Jump to content
Liberal Writer Who Claimed Firing a Rifle Gave Him ‘PTSD’ Is Back With a New Outrage: ‘God Bless America
He needs to call his mommy and have a good cry. He's giving sniveling pansies a bad name.
Ken - methinks Jeff was being sarcastic. About the fear part, anyway.
Guy shoots into a crowd at a nightclub. One of his targets has a CCW and takes the shooter down.
How unfortunate the good guy was too fearful to have left his gun at home. It would have been so much better to have been unarmed and hoped for the best.
Gun control isn't the answer. We already know how to stop the violence
"...I'll start with the Clinton years and remind everyone that it wasn't the Brady Bill or the Assault Weapons ban that made the real difference. It was the increased funding to police departments from his 1994 crime bill that showed real progress. I was on the White House lawn that day in October, 1994 when President Clinton was joined by an army of police chiefs and mayors to announce the $200 million being released to put 100,000 more cops on the streets. It's not clear just how close the Clinton Administration came to reaching that 100,000 number, but the message the funding sent had almost as much of an effect as however many new cops actually hit the streets...
...Clinton's successor, President George W. Bush, saw similar successes with boosted funding for the FBI to go after gun runners and then his "Project SAFE" program in his second term aimed at prosecuting criminals who used guns. Project SAFE alone got more than $1.5 billion from the Bush administration. Violent crime fell sharply during the Bush years, even when compared with the already falling crime numbers under President Clinton.
But at the end of the Bush years, the focus shifted from gun prosecutions to new regulations. That was probably the result of Republicans losing control of Congress in the 2006 midterms and the Bush domestic agenda was gutted..."
James – thanks for proving my point. You sling that broad brush with the vigor of Ann Coulter.
I believe it was Goebells who famously asserted the utility of lying. Lie often enough and loud enough, and the sheeple will accept it as truth. The lefty “fear” song & dance is just the latest incarnation of that same jive. Our condescending friends on the left are so perceptive, they have the singular ability to reach in the deepest recesses of anther's soul to denounce the cowardice therein. They know you better than you do. Just ask them. They say it, so we know it's true.
One of the most moronic canards from the left is 'you right wing knuckle draggers spend your lives cowering in fear. Hiding under the bed with your guns. Fear fear fear.'
Precautions ≠ fear; despite any childish spew to the contrary. As a younger man, I did some competitive martial arts and always wore a mouthpiece & a cup. If one were childish enough, one could claim I did it out of fear: fear of losing some teeth; fear of having my testicles turned into jelly.
One can just as “reasonably” assert that those who deploy fire extinguishers in their homes & vehicles are cowering in fear. Fear of fire; fear of asphyxiating; fear of the agonized shrieking as you & your loved ones are burned alive. It must be terrible to live with that kind of fear.
The reality is that most people recognize that life doesn't always go as planned. Some make preparations to deal effectively with those eventualities if they occur. Those precautions can (but don't have to) include a mouthpiece, a fire extinguisher, a helmet, a Mr. Yuk sticker, a seat belt, and yes – even a gun. It's each individual's choice to make. Choosing against any of those precautions is up to you, and I don't hold those choices against you. I certainly don't sling schoolyard 'fraidy cat' insults if I happen to disagree with the choice you are entitled to make. That may be the biggest difference between my side and theirs; and it says more about them than they know.
From my old stomping grounds - never bring an axe to a gunfight.
James - in my opinion, anything short of mandatory confiscation of the sort implemented by the Aussies & the Brits amounts to pissing in the wind. The second amendment makes that a non starter, despite Preezy's constant lip service to those models. Which means we have to look at other options. Every time one of these douchebags goes off the rails, we default to the same pantomime: more laws/gun control, and it's meaningless every time.
A good place to start would be enforcement of 20,000+ laws we already have. In 2010 for example, more than 2000 convicted felons tried to buy a gun. The Obama administration prosecuted 44 of them. Federal gun prosecutions reached an all time high during W's term at more than 11,000 annually. Since then, federal gun prosecutions peaked at 7700 in 2013. I'd like to know why there's been such a precipitous decline. But lawmakers – on BOTH sides – are uninterested. So are the media, which means the sheeple can't be bothered either. Because it's easier to fuel the emotional firestorm, and more important to raise money for everyone's pet dogmas.
Re: the Bundys, they discredited & endangered only themselves. In the real world, the bottom line is to be at least as well equipped as the bad guys if the fit hits the shan.
James - The point is that many of those opposed to armed civilians object on the grounds that it'll translate to a return to the wild west.
Last login: Tuesday, December 6, 2016
Contents of this site are © Copyright 2016 Steamboat Pilot & Today. All rights reserved.
Tablet version |