Retired Generals Against National Reciprocity – Quote of the Day

Ret Gen Stanley McChrystal wants more gun control laws in the US

courtesy al.com and the Press-Register

“In the aftermath of two of the country’s worst mass shootings, it’s an affront to both our safety as a nation and the common sense of its citizens that Congress would consider actually weakening our gun laws. Untrained and potentially dangerous people have no business carrying guns in our communities, but the (national reciprocity) bill in the House would allow exactly that.” – Retired Army Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal in After mass shootings, retired military commanders urge Congress to address ‘gun violence crisis’ [via washingtonpost.com]

comments

  1. avatar Ben says:

    These politicians are sickening… and yes, he’s a politician. Always has been.

    1. avatar No one of consequence says:

      As is pretty much any officer with ambitions higher than O5 (Lt. Colonel in the Army, Naval Commander, etc.)

      1. avatar Mike says:

        I retired at the grade of O-6, and NEVER had any political ambitions; having said that, I have observed several self-serving, ass kissers that were I wouldn’t follow to the latrine given a choice.

        1. avatar Ralph says:

          “I retired at the grade of O-6, and NEVER had any political ambitions”

          Not having political ambitions is probably (and unfortunately) why you didn’t advance further.

          It’s very difficult to trust general officers, and the higher up they are, the more likely they are to be slimy careerists.

        2. avatar Rattlerjake says:

          Ralph nailed it!

  2. avatar pwrserge says:

    Why oh why did I scroll down to the comments section? There’s a reason why the Washington Compost needs to be shut down and their editorial staff arrested. They have long crossed the line from “journalist” to “enemy propagandist”.

  3. avatar anarchyst says:

    Military personnel above the rank of colonel are more akin to politicians than they are to the “ranks”. There are very few generals who truly look out for their troops, the few being in charge of combat units.

    1. avatar Southern Cross says:

      Generals tend to see the world as a military camp writ large and us mere civilians are just unruly recruits who need harsh discipline.

      Examples would include South and Central America, much of Africa, former Soviet republics, and some southeast Asian countries.

  4. avatar Anderson says:

    This is the guy who covered up and lied to the parents of Pat Tillman.

  5. avatar Nanashi says:

    Obama appointee. Nothing to see here.

  6. avatar anonymoose says:

    Remember how everyone jumped for joy when he criticized Obama? And then he kept opening his mouth and said that hollowpoints should be banned for the f—-in plebs in America? McChrystal is no one’s friend. He should just retire to England or someplace.

  7. avatar Felixd says:

    Why again is he an ex-general?

  8. avatar Rick the Bear says:

    “What is it that I swore an oath to protect and defend? I just can’t remember.”

  9. avatar Anonymous says:

    Potentially dangerous people???

    Isn’t everyone “potentially dangerous?”

    1. avatar MyName says:

      This is one of the talking points from the anti gun brigades that really chaps my hide. Yes, everyone is *potentially* dangerous and they toss this notion out as a clear attempt to frighten people. I tend to respond, “Yes, people are potentially dangerous but, in practice, the overwhelming majority present no danger.” These fear mongers carp on endlessly about crime and danger and the hopeless fear they feel in everyday life when, in fact, their everyday lives look nothing like their dystopian fantasies. America, today, in real life is NOT a crime ridden war zone. 99.99% of gun owners are not shooting anyone. America is, for the most part, wealthy, clean and safe (particularly when contrasted with much of the rest of the world) – not the perilous hell hole these shrill fools would have us believe it is.

      It always bemuses me that I read this kind of crap while sitting in an urban center, surrounded by hundreds of strangers, everyday, and yet no one is harming or killing me. Further, I do this with no fear while acknowledging, unlike these twits, that roughly half of the people around me could indeed be carrying a gun – and a few of them I know for a fact are. There is a woman I know from my neighborhood who is one of these types and she once said to me, “How would you feel if you thought any of these people (referring to a business full of customers) might have a gun.” I said, “Fine, I happen to know that at least two of these people do have a gun concealed right now.” She started scanning the crowed, clearly a little disturbed – never occurred to her that I was, obviously, one of the two.

      1. avatar BierceAmbrose says:

        People need to be armed *because* everybody is potentially dangerous.

        1. avatar MyName says:

          Precisely. For me the calculus looks like this:

          Risk of being victimized = low
          Cost of being victimized = high to extremely high
          Cost of taking steps to reduce likelihood of victimization = low to moderate
          Benefit of being prepared = moderate to extremely high
          Risk of being prepared = low to extremely low

          Therefore, simply cost/risk/benefit analysis indicates that being prepared presents little cost and little risk with high benefit and mitigation of unlikely but extremely high risk.

          Conclusion – being prepared to defend myself is a wise use of resources, good risk and cost avoidance at low to moderate cost and risk. Wish every economic analysis was as simple.

