Friday, December 28, 2012

Posted To Make Your Head Explode



Paladin said...

It's ironic that the people who claim that we should surrender our duty to defend our loved ones to the Police (who are the only ones that can be trusted with guns), are the same people who are getting their panties in a twist over the suggestion that we actually position the police in the places where we need them to protect us?

Hey, Cal. Did you hear that NBC is now reporting that the Sandy Hook shooter didn't even use an evil assualt rifle?

They are reporting that only handguns were used, now. I know, its hard to believe that someone could kill that many people without a semi-auto rifle with a high capacity magazine and bayonet lug. They even have the audacity to claim that the shooter tried to buy a rifle before the killings and was denied.... which caused him to go to plan B and not use a rifle at all.

The very nerve of those reporters... don't they realize that Dianne Feinstein and Joe Biden are working on some very important legislation that will ban weapons not even used in this tragedy?...

It seems that both laziness and imprudence are qualities to be admired.

Kal said...

People want their pound of flesh and are going to have it. If they don't cut off the head of the NRA now they will never get a better chance and we should agree that they have WAY too much influence on your government.

Paladin said...

I do have problems with the NRA, and more specifically their current leadership. Overall, though, I am please with their defense of 2nd Amendment rights in the US and I will continue to support them.

My problems with the NRA are similar to my problems with any large lobbying group- including the Unions, Environmental Groups, etc. That's the political water we have to swim in, though, and the NRA is very good at swimming in it. Liberals are all for Political Lobbys as long as they are the *right* Political Lobby. Can't have it both ways. Until people are willing to change the water, I'll back the NRA because they have the clout to push back against nuts who make laws without thinking them through.

NRA membership has exploded in the past week. Over 8000 new members in just the first few days after Sandy Hook and the predictable descent of the Liberal Vultures who can't resist an opportunity to hack away at the old agenda.

Another unintended consequence of peoples actions. Hate the NRA and hate Guns? Liberal rhetoric over the past week has led to the highest gun sales EVER on record and the biggest spike in NRA membership in recent memory.

Strategy Fail.

As to the other point.. Been shopping lately? The price of meat can be very, very expensive.

Kelly Sedinger said...

Apparently the perverse nature of a society where we NEED protection in schools (and malls! and movie theaters! and EVERYWHERE!) is lost on the resident right wing gun nut.

It's also fun to hear how we've always got a handy example of a particular massacre that wouldn't have been prevented by whatever law is currently under discussion. Whether or not a ban on assault weapons would have prevented Sandy Hook isn't relevant to the advisability of such a ban. It does, however, give the local rightwing gun nut a chance to exercise his local monopoly on being dead wrong, though, so he's got that going for him. Which is nice.

Hobgoblin238 said...

I am with you Paladin!

Paladin said...

Kelly - The perverse nature of the society is exactly the point,and it isn't lost on me at all. It does, however, get lost when all people see GUN CONTROL and begin to drool like Pavlov's Dog.

You say the fact that the new AWB doesn't address the specifics of Sandy Hook - even though its being trotted out specifically in response to Sandy Hook - is irrelevant.

How can that NOT be relevant???? If my boat is sinking and your solution is to sing me a nice song, the fact that my boat is still sinking in spite of your "help" is pretty fucking relevant.

Unless, of course, the goal is gun control for its own sake and not a solution to actual problems. If your using the Sandy Hook tragedy to further an agenda while selling it as a "solution" - that's repugnant.

That's why I ask for specifics and challenge people to come up with something that will actually have a positive effect. One that a murdering bastard couldn't work around easily. You guys have all the big brains, don't you?.... outsmart me. I'm an ignorant hillbilly.

Come up with a specific gun law that is actually achievable in the real world that will reduce deaths instead of just punishing legal gun owners - stop it with the vague "Less is guns is better".

Until you can, any gun control measure will work no better than simply saying "Don't do that" to a murderer.

david_b said...

Paladin, you and Hobgoblin make FAR more sense than Cal on this.

My humble thanks for a well-reasoned stance, far better than I could have expounded, Paladin.

Been too busy to spend time here lately.

Paladin said...

You're very welcome david :)

david_b said...

So.. Who's running this mess in America..?

Who's not strongly supporting banning of assault weapons..?

Who's not actually DOING ANYTHING to promote change from the Executive Office..?

Oh, yeah, the guy who vacationed in Hawaii over Christmas.