. Having liberty does not mean that one is liberal. What liberal truly refers to, in the sense of government, is the liberal exercise of government power. Liberal therefore means the additional dependency upon or extra use of governmental powers. There should be a law for this, a law for that, a tax for this, a tax for that, a rule for this and a rule for that and all of them should apply to anyone to whom we choose to apply them but not necessarily to ourselves (meaning to other like minded or allied liberals).

Conservative means the opposite, a restricted use of government power, less laws enacted, less government interference with liberties, less taxes and so forth.

Liberty means the state of being free to do as one wishes, to enjoy ones rights and privileges without being under the tyranny of a despot who would restrict you from doing so. Of course any rational government restricts liberty to some extent, however; under a truly conservative government liberty is conserved to the maximum reasonable extent but, under a liberal government liberty is subject to a liberal amount of laws and restrictions.

It is, in my opinion, truly a shame that someone would try to twist around the meaning of liberty to make it seem as one with the meaning of the word liberal! The British Government was quite liberal in its exercise of governmental powers over the colonists in America; it regularly restricted the colonists' liberties even though people on the isle of Great Britain still enjoyed such liberties. Therefore came a revolt to overthorow said government and its liberal exercise of goverment power in the form of taxation and other regulations and laws. The end product hoped for by those who waged war against the Crown was a conservation of the rights, privileges and liberties that belonged to men since before organized governments existed. If you check governments throughout history, those that were either very liberal or very conservative regarding liberty, you will find this to be as plain as the nose on your face.


Best regards,
Glenn B
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top