        2. avatar anonymoose says:

          Unless of course you are an occupying army. :^) Then you want everyone disarmed, defanged, and declawed, so your jackboots can act with impunity.

        3. avatar MyName says:

          @anonymoose Yep, that’s why I say the 2nd amendment protects the 3rd.

        4. avatar Victoryman says:

          We are our own best defense. Do not depend on others.

        5. avatar Jim Bullock says:

          MyName, wrote:

          “…For me the calculus looks like this:”

          Risk…”

          Indeed, every single spasm & aspersion by the anti’s (and the folks advocating on certain other issues) aims to change the value or emotional weight of one or more of the items in your calculus.

          Even the insults and calumnies fit. For examples, label those people “deplorable” and their getting killed isn’t really a cost, is it?

        6. avatar MyName says:

          @Jim Oui, d’accord

  10. avatar Mad Max says:

    If these gun-controllers actually wanted to reduce death and injury, their focus would be on training and marksmanship, not on banning something that is Constitionally-protected.

    They’re missing the one area where they can have a positive effect. Regulate (in the founder’s sense of the word) the militia.

  11. avatar Cooter e lee says:

    Untrained and potentially dangerous people have no business leading our nations army.

    So what I’m reading here is that since every American has a god-given right to bear arms, the .gov should train us all how to use them in class at our public schools? I can get behind that.

    1. avatar Chris. says:

      I concur;

      Training in schools.

    2. avatar Baldwin says:

      You want the same government that continually oversteps it’s authority regarding guns to “train” our youth? In what way has this same government instilled so much confidence in their ability to get it right?

  12. avatar Vic Nighthorse says:

    I never thought much of most general officers, they had to be politician at heart to get to that rank. They also often had god complexes. I was friends with few general’s aids when I was in and they all agreed that they (generals) were political creatures. Even having been a generals aid was a significant (huge actually) advantage for promotion – promotion over guys who spent more time actually commanding units. Of course the aids I knew about tripped over themselves to get the job and usually got it by being friends with the previous aid, so they were rather political themselves.

    1. avatar neiowa says:

      A dogrobber is the definition of an ass kissing pol No way to get a aide job without a special talent in that direction

  13. avatar Chip Bennett says:

    Dear McChrystal: I have nothing against the horse you rode in on. You, on the other hand…

    To you and the rest of you political-hack military brass: in the words of Samuel Adams, may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.

    1. avatar Garrison Hall says:

      I have a strong suspicion that the good General McChrystal isn’t particularly well “trained” in the ways he seems to expect American concealed-carry gun owners to be. Guys like him are complete statists who don’t trust America’s gun owners to make good decisions.. Guns are ok for him but not for the rest of us.

      1. avatar neiowa says:

        I think you are quite confused. McChyrstal spent his entire early career as a grunt up thru command of a Ranger Bn. That’s ISN’T BS.

        1. avatar William Elliott says:

          Well then as a combat veteran and an officer, HE SHOULD BLOODY WELL KNOW BETTER SHOULDN’T HE?
          The fact he served with honor and distinction only to become an oath breaking POS make it even worse.
          Not only did he betray his oath by spouting that drivel, he betrayed the heritage of the units he served in. Guess he did live long enough to see himself become the enemy…

  14. avatar i1uluz says:

    He is but one voice, he’s not an expert. 99.999999% of flag officers are nothing more than ‘ho’s that sell themselves out for a buck. JFCOM’s last commander Odierno sold his soul out to JP Morgan Chase & Co as a senior adviser on “risks of doing business in various countries, technology and cybersecurity” to start on September 1, 2015.
    In other words, We at Chase purchased his soul so we could use him to go knob slobbing for our interest within DoD. His contacts and name would get us into places where we can sway the interest away from the public back to what is best for us.
    Look at the Navy scandal that involves Fat Leonard how many 06 and above being investigated. They all loved the bennys that Fat were offering at the time, but now they can’t recall what it was they did. Our current SecDef is an exception to the rule, he’s a leader of men, not a mouthpiece for some private interest.

    1. avatar Horacemann says:

      Do I see a 92A1? Carrying mine today under a coat.

      1. avatar Horacemann says:

        And BTW it looks like that general, who is a paper pusher, never picked up a pistol before that picture was taken.

        1. avatar neiowa says:

          NCOIC did make him hold in handle down/sights up. And yes a REMF POS quota baby.

      2. avatar anonymoose says:

        That’s a regular M9 (old model 92FS with the flat dust cover instead of the newer 96FS angled dust cover). 92A1s are really nice though. I had one for a while.

  15. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

    And this pantywaist fruitloop led men, real men, into combat? It’s astounding that anyone under this guy’s leadership and planning, with his cretinous degree of familiarity with and understanding of even a less challenging piblic policy issue, managed to survive a mission.

