Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Okay, gun-grabbers, which one of you wrote this?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU
 
derby378 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-29-08 10:57 AM
Original message
Okay, gun-grabbers, which one of you wrote this?
Edited on Sat Nov-29-08 11:15 AM by derby378
While the rest of us were enjoying Thanksgiving dinner with family and friends, enjoying each other's company, there was this one guy who decided to spend his time writing this little broadside against gun owners for the BerksMontNews.com site. Here's a few little excerpts, with spelling errors preserved as is:

Click here

I'm guessing the author is this guy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B72fbXDQ7Lg&feature=related
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
mrreowwr_kittty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-29-08 11:18 AM
Response to Original message
1. The term "gun-grabbers" amuses me.
I want to call anyone who uses it in earnest a "gun-humper".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
derby378 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-29-08 11:24 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. The mental image you have just conjured...
...makes my brain hurt. Ow.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SteveM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-30-08 12:49 PM
Response to Reply #2
21. Well, not if you use a hammerless S&W revolver (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-29-08 11:36 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. gun humpers!!!
:woohoo:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tejas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-29-08 02:51 PM
Response to Reply #3
15. You just could NOT have picked a better smilie!
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aikoaiko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-29-08 11:42 AM
Response to Reply #1
5. I takes a certain type of person to sexualize guns.

:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-29-08 01:38 PM
Response to Reply #1
14. Sounds like .22 rimfire envy of the big centerfire calibers. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aikoaiko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-29-08 11:40 AM
Response to Original message
4. Let's face it: there are wussies who will throw away civil rights in the name of security

With every freedom enshrined in our constitution comes the opportunity for criminal exploitation. It is one of the unfortunate side effects of living in a relatively free society.

Having said this I am not opposed to some gun control regulation
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-29-08 11:45 AM
Response to Reply #4
6. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
aikoaiko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-29-08 11:50 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. Did you read the link in the OP. The person I was referencing doesn't think anyone should own
Edited on Sat Nov-29-08 11:53 AM by aikoaiko
a handgun for self-defense or even a semi-automatic rifle or shotgun.

Good grief, it doesn't get that much more extreme than that.

Eta: I too "... have no problem at all following the law and respecting others right NOT to be shot at random by some gun-humping yahoo anyone who will then claim they looked at him "funny". "

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tridim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-29-08 11:52 AM
Response to Original message
8. Well, I'm off to my local military base to pick up my bazooka and nuclear warhead.
It's my Constitutional right. Right? :eyes:

I didn't write the piece, but I do agree with him/her. Neither of us want to "grab" guns, we just don't think any true hunter needs semi-automatic weapons.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
derby378 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-29-08 12:04 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. Read the Second Amendment, and then READ IT AGAIN
Not a single word in there that says anything about hunting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aikoaiko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-29-08 12:08 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. There are mechanisms for regulating hunting rifles without infringing on people's rights
Edited on Sat Nov-29-08 12:09 PM by aikoaiko
to keep and bear arms including semi-automatic rifles and handgins

Look what this LTTE person said, "There is no reason why the rights of individuals in this country should make it easy for criminals to kill or handicap people."

I think he means the 2 Amendment, but would he say the same about the 1st (freedom to assemble), or the fourth (freedom from unreasonable search and seizure, the fifth (freedom from self-incrimination), the sixth (right to speedy trial and counsel). All these rights can be exploited criminals who hurt or kill law abiding citizens.

Should we really go down this road? I think not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JonQ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-01-08 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #10
23. But that's completely different
the founding fathers actually meant those amendments. The 2nd was just a sort of inside joke between them, never meant to be taken seriously.

:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jmg257 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-29-08 05:10 PM
Response to Reply #8
17. Whew...good thing I don't hunt - my semis are OK then! Thanks! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bossy22 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-29-08 05:29 PM
Response to Reply #8
18. what about for self defense?
i'd say semi-auto weapons (especially handguns) are the best weapons for self defense

thats why most police departments use them as their duty weapons

semi-autos are protected by the second amendment anyway since the amendment protects those weapons in common use- and id think you'd have a hard time making an arguement that semi-auto weapons are not common and used for lawful purposes
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-30-08 11:17 AM
Response to Reply #8
20. The term gun-grabber parallels use of homophobe for people who simply dislike gay people
You don't have to be afraid of gays to qualify as a homophobe.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SteveM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-30-08 01:02 PM
Response to Reply #8
22. Ah, the bazooka & nuke argument, again...
Actually, you can own arms beyond non-automatic small arms if you go through so rather rigorous licensing and financial hoops, which might explain why fewer than three hundred thousand folks own full auto weapons and why the actor Dorn (of Star Trek, Next Generation) owns and flies a Saber fighter jet. BTW, you can't own a nuke since it is not an arm you can bear.

Semi-auto firearms have been used in the field for years by "true hunters." Do you need them? No. And you don't need a bolt-action, lever-action, falling-block, muzzle loader, single-shot, pump or any type of action.

But you need something if you hunt with a gun.

I would point out that hog hunters have used Remington 742s for years as they provide a rapid follow-up shot on an animal which very infrequently goes down with one well-placed heart-lung shot. The hoary old Remington is a semi-auto rifle, usually chambered in .30-'06. In a few years, I think these old rifles will be replaced with AR-15-type semi-auto carbines for use in the field. Their ergonomics, comfort, east of aiming, low recoil and accuracy are increasingly recognized as equal to or superior to conventional walnut & blue steel rifles. Of course, they will be chambered for more powerful rounds than the current .223 (a little too low power).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidMS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-29-08 12:15 PM
Response to Original message
11. I somehow think alcohol was involved in the origionaly refrenced post
That or some grade "A" Sloppy thinking. That and a depressing lack of research into actual firearms laws.

Worst part is as an unsigned editorial implies that its the position of the editors.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
derby378 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-29-08 12:27 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. Part of me feels sorry for the guy
Instead of munching on a nice Thanksgiving spread with family and/or friends, he's clogging the Intertubes up with this drivel. I mean, come on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-29-08 12:22 PM
Response to Original message
12. Deleted sub-thread
Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Tejas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-29-08 02:58 PM
Response to Original message
16. Wonder if the author cares half as much about
missing children as he does missing guns. No, as is usual with leaks in the media payroll, lawful gunowners are much easier targets than pedophiles or kidnappers.



bonus: Wonder what his thoughts are on the firearms missing from LEO vehicles?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gorfle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-29-08 06:50 PM
Response to Original message
19. Riddled with errors.
Instead of worrying about public safety, gun owners are worried about their right to bear arms.

Gun owners do worry about public safety. Many people own firearms because they are concerned about their own safety, and want to take personal responsibility for protecting it. What gun owners are not willing to do is give up the Constitutional right to keep and bear arms in the name of public safety.

And yes, most gun owners aren't involved in illegal activity.

Here, at least, we have the truth. Most gun owners aren't involved in illegal activity. In fact, out of 40-80 million of them, only some 800,000 - less than 2% - are involved in illegal activity.

However, many of them aren't responsible gun owners because they think it is not their problem if a gun is stolen and used in a crime.

The person who is mostly responsible for such things is the criminal who is guilty not only of theft, but also using a firearm in the commission of yet more crime. It's convenient to pin it all on the gun owner but let's not lose sight of who is actually committing the crime here.

Children die everyday because either their parents are too lazy to make sure their gun is inaccessible or because they are in the wrong place at the wrong time when bullets from a stolen gun are sprayed across an unsuspecting city block.

Oh the classic "it's for the children" argument. The fact of the matter is more children die from drowning every year than from guns.

People get so caught up in their right to have a gun that they lose sight of what is important: Public safety.

Here we have the heart of the matter. The author clearly wants to put safety above a Constitutionally enumerated liberty. As Benjamin Franklin said, those who would forsake liberty for a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

I know there are some legitimate hunters who think they are allowed to have semi-automatic guns too. It is ridiculous to call yourself a sportsman if you need to use a semi-automatic gun. Each shot should be carefully calculated, not just haphazardly shot repeatedly in seconds in the approximate direction of an animal.

