There is already a thread in General Questions trying to figure out the facts and laws about the incident. That’s not what I care about.
I want to know WTF Sen. Jim Webb needs to carry a gun. Has he been threatened? Or, like many people in the U.S. today, are you thinking that if you carry a gun you are somehow safer?
I do understand the mentality of people who carry guns. I think they are, in general, wrong. But I understand their motivation.
But, isn’t it unusual for a congresscritter to carry a gun?
Because he wants to, because he is allowed to, and as long as he doesn’t violate the law (which he may have in this case, I don’t know) he doesn’t owe you or anybody else any justification.
Well, in Virginia, Webb, and anyone else is allowed to carry, and in all likelihood have a permit to conceal a firearm.
But he certainly is not allowed to hand it to a subordinate he knows is going to go to Washington DC, where as a Senator he should be well aware that subordinate is not allowed to posses a firearm.
It is absolutely irresponsible for a Senator to set such an example. I don’t know about the yutz that “forgot he was packing a pistol” in the length of time it took to get to the office. But he doesn’t sound like someone I would hand my pistol to. “I was carrying it, and then realized that I could not take it onto the airplane.” Well, I would prefer that my Senator have a somewhat more serious outlook on carrying a weapon. If it’s nothing that he feels he needs to think about enough to take it off before going to the freaking airport, well, I find that pretty worrisome. Didn’t he realize that the Yutz was absolutely going to have to commit a crime one way or another to do this? Poor planning. And poor planning is not what I was hoping for, when I voted for him. (or more accurately voted against his opponent.)
Right. By starting a thread in the Pit, by calling him stupid in the thread title, and by implication due to the manner of your “question” implying that people who carry guns are stupid as well.
I tend to expect better from you. That weak follow-up justification was pitiful.
EDIT: If you had said what Tris said I would be on board with you. Too bad you didn’t.
Ah, the hair-trigger arrogance of the gun zealot—as reliable as the sunrise, if not quite as reassuring or picturesque.
Until recently, there was always the possibility of being challenged to a duel by Zell Miller. Timing seems off in Webb’s case, though. Perhaps it was for protection against the wild, free-roaming macaques rumored to be menacing the District.
Senator Webb may also have the right to legislate while attired a leopard-print thong and platform shoes, or to stand in the national mall singing show tunes into a bullhorn, but I doubt that an OP questioning his motivation for doing so—even one that employed a profane acronym—would meet with such righteous indignation.
Nothing seems to stir the hive on this board like the merest hint of questioning the wisdom of making firearms as ubiquitous as possible in society—not abortion, not racism, not religion (even outright mockery of such). It’s really as though the thought of less than fully armed, for even a moment, for some is a pathological fear akin to castration anxiety.
Which doesn’t really help explain why (if the facts bear out) the Senator was allowing his aide to carry his manhood for him.
That’s not even remotely true. I advocate my beliefs, but I also make allowances for the fact that some people find the idea to be unthinkable and I do not believe that everybody should be armed, just that everybody should be afforded the option. I do not make any particular effort to insult people for holding that opinion.
My, to use your words, “hair-trigger arrogance” comes from the fact that my rights with regard to this topic are constantly under attack, and while there are reasonable and rational objections to carrying a weapon they are rarely couched in terms that are either reasonable or rational. “WTF?”, demanding an explanation, and using the word “stupid” to open the discussion deserves response in kind. I actually gave it a much nicer response than it really deserved. I gave a reasonable, well written, and clear (albeit stock) response, which is correct in every respect. Defiant? Perhaps. But I’m not the person on the attack from the get-go here.
There is something seriously screwy when totin’ killing machines is a matter of ‘beliefs’.
It is my belief that non-official people wishing to carry about their persons means to deliberately destroy other humans don’t need to be anywhere in my vicinity. Preferably, my country.
This whole gun adoration thing is one of the wierdest aspects of life in the lower half of the continent. I’m pretty sure here that an MP or an MPP (MLA, whatever) who advocated for the ability to carry concealed weapons would be backed away from and looked at askance. You know, the way you look at those guys in the park who yell at cars and rocks.
Spoken like a person who’s never been mugged. The problem with this sort of issue is that the only way to get people like you to understand the value of self-protection is that you first have to value yourself and be threatened. If on the other hand you value yourself and have been lucky enough to survive a life threatening encounter with a sociopathic thug but still hold to your naive viewpoint, then there is something seriously screwy with your own beliefs. And you’re entitled. But don’t try to force yours on me. I will stop you.
Well, to be honest, free-range macacas did factor prominently in Webb’s last campaign.
Sorry about that.
Webb was an idiot. Politically and in his exercise of his carry-rights. But that’s a problem for him to overcome in six years. Right now he just needs to face the music and due the public apology thing. He’ll get past it.\
It won’t inspire any substantive change in gun control/rights issues in either DC or Virginia.
It certainly didn’t change my opinions of gun laws.
I am disappointed that a senator with a military background isn’t going to bat for a man who by all accounts has been nothing but loyal to him. His comments in public seemed calculated to distance himself from his aide.
Frankly, I would have liked to see better loyalty and leadership in Senator Webb. Given what I have seen of his character over the past few months, I can’t say I am surprised, though.
If this had happened to one of Ted Kennedy’s top staffers, the comments made in public would have been much more helpful to the aide. I can guarantee that.
Why is it that when attacking gun-toting politicians, nobody goes after the obvious hypocrites?
And why the big insistence on justification for exercising a legal right? I owe nobody a justification for carrying a firearm. I don’t need a reason beyond ‘I want to.’
If anything is arrogant it’s stamping your feet demanding justification for why someone wants to do something that is perfectly legal and in fact protected not only by the US Constitution, but many state constitutions as well.
Gun owners and concealed carriers don’t owe you a damn thing.
Well there’s always the publicly anti-gun Diane Feinstein. Even if it is ‘unusual’, why does that matter in the least? Something that is ‘unusual’ is not automatically wrong.
I’d wager that the Venn diagram of people that have been mugged and the people that own guns has a relatively small middle. If fact, I’ll bet there’s an opposite correlation even if you include attempted muggings.