    Really, there are some strong arguments against national reciprocity. However, that the bill changes the current state to “allow untrained and potentially dangerous people to carry guns”, is not one of them. That’s not even an intelligent utterance. What a complete and utter fool.

    1. avatar Vic Nighthorse says:

      From the list of his company and field grade commands it is hard to imagine that he was not a competent soldier. Thes problem is that he was/is even more of a politician and an elitist.

    2. avatar ATFAgentBob says:

      Led men into battle? No no that ain’t how it works. See he sits at his desk in the greenzone and tells his battalion commanders what he wants done, They tell the Sergeants Major; the Sergeants Major all get together and drink because the plan has driven them to it but they come back and tell the Commander how to make it betterer. Afterward, the Battalion Commanders call their Company commanders and tell them what they need to do with their companies to make it happen, The Company Commanders tell the First Sergeants what they are planning, the First Sergeant immediately has a stroke from the stupidity and makes a workable plan that the Company Commander steals as his idea, he calls up his Platoon Leaders and briefs them on the OPORDER, after that the Platoon Leaders tells the Platoon Sergeants what the mission is and the Platoon Sergeants figure out how to accomplish the mission. The Platoon Leader briefs his platoon and puts out the OPORDER, the troops groan or snore. After this is over the Platoon Sergeant briefs everyone on the real plan (you know the one that will actually work). The Squad leaders get their squads in order and then the mission kicks off.

      After the mission guys like McChrystal take all the credit for the successful mission and get silver starts while the guys that actually went out and did the mission are lucky to get an ARCOM.

      1. avatar DoomGuy says:

        You just about nailed it, just you forgot all the “good old boy” E-7’s (the retirees who have been an E-7 since 2005, aren’t the platoon sergeant and are never even gonna try for E-8) who take it upon themselves to give their input to the commander, first sergeant, platoon leaders and (if they’re at brigade or battalion) the field grade officers (however stupid their ideas are) so they can pencil whip some bullet points on their NCOER’s.

        1. avatar ATFAgentBob says:

          Damn knew I missed something!! Also missed the old Master Sergeant saying this is stupid and I ain’t doing it before retreating back into his CHU to drink a smuggled in fifth of Jack and watch bad haji copies of old adult films. Generally though it is correct, though I doubt those good ole boy E7s really effect much they seem for the most part to be the ones that got passed over like 1800 times for promotion and have reconciled the fact that they ain’t goin no higher and it literally takes an act of Congress to demote them. On the other hand, they are sometimes guys who never went OCS but seem to think they’d make a great general so they advise officers on nearly everything and act more like a Major than a Sergeant First Class.

      2. avatar SparkyInWI says:

        Pretty much nailed it….. Few generals care that much about their men. One of the rare and true heroes is O.P. Smith, read about him as we come upon the Chosin Reservoir anniversary.

        As for this General and others like him (Flynn comes to mind right now) they lie, they politic, they clearly have forgotten their oaths if they ever really knew them, etc.

  16. avatar ATFAgentBob says:

    Who cares? McChrystal only got as far as he did by putting in more than his fair share of hours under the desk of his superiors. He’s no better than any Democrat or RINO elected into Congress. Once you get past what they term lower enlisted (E-5 and below) or junior officer (O2 and below) it’s all politics. I’m willing to bet this guy hasn’t hauled around a personal weapon since he made 2nd Lieutenant further, I’m willing to bet he hasn’t fired a weapon nor had to depend on one to save his life since then as well. There’s a huge difference between soldiers like him and actual combat arms troops that went outside the wire.

  17. avatar former water walker says:

    Retarded generals against national reciprocity…FIFY. I don’t give a rat’s anus about his opinion.

  18. avatar Horacemann says:

    I did not serve with or for him but it seems to me Schwartzkopf (sp) was the last general worth a tinkers damn when it came to taking care of his men during war.

    1. avatar troutbum5 says:

      Marines who served under General Mattis would vehemently disagree. I know several grunts who did, and their respect for him borders on worship. For good reason. Many think he’s the second coming of Chesty Puller.

      1. avatar Horacemann says:

        Those marines would know better than I. As I said I did not serve with Schwartzkoph or Mattis. Post was not meant to offend or judge.

    2. avatar LarryinTX says:

      I worked in Desert Storm, where Schwartzkoff was the commander overall, and I never heard anyone criticize him for anything, we *all* loved him, and I still believe today that the best military decision Colin Powell ever made was to put him in charge and get the flying fuck out of his way.

  19. avatar Ragnar says:

    What’s truly frightening; he knows what he is saying is a lie.

    He sold out to the statist devil a long time ago.

  20. avatar TyrannyOfEvilMen says:

    This guy is an idiot but apparently that’s not against the law for generals.

  21. avatar Gordon in MO says:

    There are political generals and there are warrior generals. It is easy to tell the difference if you pay attention.

    Political generals attain their promotions during peace time and service in Washington DC where they can work on their political ambitions.