Here is another common theme - that the entire ownership criteria for firearms should revolve around hunting. The Constitutional right to keep and bear arms revolves around killing people, not hunting.

These guns, the ones that should never hit the streets, are getting into the hands of criminals and innocent people are dying. Why? Because guns get stolen.

I would be interested in data showing how many stolen firearms are used in crimes annually. It has to be less than 800,000 times.

In my opinion, there is no legitamate use for civilians to use a semi-automatic weapon.

Then the author has not read any of the justifications in contemporary literature for why the second amendment was placed in the Constitution. The legitimate use for civilians to own semi-automatic weapons is defense against tyranny.

There is no reason why the rights of individuals in this country should make it easy for criminals to kill or handicap people.

There is also no reason to infringe on the rights of 98% of firearm owners for the sake of 2%.

Gun shows are the worst example of how the private sector can hurt the public sector. A gun, which is a deadly weapon, should only be purchased after a person proves they are not crazy or some career criminal. Thorough background checks need to be made because it is a matter of life and death.

99+% of all firearm sales at gun shows are through FFL dealers, and as such require a background check. Private sales at gun shows are rare.

Guns should never be put in the wrong hands because we are simply trying to protect gun owners' rights. What about the rights of those who are being hurt by guns?

Guns should never be taken out of the right hands simply because we are trying to crack down on criminals. What about the right to keep and bear arms?

Besides gun owners being more responsible by not allowing children to hunt, not allowing children to gain access to a gun closet and the added protection of a trigger lock, there needs to be stricter laws to raise people's awareness that with privilege comes responsibility.

I started hunting with my father when I was about 10 years old. I got my first rifle when I was about 12.

Further, the right to keep and bear arms is not a privilege, it is a right. Rights to indeed come with responsibility. 98% of firearm owners act responsibly every year.

We should never take rights away from people, but homicides are most often committed with guns, especially handguns.

Also we should note here that they are hardly ever committed with rifles. Especially "assault rifles".

I'm not real sure what type of hunting requires a handgun.

In fact lots of people hunt with a handgun.

And I'm pretty sure there are more effective ways for personal protection other than keeping a handgun around.

And yet it is the preeminent choice of law enforcement personnel for their own personal protection. You can be sure if there was something more effective our police would be using it.

In the event of a home invasion, for example, by the time the individual gets to that "locked" handgun, they could already be dead.

Clear case for not locking them up to begin with. But even if you choose to lock them up, there are inexpensive quick-access safes that can be opened with no more effort than placing your hand on them.

So the handgun is not exactly the best option in personal protection. Not to mention the fact that the same gun intended to protect could actually be used against the victim.

I would be interested in statistical data to relate how frequently this happens.

Illegal/stolen guns are also killing police officers who vow to serve and protect the public.

Police officers are dying because criminals have too many rights.


Really? What sorts of rights is it that these criminals have that are causing police officers to die?

It is time for people to see the other side of this issue. Go and speak with someone who lost a loved one due to a senseless act of violence with a gun. Then come and preach about rights.

Go speak to this woman who lost her mother and father to a sensless act of violence with a gun. Then go preach to her about gun control:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suzanna_Hupp
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JonQ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-01-08 03:18 PM
Response to Reply #19
25. That's a pretty intense
collection of falsehoods, misdirections, and general ignorance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pipoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-01-08 02:36 PM
Response to Original message
24. LMAO
This sounds like the OP ED to this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CLjNJI54GMM
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
derby378 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-01-08 04:44 PM
Response to Reply #24
26. In Archie's defense...
If all the passengers were armed, no TSA stooge would ever order a nursing mother to drink her own breast milk again. :bounce:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sanctified Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-01-08 10:20 PM
Response to Original message
27. I wonder if people get this worked up over beer, beer kills more people every year than guns. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JonQ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-02-08 04:29 PM
Response to Reply #27
28. We really need to ban alcohol
then no one would drink, our streets would be safer and we wouldn't have tens of thousands killed every year.

Some sort of prohibition against it ought to do the trick.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 24th 2024, 11:44 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC