Quote of the Day: Interplanetary Edition

Miner_4243w

“There wasn’t one piece of that bill that I couldn’t find something to point to and think, ‘Boy, oh boy, I must be on Mars.” – Connecticut State Representative Craig Miner in After gun tragedies, Connecticut and Arizona take different paths [at washingtonpost.com]

comments

  1. avatar foggy says:

    Gun grabbers are from Mars and are obsessed with your penis.

    1. avatar Bear The Grizzly says:

      This. I can’t have a 5 minute conversation with these people without them bringing up phallic symbols.

      1. avatar PeterC says:

        That’s why I’ve stopped trying to reason with them; they’re obsessed with penises.

        1. avatar waif says:

          Maybe they are just hungry.

        2. avatar emfourty gasmask says:

          Hell, I’m gay and I’m not even that obsessed about penises. Those guys got problems.

    2. avatar ThomasR says:

      Umm, no, those that support gun ownership are from Mars and those that oppose it are from Venus.

      I read the book.

  2. avatar Shire-man says:

    Why bother with the pointless research they did (looking at pictures, asking cops if they want more laws and power and touring a factory?) if they already had their minds set? It’s not like they ever had to convince anyone. Their numbers were veto proof and their constituents eat up everything they propose. They didnt even need Newtown to happen to get what they wanted and that is why CT is a lost cause.

    1. avatar CT Resident says:

      Sadly that is not true, CT was not a lost cause. Connecticut was betrayed by insufficient, dishonest representation that abused their power of office and exploited a terrible atrocity to enact unjust laws at their whim. The bill they passed last year was forced through the legislature, it was heavily protested in CT. Gov Malloy, CT President Pro-Tempore Donald Williams Jr, and Democrat Majority Leader Martin M. Looney were the visible leaders of this to the extent that the method of passing the bill mis-used a process called emergency certification, a process that is intended to be used during emergency situations such as natural disasters where the usual process is too slow. They did not even process the e-cert correctly.

      Think this is just Connecticut’s problem? Think again, the Democratic Governors Association (DGA) is heavily supporting Gov. Malloy’s reelection campaign even though he is significantly unpopular in CT. The Gov is using MILLIONS of dollars of taxpayer money to buy votes by promising monies to vulnerable populations in CT. The DGA is heavily trying to influence Governor’s elections across the nation to implant governors just like Malloy and inject those same strategies of forcing legislation and suppressing opposition that has occured in CT, NY and CO.

      The irony is that when I went to the State hearing on the bill, I found that we had supporters that were asking the right questions and representing their constituents. Miner was actually a good Rep.

      1. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

        I say it every damn time, which I’m sure regulars, even those who agree, get tired of hearing, but like other important truths about guns, it bears repeating. The truth is that CT has done this to itself because conservatives there fail to go vote.

        Voter turnout from both parties is higher during presidential years than during off years, like 2014, when governors are elected. Conservatives are outnumbered overall in CT. However, the typical number of conservative voters who turn out during presidential elections, and are outnumbered by liberal voters in those elections, nevertheless could swamp the number of liberal voters who turn out during off year elections. Look up the numbers yourselves, right there on the state Sec. of State’s website. Same in places like MD, too.

        The conservative votes are there to win, but you need consistent energy to turn out, especially in the boring, unglamorous, low profile, off year elections. It wouldn’t take long to repopulate most of the government and reclaim their freedom if they would just VOTE.

        So I don’t want to hear how helpless, outnumbered and put upon the poor are the Connecticut conservatives losing their gun rights, when they won’t even utilize the obvious and available tool of voter turnout to their advantage. You’re losing them because you’ve forfeited them.

  3. avatar Joe R. says:

    The aliens abused him…sexually…

    Seriously though (here between CT and AZ) we read ‘your’ legislation (Pick a New England state, down through… oh, hell, down to where it finally wraps around to TX, then skip to NM and keep going to WA, with a few northern states on the upper central), and we think you must be on Crack.