    Warriors do not do well in peace time and when serving under democrat presidents…and RINO presidents.

    Warriors only do well when someone becomes serious about actually doing well in military conflicts. When that time is over it’s back to “dogs and soldiers keep off the grass”.

  22. avatar Cliff H says:

    “…it’s an affront to both our safety as a nation and the common sense of its citizens that Congress would consider actually weakening our gun laws.”

    Sorry, “sir”, National Reciprocity does nothing to “weaken our gun laws”, it only makes them approximately uniform all across the fucking nation.

    I read the summary of the bill. States can still make their own laws and people from out of state must follow them. The only difference is that a State cannot prevent you from carrying your weapon so long as you have a valid permission slip from you home state, or your home state is honest enough not to require an unconstitutional permission slip for you to exercise your natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms.

    Wait for New York City to make it illegal to carry a concealed weapon within 100 feet of a red fire hydrant.

    1. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

      “I read the summary of the bill.” Read the actual bill. You’ll have a better understanding of what the actual bill would do.

  23. avatar Brandon Carter says:

    Most AD personnel didn’t give a fuck what they thought when they were active, being retired and in some cases disgraced really does’t change that.

  24. avatar Huntmaster says:

    When I was in the Navy the average E-3 had more time sitting in sexual harassment training than actual time training with small arms. Which actually amounted to about 15 minutes. They would still put you on the deck of a Nuclear Submarine with a 12 gauge, .45 or M-14 for sentry or topside watch. I was once assigned topside watch with a 12 gauge Mossberg while my right arm was in a sling, because I had a broken wrist. I am right handed The Captain and Commodore walked across the bridge and I saluted with my left hand. The Commodore turned around walked back to me and said “Captain what’s wrong with this picture?” The Captain reminded the Commodore that in the Navy, you are indeed allowed to salute with your left when your right hand is encumbered. Very well said the Commodore and they continued on their way.

  25. avatar Huntmaster says:

    When I was in the Navy the average E-4 had way more time sitting in sexual harassment training than actual time training with small arms. Which actually amounted to about 15 minutes. They would still put you on the deck of a Nuclear Submarine with a 12 gauge, .45 or M-14 for sentry or topside watch and actually pretend that this was security. I was once assigned topside watch with a 12 gauge Mossberg while my right arm was in a sling, because I had a broken wrist. I am right handed The Captain and Squadron Commodore walked across the bridge and I saluted with my left hand. The Commodore turned around walked back to me and said “Captain what’s wrong with this picture?” The Captain reminded the Commodore that in the Navy, you are indeed allowed to salute with your left when your right hand is encumbered. “Very well” said the Commodore and they continued on their way.

  26. avatar Hank says:

    Benedict Arnold’s for gun confiscation is more like it.

    1. avatar B of Ohio says:

      I wonder what pansy-assed commie he has his nose attached to

  27. avatar Joe R. says:

    “Untrained and potentially dangerous people have no business carrying . . ,”

    The day he gets to decide that, will never get here. And that’s a fing promise.

    1. avatar Joe R. says:

      Definitely more evidence of an evil POS (D) problem and why you have to oppose them all the way back when they ran for dog-catcher, or the local school board

  28. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

    ‘…potentially dangerous people have no business carrying guns in our communities…’

    Everyone is ‘potentially’ dangerous, so apparently nobody should carry a weapon including cops because they’re just as potentially dangerous as anyone else. However, the gubmint is impotent to stop ‘actually’ dangerous people from carrying weapons in our communities so it’s up to us potentially dangerous people to carry our own.

    Probably too simple and logical for a general to understand.

  29. avatar Chadwick says:

    “Retarded general against national cc reciprocity”.

  30. avatar Gunwrites says:

    “I’m OK having complete access to WMDs. You cannot be trusted with small arms.”
    What an ass.

  31. avatar WI Patriot says:

    “Retired Generals Against National Reciprocity – Quote of the Day”

    Off course they are, they don’t want “ordinary” citizens to have the ability to defend themselves…hypocrites they are…

  32. Everyone could qualify as a potentially dangerous person at one time or another. The key word is “potentially”. 99 and 44/100 percent of the people that carry arms would never use those arms under anything but the most dire of circumstances involving possible loss of life for them or those in close proximity to them.

    What that general is demonstrating is the dangerous “we are better than you and have authority over you” of the progressive elite among us that feel the have a right to control those they have decided are lower than themselves.

    The only controls over citizens and naturalized citizens (the only people entitled to the protections in the Constitution) are those in our founding law set, the Constitution, and the laws legally adopted following the processes demanded by the Constitution.

    The Second Amendment does not discriminate when it gives everyone the duty of keeping arms to bear in defense against tyranny by those posing as government. We must each be prepared at all times, with the arms we decide are the best we can afford for the specific purpose intended by the Framers; preservation of the Constitution and protection of our society based therein, from government run amok of the Constitution.

