I can certainly understand how there might be a distinct division between gun-owners who are primarily interested in hunting as a sport, and people who want guns for other reasons. And I can certainly understand how such a sportsman would discriminate between a hunting rifle and a handgun, since one is designed primarily to shoot deer, elk, antelope and chupacabra, and the other is designed to put holes in people.
I can well understand why the sportsman/hunter would want to seperate his concerns from those others, and most definitely why they would reject being exploited by gun enthusiasts, who don’t really share much common ground. The sportsman doesn’t need military weapons, Bambi’s mom will not charge, even when cornered and wounded. If you can’t get a kill with one clean shot, you shouldn’t shoot.
What I object to most about the NRA is how they warp the political landscape around their fetish, how they turn out masses of single-issue voters who almost invariably support the Forces of Darkness. Which is why I belong with the UnBrady Bunch: keep the damned things if they mean that much to you, its not worth the energy. There is no practical way to reduce the number of guns in our citizen’s hands, that train has long left the station, they are already there.
So, you want them that bad, keep them, muzzle tov, much good may it do you. Perhaps it may even have an effect on the massive avalanche of home invasions sweeping across the country. But a paranoid never feels safe.
But **Una **didn’t. **She **made an exact statement about a *subset *of the group with whom she has had *personal *experience. **You **were the one who put further words in her mouth.
Yeah, I always enjoy giving a +1 to posts based on my limited experience, then being able to back down later by saying “But, I said ‘in my experience’” when someone points out that my characterization isn’t at all accurate or fair. It adds so much to the discussion, and doesn’t piss people off at all.
For instance: In my limited experience, gun owners who don’t hunt tend to be paranoid Second Amendment thumpers who sleep with their arms wrapped around their guns & who go apeshit any time someone gives them flack about their choice of firearm.
Don’t get mad at me, I’m just basing it on these guys I met at the range this one time.
Likewise, if you don’t want other people to point out instances where someone else’s specific experience may be extremely limited & misleading, you’d better stop posting on a message board.
I’m pretty sure the fact that she *deliberately couched it *as her own personal experience indicates that she knew that they were not necessarily representative of hunters as a whole, or she would have just fucking said “all hunters” like you’re pretty much accusing her of.
Given how sick I am of having to hit retards like you upside the head, though, you’d think I’d stop posting on boards.
I’m not accusing her of that at all. I’m saying that you shouldn’t support a broad statement like “hunters are dicks” with extremely narrow & selective experiences. (I find it surprising that Una hasn’t encountered dozens of hunters on this very message board who are extremely supportive of 2nd Amendment rights.) Despite the fact that you are having a very, very difficult time understanding this, you’ve decided that calling someone else a retard isn’t the least bit ironic.
I’m sure there are plenty of people out there in cyberspace who would support your effort to kick the habit.
I will happily retract if you can give me a cite of **Una **saying this, because it would clearly be inaccurate to describe all hunters as such. What I *recall *is her saying that her experience was in line with someone else’s statement that hunters are often only concerned about controls on the guns they prefer to use and support restrictions on other weapons; that’s a far cry from “hunters are dicks.”
In post 102 she quoted the “Hunters are dicks” part & responded to it.
Look, I have a lot of respect for Una, and probably shouldn’t have come down on her as hard as I did in my initial post. That being said, I thought she was a bit quick to agree based on limited experience that didn’t even totally support the notion that hunters don’t care about other people’s 2nd Amend. rights. That’s all. I respect her posts on Nuclear power & other aspects of gun control enough that I’d rather not make any more of an issue out of it.
Yes and no. The law provisioned that new magazines made or imported after the ban was set in place could either not be more than 10 rounds, or marked law enforcement only. But the huge stock of existing magazines didn’t get banned. So for most guns, there was still a huge market out there for “high” (normal) capacity magazines, so aside from making some magazines from some new models scarce and driving up the price somewhat, it didn’t really have too much of an effect on it.
Also, in reference to the “hunters are dicks” things, I realize it’s a generalization. I realize it’s not universally true. But I know most of you can’t comprehend this, but many (or most?) people who believe in gun rights believe that in the right of self defense is a fundamental human right, along with other fundamental freedoms. So when you have a group of people who are willing to trade your rights for theirs, because they don’t care about the fundamental right so much as their particular hobby, you start to think of them as dicks. People who’d be willing to sell out your general freedom of speech as long as their specific slice was protected also would seem like dicks to you.
This had practical real world effects - a significant fraction of gun owners are just people that are worried about their duck gun. This makes up a decent fraction of the NRA too. So when the AWB was around, the community and the NRA were somewhat split and did not present a unified front on the issue like they could’ve. There was a lot of debate within the NRA whether the AWB should even be opposed.
In that context, knowing I’m obviously making a generalization and it doesn’t apply to every individual, I’m comfortable with saying hunters are dicks. I guess more precisely “what do you need that for, anyway? Just let me keep my duck gun” hunters are dicks.
Yes, with the same bullshit mischaracterization every time. That is how discussions work, outside of something like GQ. Person A says, “This is what has happened to me.” Then Person B says, “Oh, that happened to me, too.” Then Person C might come along and say, “Gee, what happened to me was totally different.” And as long as Person B was making a comment about their own personal experiences and not drawing larger conclusions (and again, I ask for a cite that shows Una saying anything about **all **hunters versus just the ones **she **has had contact with), Person C’s experiences in no way invalidate those of Person B; they simply further inform the discussion.
You should be getting your certificate in the mail in six to eight weeks.
I thought it was a damn fine pun. If I was sure 'Luci wouldn’t press charges for assault, I’d throw peanut shells at him as is traditional in several fictional bars I’d like to visit.