    1. avatar sven_va says:

      Hey, leave Vermont out of that brushstroke, Joe, at least on this…

      1. avatar Woodchuck says:

        The antis did manage to push through that confiscation restraining order crap. I’d like to think it cost the left too much political capital like it did with civil marriages but I’m not holding my breath this time. Btown’s hippie dippie utopianists just have so many numbers. especially with all their idealistic college butterflies who’ve never had to deal with the real world

    2. avatar Gene says:

      I’m not saying aliens, but…

      http://imgur.com/gallery/nljNxVT

  4. avatar Kyle says:

    Interesting that they “debated” whether features like thumbhole stocks and pistol grips made a weapon an “assault weapon.” Somehow I think their minds were already made up regarding that one.

    1. avatar John L. says:

      “Pure evil!”

      “No, only mostly evil!”

      Debate. Yah.

    2. avatar Joe R. says:

      I like to picture such people (good-willed protectionists [a/k/a gun-grabbing bend over and take it with me nut-jobs]) attempting to quickly swap mags in an SKS in a firefight (or just at the range with eye an ear protection, ya know, enjoying the day). They’d be like ‘man this don’t qualify as an “assault weapon”.

      1. avatar Taylor TX says:

        “Well Im holding it and i dont FEEL like assaulting anyone?!”

        1. avatar Doc says:

          FTW ^ GIVE THIS MAN A COOKIE

        2. avatar Joe R. says:

          Rub it

      2. avatar Bryan JD says:

        Unless I missed something, the SKS doesnt have a swappable magazine? 🙂

        1. avatar Joe R. says:

          Yeah, the internal ones (and the removable) you can fill with strippers, but they do have removable kinds, but they’re kinda weird. They’re “duck-billed”, you can pull out the old one and put in a banana style one.

          They are not handy-in-a-hurry.

          Here’s a link with some cheapies.

          http://www.thecountryshed.com/sks_magazines.htm

    3. avatar Pascal says:

      Of course their minds where already made up. Everything else was political theater to make believe we have a political system. When you have states like CT and CA or even TX where there is a single party super majority, there is not discussion, they do whatever the hell they want.

      Look at NY and CT, to stop any and all public debate, they used some legislative emergency protocol to ram it through so they could simply get to the vote. There was no emergency.

      The democrats have taken their lead from Obama. The entire Obama administration pretty much has thrown out the rule of law. They simply do what they damn well please.

      Simply look at all the BS laws CA has passed over the last year, not just gun laws, but general laws and look at the BS you get when there is no debate.

      1. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

        In the liberal states, you’re right, they do whatever they want because liberals in office outnumber conservatives hugely and think and act in lockstep. In Texas, where conservatives predominate, it’s different.

        In Texas, you’ll find much agreement on goals among conservatives, but being a philosophy more conducive to, appreciative of, and oriented toward individuals, conservatism yields many and varied ideas on reaching those goals. The legislative record bears this out.

        Even with supermajorities (60%+) in both the state House and Senate in GOP hands, the fact is that our GOP governor still vetoed this past session 28 bills the legislature had passed. There was plenty of debate and disagreement involved along the way. So much so, that the governor recalled the legislature not once, not twice, but three times this past regular session for three additional special sessions. Think of it as legislative triple overtime, all for the purpose of debating and hammering out legislation among people whom you claim do whatever they want.

  5. avatar Sixpack70 says:

    Reason and logic are things that legislators and a lot of constituents in CT lack. If they actually did some research they would see their efforts have zero effect on crime, but turn good people into criminals.

    1. avatar Paco says:

      Arghhh….another post talking about “research”, believing the anti-gun agenda is about reducing crime, ect…

  6. avatar RockOnHellChild says:

    And by Mars he means England.

    1. avatar Joe R. says:

      And by “England” he means the 2nd (European) Crater of Islam.

  7. avatar SelousX says:

    The bias in the article was quite prevalent. I am saddened to see no mention of any defensive gun use since Sandy Hook, just what hard work that simple folk are doing to prevent “gun violence”, as if other types of violence won’t leave one injured or dead. Just sad…

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      I was saddened to see no suggestion how these legislative efforts would have affected the Sandy Hook or Giffords shootings, one way or the other. I know why they didn’t, because there would clearly have been no effects, and why work to defeat our own mindless goals?

  8. avatar Alex Peters says:

    I question whether this quote was taken out of context. Rep. Miner was one of the minority who voted against that POS CT bill.

    1. avatar Brian says:

      I agree. Maybe make it clear he’s questioning the antis?

    2. avatar mark_anthony_78 says:

      Exactly… he is expressing how the bill is so out of whack with reality.