    Government that has run amok of the Constitution is one comprised of people that we have chosen to serve in our places as our voices in management of the affairs of our great Constitutional Republic who have fallen to unguarded temptations, over time, for which there are no penalties for abuse. Those people will have lost site of why they hold the positions they hold and how they got into those positions as well as the obligations they accepted when they took their oaths-of-office. They will have become self-serving and concerned only with ill-gotten gains in power and personal wealth while having lost all allegiance to we the people and to the United States of America.

    When we the people have decided that the public servants we chose to serve in our places have truly run amok of the Constitution and have become dangerous to the survival of the Constitution, our country and our society, it is our duty to remove those people from positions of authority and return government to the rules in the Constitution.

    First, we must exercise the power given us by the Framers. They decided that the amounts of time allocated for Senators, Members of the House of Representatives, and a President to serve in respective terms, is the amount of time during which each is least likely to fall to the unguarded temptations to which they will be exposed while a public servant of the people. It is our duty to make sure those we choose/elect are qualified in character and experience to serve us in the manner we need them to serve. Doing so takes time and effort on each of our parts to insure we know the people we choose and have researched their character and qualifications well.

    The Framers gave specific lengths of service for Senators, Members of the House and a President. We call those periods of service terms. The points in time when those terms expire provide us with the opportunities to choose whether to allow those persons to continue to serve us, or, to elect someone new to fill their places. These are term limits and it is up to us to use them to control how government is conducted and who is chosen to comprise government.

    We the people must be allowed to keep and bear arms to protect our country and way of life. We cannot tell when the time to put down our run amok government will present itself so we must carry the best arms we can on our persons at all time in order to be prepared. Self-preservation is a side benefit of being prepared to defend our government. No state or other entity has the power to “infringe” on our Second Amendment duty. Infringements weaken our defensive abilities and empower those with tyrannical tendencies. This we must not allow, ever.

    Laws now exist to protect us from those that are want to use arms for unintended purposes. Those laws must be enforced. Crimes committed using firearms must have penalties that will discourage future abuses and those penalties must be carried out publicly. Exposure can be an effective deterrent for preventing future abuses.

    BUT, we the people must actively participate in government and be responsible for who serves us and what they do while in office. We must refuse to elect anyone that does not serve us well under the Constitution.

    YOU, yes you must do your part always or we will lose everything those who have died for our country have sacrificed for us to continue on. Will you?

  33. avatar ACP_arms says:

    Why would a general want some civilian to carry a gun when he doesn’t let those serving under him to carry on base?

    1. avatar Mark N. says:

      But of course! Unless in actual combat, no one “needs” a firearm.

  34. avatar 10x25mm says:

    General McChrystal was forced to resign from the Army in 2010 after making comments about his superiors which were insubordinate.

    His comments in the Washington Post, along with his new dye job, are part of his ongoing campaign to rehabilitate himself.

  35. avatar Rusty Chains says:

    I think we have 16 contenders for the position of a Modern Major General!
    https://youtu.be/JTSpFksJ9LQ

  36. avatar johnny108 says:

    You are a traitor to your oath!!

  37. avatar PATRON49IFT says:

    The General is another in a long line who think they know what’s best for us all when it comes to firearms.

    Unfortunately for these folks there is this thing called the 2nd Amendment.

    My low opinion of most flag rank officers has not changed but continues to be reinforced when I hear ignorant , wrong-headed sermons like this one. Guys like the General only want the military and police forces to be armed. Civilians should be disarmed so as not to create any problems. Right?
    How did that work out in Germany pre-WW2? There are many other examples of this idea and how things went sideways.

    It is a pre-requisite that all common sense be discarded in order to get to his level?

  38. avatar Wanderingninja says:

    Can we wait until after we kick all of these anti 2A traitors to build the wall? I don’t want them here I’ve decided.

  39. avatar The Rookie says:

    A good example of the “appeal to authority” fallacy. McChrystal was a general. Fine. That doesn’t automatically make him an expert – or necessarily even competent – on anything 2A related.

  40. avatar FB says:

    Follow the trail of facts. Investigate any large deposits or receiving large investments.
    Specifically from Soros, Bloomberg and dnc organizations.
    Deep down he knows its wrong and not logical thinking.

  41. avatar simon bender says:

    This is the same Officer who was fired for mishandling classified info by providing his mistress, who was also his biographer, access to secret materials, ostensibly to assist her in her book! This ASSWIPE has an opinion that has been issued by the DNC and should be treated accordingly, as the big giant piece of shit that he is!

    1. avatar Huntmaste says:

      Actuallly that was former CIA director General Petraeus. I would add that it is getting to keep track of all these officers who have disgraced themselves in recent years. There are so many it’s hard to keep track of who’s done what

  42. avatar Jim Bullock says:

    General Confusion there just can’t tell the difference between his command and those who command him, who B T W granted him his command, on their (our) behalf. Not his place to declare the people “dangerous.”

