ISTM part of what that author’s decrying is that the all-out ban-guns position is not as prominent or dominant as he thinks it should be, and the liberal mainstream, which only wants regulation and control, is too timid for him. He feels there should be a strong radical anti-gun faction to move the middle ground back in the direction of limiting rather than expanding.
So indeed they exist, but they are few and weak and are reduced to wailing in the wilderness. One does wonder however just how much they are or should be able to influence the votes of “the base” or the public debate tone. They are, I must however recognize, a very effective bogeyman and they do damage the overall progressive platform at the ballot box.
(And BTW just what IS so “liberal” or “progressive” about a total gun-grab anyway? Regulation, sure, but prohibition?)
Sounds good.
I like how gun activists think they have soooo much power. An iron grip on the country’s balls. Well, times change. Every other civilized 1st world nation has. We’ll just keep having mass shootings until society finally wakes up and quits romanticizing the Old West that never was. Enjoy your iron grip while you have it.
Say, could you twirl your mustachios while you’re saying that…? Maybe in a Dr. Evil voice? 'Cause your inner evil genius is showing.
Right now 3D printed guns are crap, but people are working night and day to make 3D printing better. Once general purpose 3D printers can produce a decent or even adequate gun, banning guns will be about as effective as banning alcohol was. Even if a national ban was in effect and never repealed, career criminals would have guns, and so would gun enthusiasts or even just ordinary people who want a little insurance hidden away just in case- like people have been doing for decades in D.C., New York City, and Chicago.
I know your ilk is into colorful rhetoric, but do you think the fact that alcohol is disposable played any role? Do you envision criminals drinking their guns when cops show up?
Follow-on to a case that probably appeared in this thread earlier. Retired Police Captain Reeves in Florida didn’t like a guy texting during the previews for coming attractions, so he killed him.
Give Reeves credit; he started by just yelling at the guy, and went for his gun, murdering Chad Oulson, only after Oulson started throwing popcorn.
Reeves pled innocent by virtue of the Stand Your Ground law, saying “I realized I was in a life-or-death struggle.” Reeves claims Oulson hit him with the phone, but multiple witnesses stated that Reeves murmured something like “Throw popcorn at me, will you?” immediately before pulling the trigger. Judge Susan Barthle ruled that Reeves was not in imminent danger and SYG does not apply. (I suppose the jury can overturn this decision.)
Remember: This was a retired Police Captain. :eek:
I don’t have an answer about the 3D printing problem. Can you print bullets too? I suppose it’s an issue the whole world will have to deal with. Someday we’ll have little DIY home genetic engineering kits and people will be able to make their own bioweapons too!
The only way to stop a bad guy with germ warfare is a good guy with germ warfare.
You presume he’s old enough to have facial hair.
Maybe he can get one at a costume shop. Or just draw one on. Of course then he couldn’t twirl it.
Maybe he could hold a pinkie up to the corner of his mouth instead?
Yeah, the guys with the “NRA SMASH YOU” aren’t the evil moustache twirlers. “You try to take our guns, we crush! Look at election results!”
You poor little snow darlings.
The city of Tuscon is so dedicated to destroying any confiscated guns that they’re currently in open defiance of a state law ordering them not to:
Hey, as long as you don’t mind Trump in the white house; a Republican congress; a Republican senate; 32 Republican governors; 32 Republican state legislatures (versus 12 Democratic state legislatures and 6 split of coalition legislatures), sure, keep beating on the anti-gun drums and drive voters towards the party that is going to overturn Roe v Wade.
There are probably fewer people murdered by law abiding citizens with guns than there are people killed by stabbing. Murder Victims, by Weapons Used But don’t let that stop you from trying to ban guns with adjustable stocks and bayonet lugs.
Your link doesn’t mention at all whether the gun victims were killed by legal or illegal gun owners.
Sean Hannity brings a gun to Fox News, and allegedly points it at Juan Williams. But it was unloaded (if it happened), so that is OK.
OK now that IS basic gun stupidity if so. However much both Hannity and Williams may say it’s OK, guns are not toys and you don’t play with it at the workplace or tag your co-workers with your gun’s laser sight.
Dammit, it’s Day One elemental safety.
Or maybe not. At least according to both parties who were actually there.
So is the original story fake news? Or is the rebuttal? I’ve gotten to the point I don’t believe any news without video footage of the incident starting 5 minutes before whatever is being reported to preclude taking something out of context.
Somewhere between 3% to 20% seems like a good guess:
“if Scarborough had said that 3 percent of criminals who use guns get them legally, he would have come closer to the truth.”
“They found that in approximately 8 out of 10 cases, the perpetrator was not a lawful gun owner but rather in illegal possession of a weapon that belonged to someone else.”
The fact of the matter is that most gun murders are committed by people that are prohibited from possessing guns. I think that we can reduce the availability of guns to these prohibited persons with licensing and registration but there is no credible broker who can propose that without raising concerns of gun confiscation.
Now here are some real party poopers. Funeral home directors call for law to reduce violence at funerals.
Someone could end up dead, ya know.
Shades of Poptart Pastry Pistols.
Five-Year-Old Girl Suspended After Making ‘Shooting Motion’ with Stick Shaped Like Gun