    3. avatar Another Robert says:

      Well, depends on what you mean by context. I think the Post article clearly shows he is being critical of the legislation.

    4. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

      When I think of something as having been “taken out of context”, I think of it in terms of having been removed from what was said immediately before or after it, what it may have been a response to, or that it was clearly meant as a joke. Howsoever, the meaning gets twisted to negative effect from its intent. Here, it’s not so much twisted, as it is just unclear.

      Reading the original newspaper article, he meant that he felt out of place when he read the final bill, as though he were on Mars, because it was so bizarre a bill. Someone else might say they felt like they were Alice herself in Wonderland, or some kind of bizarre place where the normal course of things is upside down and backwards.

  9. avatar Gov. William J. Le Petomane says:

    My advice to anyone left in the northeast with a shred of sense – get out while you still can. They’ll be packing you up in box cars and sending you off to reeducation camps if you don’t.

    1. avatar Alex Peters says:

      If those of us who have lived our entire lives in the Northeast haven’t been reeducated by now, it’s never going to happen.

      1. avatar Gov. William J. Le Petomane says:

        Well the people who go to those camps in North Korea are never actually ‘reeducated’ either.

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          OTOH, they rarely come back, either.

        2. avatar Jus Bill says:

          But in the DPRK, only the military and cops have… Oh, never mind.

  10. avatar GuyFromV says:

    From the comments section of the article:

    “Italian Rose
    9/1/2014 5:09 PM PST
    The Moms group calls any gun that can fire 10 rounds in 1 minute an assault weapon that must be banned nationwide. I whole hardheartedly support this definition and any American with a conscious should also.”

    BahhahhahahHHahhaha

    1. avatar Gov. William J. Le Petomane says:

      Damn, I guess I’d have to give up my Single Action Army then.

      1. avatar Another Robert says:

        Yup, that definition takes in pretty much every firearm invented since the introduction of the self-contained metallic cartridge, except maybe some single-shot, single-action derringers.

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Maybe in .500 S&W. Otherwise, 10 in a minute seems pretty easy.

    2. avatar Alex Peters says:

      So besides not knowing anything about guns, they also don’t know anything about time. I’ll bet the LEO’s would love those firearms that can only fire one round ever 6 seconds.

    3. avatar Taylor TX says:

      Im pretty sure that could be accomplished with a break open shotgun without really trying too hard.

      so ban everything that isnt a musket right?

      1. avatar Another Robert says:

    4. avatar mark_anthony_78 says:

      When an attacker has 15 minutes before police even show up, does that really change anything?

    5. avatar juliesa says:

      That comment seems like parody to me. It’s hard to tell though, given the quality of thinking of many of the gun grabbers.

      1. avatar CT Resident says:

        If you want to see how ill informed “well meaning” Connecticut anti gun people are look at the testimony from the following woman. She is now on the Board of Governors for “Connecticut Against Gun Violence” a long time anti gun lobbying group. Having been at the Hearings and listening to testimony there was overwhelming amount of testimony against the Bill, her claims were surprising to say the least. One of the Representatives was also surpised. To be fair, she might not have been on the board of CAGV at the time so to call her a lobbyist is perhaps incorrect.

        If you jump forward in the video to 6:00 – 6:30 there is an exchange with one of the Representatives and he is actually trying to inform her of the facts about “assault weapons”.

        1. avatar Jus Bill says:

          I like the part where he says “I’m not laughing at you.” He was the only person in the place that wasn’t, and he was trying hard.

    6. avatar Ing says:

      So any American with a “conscious” should support that definition?

      Here’s your problem.

      Like most Americans, I have a conscience and I’m conscious, so I will continue not supporting your arbitrary definition of that obnoxiously nebulous term.

  11. avatar Kyle in CT says:

    You and me both buddy. You and me both …

    For example, I can’t really understand why everyone is talking about the “assault weapon” ban. To me, that takes a serious back seat to the fact that we now have de facto universal registration in this state. Any gun, of any kind, private sale or retail, has to be “approved” by DESPP. Paperwork has to be sent in giving name, address, serial number, description, etc. Oh, and by the way, you can’t actually buy a gun without some sort of license anymore. To buy ammo you need an ammunition certificate (which you have to pay for of course). To buy a long gun you need a long gun certificate (again, that you have to pay for). They also raised the renewal fees for carry licenses to $200. That is in addition to the 200 you already had to pay the first time, along with any additional fees that the town you live in decided to tack on, despite the fact that there is state law preventing them from doing exactly that. That even assumes you can get the paperwork, which in Hartford and New Haven, you can’t. The police departments which are required by state law to provide you the paperwork, won’t. You have to go through an appeals process at the state level, and the last time I checked they were backed up by over a year.