    It turns out the mental warps from navigating the armed part of the swamp — Nature? Nurture? Why not both? — are ill-suited to policy. Generals see rivals, their commqnd, and the enemy. Arming any of those is “genrally” bad for him. Citizens of a republic are none of those. Armed citizens are a good thing, if you think like a citizen n not a general.

    HlGeneral McCheese there is the gollem his life has made him. Doesn’t mean we should let him run loose outside his cave when he thinks everything he encounters is his precious, or in the way of his getting it.

    (This is why tapping the U S head of intelligence for occupied Iraq to head internal U S security was bad, wrong, and look what we got. “We want to know everything.” is exactly the wrong perspective on citizens. “Homeland security” works for us, the.population; occupation works on the population for someone else.)

  43. avatar Rusty Chains says:

    I will believe a general or an admiral is a firearms expert when I see they can fire an expert qualifications score with a general issue weapon like they issue to our troops. Otherwise I will continue to believe I know more about firearms and their usage than these political ass kissers ever have or will.

  44. avatar ironicatbest says:

    Major Fuckup and General Disaster.

  45. avatar cisco kid says:

    I totally agree with him. I have been to concealed carry classes and some of them are a complete joke. In the shooting part of it I have even seen untrained highly intelligent people (one was a doctor) do such stupid things with a loaded gun I could not leave the class fast enough to save my own life. And now we are going to have some of these Morons coming at us from every State in the Union. Lord forbid it. Now that is reality even a monkey could not argue against.

    1. avatar Ragnar says:

      So, you condone blatant infringement on law-abiding citizen’s Constitutionally protected rights because you saw a stupid person?

      1. avatar jwm says:

        This lying sack has never been in a gun class. He’s a kapo bloomberg troll.

        1. avatar cisco kid says:

          Quote————————-This lying sack has never been in a gun class. He’s a kapo bloomberg troll.————————quote

          I was repairing firearms, hunting, engaging in competition and teaching firearms training while you were still shitting in diapers assuming you even wore any in your trailer park.

        2. avatar Excedrine says:

          @crisco skinhead — JWM was probably repairing guns, hunting, competing, and teaching while you were still a gleam in your daddy’s eye. Assuming your daddy even stuck around the projects after he knocked up your mama without him putting a ring on her finger first.

    2. avatar Excedrine says:

      Of course you do. You’re a willfully clueless gun-grabber. That’s what you do. You’ve also never been a concealed carry class, either, because you know just as well as any of us do that you’d be the only joke there. And now we already have Morons like you coming at us in every state in the Union. Lord forbid you. Now that is reality that even a moron like you couldn’t argue against.

  46. avatar Chris Morton says:

    Yeah, we need unelected generals determining national policy.

    Look how well it’s worked in Argentina and Myanmar…

  47. avatar Mark N. says:

    Was this the same general who said that citizens should not have AR-15s because they are “weapons of war,” and that he had seen the horrendous wounds inflicted by the .223 round?

    1. avatar cisco kid says:

      Quote————————-Was this the same general who said that citizens should not have AR-15s because they are “weapons of war,” and that he had seen the horrendous wounds inflicted by the .223 round?————————quote

      You should not be making a fool out of yourself by shooting off your big mouth when you have no hunting or war experience with this round. I do and I can assure you sometimes the 5.56mm does indeed make horrendous wounds even with just fmj bullets never mind what happens with expanding bullets. People who have used this round know what I am speaking of. I have seen white tale deer go down as if pole axed at ranges up to and including 225 yards with fjm military rounds and ditto for expanding bullets and the results were not pretty even at that range never mind close combat ranges which are often far , far worse. True every game animal shot reacts differently and may suffer many types of wound damage depending where they are hit but to believe the moronic gun writers when it comes to caliber size and lethality is simply shouting to the world you know as little as they do when they write their idiotic diatribes in the gun rags against small caliber lethality.

      Do you know what caliber to kill specially bred feral mine mules that weighed up to 650 lbs was and it was documented with eye witness accounts by the great gunsmith P.O. Ackely. You will never guess in a million years and it beat out all the old time standard military calibers even though it was never a military caliber. I give you another hint it also penetrated 1/2 inch armor plate with a 48 grain soft point bullet while the 30-06 armor piercing rounds failed to penetrate the same hardened armor plate. The mules went down as if hit by lightening and when the unbelievers saw this they put away their 30-06, 8mm , 7mm rifles etc and were all clamoring to try his rifle out on the mules. And by the way I own and use this caliber as well and yes it is way more lethal than the .223 but it should be considering its velocity over the .223 and no its not a big bore either or even a medium bore. So much for the bull shit that caliber alone is paramount to killing power.

