I tried, but I was distracted by something I was reading.
Yeah, but in your feverish little mind, every gun control law is a bad gun control law, soo…
This.
Every time an accidental shooting makes the news, we have a Gun Control Debate. It’s not fucking rocket science, and you’d have to be a little paranoid to ascribe any other explanation to this “phenomenon”.
Anyway, I fully support your right to keep and bear weapons unless the 2nd Amendment is repealed.
However, I don’t think the pro-gun crowd does itself any favors by constantly favoring legislation restricting the rights of law enforcement to trace weapons, or opposing any legislation restricting the rights of felons to own them, or even the most piddly gun registration requirement.
When your primary battle cry is, “when guns are criminalized, only criminals will own guns!”, it’s pretty fucking disingenuous to actively promote legislation ensuring that criminals will own guns.
Whatever. He’s made it abundantly clear, over and over, where he stands politically.
As I just got done saying in a related thread:
So anyone who disagrees with you gets branded with a hammer and sickle?
I think DT is as crazy as you do, but I can only assume you don’t actually read his posts or you don’t actually know what communists/Bolsheviks/Marxists/Stalinists are, since he’s never actually said anything evidencing that sort of stance.
But hey, I don’t want to let facts get in the way of your pigeonholing. That would be rude.
Right, because allowing law enforcement to determine whether your gun was used to shoot someone would totally infringe on your inalienable right to not get caught.
He’s a leftist piece of shit. I’ve read his posts and he sounds exactly like the rest of the pinko trash I used to see at Democratic Underground.
I’m here to post something else, but I had to quote this to reply with “Wow, you’re an idiot;” “Who emptied their colostomy bag in your Wheaties;” and “You know, they make decaffeinated varieties which are just as good as the real thing.”
Eh hem.
I don’t think Barack Obama or Joseph Biden plan to take my gun. I think my gun is safe.
The NRA can kiss my ass because their NAME IS SOOOOO PREJUDICED - they’re called the National Rifle Association and all I have is a .357 revolver. 
I’m totally tired of this. I don’t know you, and you don’t know me. But I will put my proven commitment (in terms of time spent and actions taken, not posts on the Internet) to human and civil rights up against most people’s. And I am pro-individual gun rights.
I’m not a thug, a paranoid, a fanatic (well not on guns) nor a fool.
I see. So leftist = communist.
Does that mean rightist = Nazi? Because that would make things much simpler.
This is exactly why many of us on the pro-gun left don’t publicize our views. Getting associated with right wing crap like this isn’t something that we want.
My opinion of Der Trihs was certainly changed by this thoughtful persuasive piece. I don’t know how to thank you for opening my eyes about what a swell guy he is, but also what a viable path for humanity Communism is.
Cunt.
I’m glad my eloquence has moved you to bestow upon me the title of an organ which gives pleasure and brings forth life. And here I thought you’d be insulted!
To preface, I am in favor of strict gun control laws, but this was an awesome response. Touche.
I have to ask gun rights advocates like ExTank in all seriousness exactly what chain of events they think will unfold if a complete US gun ban were to occur? What precisely are you (I know you don’t like the words paranoid, afraid, or scared)… concerned about?
Is it the “once that right is removed who knows what right they’ll take away next” theory of the government wanting to control people and this would be the first major step? After that our rights will be removed one by one?
Is it the “once they take guns away from law abidding citizens only criminals will have guns and law abidding citizens will have no way to defend themselves” arguement? Do you forsee crime running rampant?
Or maybe not criminals but “once they take away our guns which we use to defend our rights, the government will just take more of our rights away since we will no longer have our guns to defend them”.
Or is it simply “it’s a right, and no one should ever take away a right under any circumstances”.
Exactly what repercussions would you see the US facing?
Der Trihs and I have crossed paths on more than one occasion, and I’m not his biggest fan.
But I will say this. You’re making an ass of yourself assuming that anyone who disagrees with you must be a Marxist, etc. etc. He is clearly not that.
Der Trihs is anti-American, and is a nihilist. Any resemblance to actual political thought is pretty much by accident.
It makes me wonder, though…why is it that every time an accidental drowning makes the news, we don’t have a debate about whether swimming pools should be legal?
Probably because the primary purpose of a swimming pool is swimming, whereas the primary use of a firearm is shooting things.
One is inherently recreational, and the other is not (necessarily).
There’s also the more obvious reason that a swimming pool is a hole in the ground with water in it, and if you ban those, you’ll have to ban lakes, retention ponds, oceans, canals…
For much the same reason why we don’t have a debate requiring everybody to learn how to swim, or to learn lifesaving techniques: it wouldn’t make much of a dent in the number of accidental swimming deaths.
Somebody asked, upthread, what would happen if there were a unilateral ban on private ownership of guns, and what gun-rights advocates were concerned about. I’ve seen two opinions: (1) people don’t want their right to own guns taken away because they are safe with their guns, and it doesn’t seem fair for them to be punished because some other people are spoiling the fun for everybody, and (2) when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns, and home break-ins and robberies will ramp up considerably, along with more intentional shootings being done by petty criminals.