    These same politicians would be screaming bloody murder if you had to jump through 1/10th of the hoops to vote, yet somehow restricting constitutional rights is ok when it’s guns. And before some numbnut says move somewhere else, I will say this: if you are such an ardent pro-rights supporter, nut up, move here, and help us roll back this lunacy. Otherwise, I don’t want to hear it, because it means you are ok telling other people that they should uproot their lives, but aren’t willing to live by your own words. That makes you a hypocrite.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Follow the money.

    2. avatar Jus Bill says:

      [CLAPPING WILDLY] BRAVO!

  12. avatar Rambeast says:

    ” And before some numbnut says move somewhere else, I will say this: if you are such an ardent pro-rights supporter, nut up, move here, and help us roll back this lunacy. Otherwise, I don’t want to hear it, because it means you are ok telling other people that they should uproot their lives, but aren’t willing to live by your own words. That makes you a hypocrite.”

    You are asking more of them than they are of you. Along with the asinine gun laws, you have ridiculous taxes, outrageous cost of living, and the most annoying neighbors you can ever imagine. For you to leave, you get all of the bonuses, and only the inconvenience of the packing up and moving.

    Now, who is the numbnut?

    CT and most of the northeast are a lost cause. You could move the population of the rest of the country (non-communist residents) to that area, and not make a dent in the voting habits of the locals. Face it, it’s game over without federal intervention. Even then it will be an almost impossible process to force the state and local govts to comply. Hell, the northeast and west coast are exporting “liberals” and ruining other once free states in search of lower taxes, but bringing their idiotic voting habits with them.

    1. avatar Kyle in CT says:

      It’s a pretty simple point, don’t ask someone to do something you aren’t willing to do yourself.

      1. avatar Jus Bill says:

        EXACTLY! I’m staying in Maryland and fighting. The pu**ies in freer states that tell me to uproot my entire life and move can eat it. Let them move here and fight with me if they’re so damned fired up.

    2. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Hell, the northeast and west coast are exporting “liberals” and ruining other once free states in search of lower taxes, but bringing their idiotic voting habits with them.

      Including votes for higher taxes! These guys are really brilliant.

      1. avatar Jus Bill says:

        And you’re doing what exactly about it?

  13. avatar RT says:

    Yeah, I’m going to move to give up rights, but you won’t to gain them. Sound logic………HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

    1. avatar Jus Bill says:

      Because I fear no one and respect but a few.

  14. avatar former water walker says:

    They tried this(& worse) in Illinois. Churches with idiotic signs urging the banning of “assault rifles”. Chicago democrats conspiring to f##k all of Illinois. Thank God for Illinois republicans downstate and yes some pro-2A democrats. If things can get better in Illinois it can get better in Connecticut. I know I got really p###ed off having a##holes in Indiana tell me “just move to Indiana-things will NEVER get better in Illinois”.

  15. avatar Robert says:

    That’s because people who ban guns ARE from Mars! 🙂

    1. avatar Ralph says:

      Actually, gungrabbers are from Uranus.

      1. avatar Another Robert says:

        Not from mine….

      2. avatar Jus Bill says:

        No, I wiped.

  16. avatar IdahoPete says:

    A classic illustration of the fact that a “mainstream” media article about firearms is defined as “something with a mistake in it.”

    I quote from this WaPo article: “… lawmakers there [Arizona] named the Colt Army Action Revolver the official state gun.” Now, I understand that the idiot reporters at the WaPo have never held a gun in their lives, but couldn’t they at least READ THE LAW from Arizona? It is the Colt SINGLE ACTION ARMY revolver – a reasonably famous firearm – unless you have lived in the mushroom environment of the news media your entire adult life (In the dark, covered in excrement.)

  17. avatar DTAL says:

    One state opted to follow the Founding Fathers who birthed the concept of individual freedom. The other state opted to follow Hitler and Stalin’s approach to individual freedom. Any questions?

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email