      1. avatar Excedrine says:

        You should not be projecting your foolishness onto others that you’ve already more than earned for yourself when you have no hunting or war experience, or any experience period, with any round whatsoever. You actually don’t and you have no capacity to even make any assurances at all, especially given the fact that you have no knowledge of the military’s own ballistic gel and meat tests showing that their old M855 ball round only fragmented 15% of the time even in the best of conditions, and did not have the velocity to even yaw after just 150 meters from an M4 or 200 meters from an M16. People who have actually used this round, and you clearly haven’t nor do you even know anyone who has, know what I’m speaking of. You’ve never seen a white tail deer struck by anything save a car. And to believe moronic anti-gun nuts like you when it comes to literally anything under the Sun is actually shouting to the world that you know absolutely nothing when you write your idiotic diatribes. (There is a reason why there is a minimum caliber rule in most every state for hunting. Not that you would know that, naturally.)

        You’re alluding to the .220 Swift, by the way, and it penetrates through sheer velocity — velocity being what kills armor first and foremost. Most of us already knew this long before you showed up. And by the way, we rightly doubt you use or own any gun of any caliber and you simply picked up that anecdote from The High Road or some other place you’ve tainted with your demonstrable, willful pig ignorance. Oh, and to top if all off, no one here made any claims that caliber alone is paramount to killing power in the first place, nor could you point to any because it never happened and any claims to that effect came from you pretending that they came from us.

        You’re a liar, a charlatan, and project all of your faults, insecurities, and ills onto people you damn well know don’t exhibit them in the least. All in an effort to assuage your own guilty conscience.

  48. avatar William Higgins says:

    It’s disgusting that this shitbag forgot his oath of enlistment.

    1. avatar Ragnar says:

      Not enlisted. An oath by a commissioned officer is different from an enlisted member.

  49. avatar Macofjack says:

    While in the military I found that most officers are liberals (with the college’s like they are no surprise). This would explain the stupid comment!

  50. avatar piper says:

    Those Generals are bribed, bought, and paid for to mouth such ignorance. Just like many politicians.

  51. avatar adverse5 says:

    The military does not like the idea of facing armed opposition either.

  52. avatar Sven79 says:

    Quite a few of the “untrained and potentially dangerous” civilians actually spend a lot more time on the range than the average policeman or soldier. Furthermore, studies have shown that those with a concealed carry license are far more accurate than the police when they have to shoot.

  53. avatar drunkEODguy says:

    Eat shit Stan, I don’t have a uniform on anymore and neither do you. You have no power here.

  54. avatar Tim says:

    OK, yes National Reciprocity sounds great doesn’t it, but one MAJOR problem with that piece of legislation…it’s Unconstitutional, which is the only reason to oppose. Before any of you stroke out consider that “our federal Constitution doesn’t delegate to the federal government any power over the Country at Large to restrict our arms. Accordingly, all pretended federal laws, regulations, orders, opinions, or treaties which purport to do so are unconstitutional as outside the scope of powers delegated. They are also unconstitutional as in violation of the Second Amendment.”

    Think about this; you have a Concealed Carry Permit, what did you have to do to get it? You had to ask permission of your government to exercise your natural right, but you also had submit to a Government background check to prove your innocence against a presumption of guilt. So now your right has now been transmuted to a privilege requiring you to get permission from Government. How is that not a restriction or infringement?

    “If the central government has the authority to tell a state it must accept permits from all the other states, then it also has the authority to tell a state it may not accept a concealed permit from any other states. If the central government can do these things it can set up a national concealed carry permit scheme and in essence bring into existence a national arms registry. That is exactly where this is headed.” Attorney Richard D. Fry

    We’d be better off getting Constitutionally educated and start pressuring your Congress Critters and State Legislators to follow the Constitution and begin repealing all the Unconstitutional gun control laws including CCW Permits…States like Arizona, Michigan and others have gone with “Constitutional Carry” no permit required…on the Federal level repeal NFA of 1934, Gun Control Act of 1968, abolish the ATF. Our Founders would be aghast at how we the people have forfeited our rights and worship at the alter of FedGov….why, because we don’t know them.

    1. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

      This bill is completely withing the powers of the Congress to enact. It is also necessary for Congress to enact it (or something like it) because the courts have not made any ruling upholding the right to bear arms, and are not likely to anytime soon.

      What is the legislation you suggest Congress pass and what are the chances of it even getting a committee hearing?

    2. avatar Jim Macklin says:

      The Fourteenth Amendment says that no state shall make or enforce any law that restricts te rights of a citizen. Since the HELLER and McDonald cases the dozen or so states that deny the right to keep and bear arms have been violating the rights of citizens by banning any method of carry or of not issuing a license for concealed carry.
      Section Five of te Fourteenth Amendment says Congress shall enforce the amendment with laws.

      1. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

        Tim either doesn’t care or is incapable of learning.

  55. avatar Rocky says:

    McChrystal commanded JSOC (Joint Special Operations Command) in Afghanistan. I have a close connection with an officer attached there during his his command. He said that McChrystal was the smartest man he had met. Obama fired him for his remarks to a Rolling Stone reporter about how feckless the Obama administration was.
    See http://theweek.com/articles/493315/5-insubordinate-quotes-rolling-stones-stanley-mcchrystal-profile

    I’ve had high regard fir him up til now. This shows that smart people can also be wrong, even stupid.

  56. And yet, when these generals were on active duty, they refused to deploy troops to suppress gun violence.

    Why should we listen to them?

  57. avatar Jim Macklin says:

    Right now I can legally carry in forty states. The one state I have reason to visit where I can’t carry is Illinois. HR38 National Reciprocity will let me visit my home town and friends before they die of old age or I do.
    All the gun laws are patterned from NYC Sullivan Law which was in actuality intended to promote crime. Tim Sullivan, the author was a leader of the Irish Five Points Gang. He wrote the law so he could issue a permit to criminals of his choice and deny a permit to rivals and honest citizens.
    So some Generals oppose national reciprocity.
    They are not experts on civil rights, law or history.

  58. avatar Kenneth says:

    Who is this General? I guess he is either a fool or a plain core Commie,Socialist, Democratic death Party Member. CCW carriers spend time at there shooting clubs. They come from different background’s. Military,law enforcement,etc.Why is this person speaking about CCW should not have the right to carry there weapons into another state. They are carrying to protect themselves,family.

  59. avatar zebra dun says:

    Old Phuc needs to sit the Phuc down and Shut the Phuc up, your retired ya political Obama appointed weenie, GO COLOR!

  60. avatar Edward Allen says:

    I guess I’m safe than. As a former Marine, I can carry according to the putz mcchrystal. Although I think he needs to be tested for the use of illicit drugs.

  61. avatar Ben says:

    Retired Generals need to give up all their arms before anyone else.

    1. avatar kenneth kaplan says:

      Ed I agree with you. This dope makes the most dumb statement. I hope this fool does not carry.

  62. avatar K2 says:

    Damn, I guess Google was broken when most these comments were written. General McCrystal was an excellent commander. You don’t lead a Ranger Company, Battalion, and Regiment if you’re a pussy. He turned JSOC into a highly focused killing machine. In Afghanistan, I think he could have turned things around had he not taken the hits for shit his staff said to a Rolling Stone writer. So most of you need to shut your pieholes about his military record.

    Is he anti-gun? Hell Yes! I know several people that will tell you he was this way when he was a Ranger battalion commander in 1994. They also said he best commander they served with in over 20 years of service.

    1. avatar M. Atkinson says:

      And this is supposed to excuse his anti-Second Amendment bullshit, I think not!
      F..ck him.

    2. avatar Shallnot BeInfringed says:

      Whatever – his military record and the second-hand opinions of a few who served with him doesn’t mean shit to me. Maybe he wasn’t a pussy then, but IMO he is a pussy now; he certainly fits the profile. ‘Anti-gun’ is all I need to know in order to classify him with other pathetic liberals who should shut their pieholes in public.

      Oh, and he’s a traitor, too. Yes, I said it. Anyone who has such little regard for his fellow citizens and the Constitution (including the Bill of Rights) and feels that we shouldn’t have the ability to arm ourselves (in direct opposition to the 2nd Amendment) is a traitor to the oath he took. End of story.

      1. avatar K2 says:

        My comments were directed at the moronic comments on GEN McCrystals record of service by uninformed jackasses who have never served in the military,

        I don’t support McCrystals anti-gun position. But he is not a traitor, we just disagree. But if he or anyone attempted to take my firearms I have the means and skills to effectively resist . Nor do I support national reciprocity for concealed carry. I don’t want the Federal Government involved. Laws are usually written so poorly, bureaucrats can interpret their meaning however they choose.

        1. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

          The general served with distinction, and funnilly enough he was fired for being a terrible politician. Seriously, don’t insult the pettiest, most vindictive president we have ever had (and I’m including Trump) in a national publication.

          But to your other point about how Congress shouldn’t be involved in protecting 2A rights, you are dead wrong. That’s their (and the courts) job, and the courts aren’t doing it.

        2. avatar K2 says:

          I don’t trust Congress to do their job. I fear bureaucrats with vague laws, making regulations and being supported by the politicized judges willing to find any excuse to forward their agendas/beliefs. Few laws were passed during the Obama Administration, but we still got thousands of regulations. And the Heller Decision allows reasonable firearms restrictions.

        3. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

          Well then, I guess it’s time to kill all of them, since there are no other solutions.

        4. avatar Shallnot BeInfringed says:

          I don’t support McCrystals anti-gun position. But he is not a traitor, we just disagree.” Well, you’re right about one thing – we disagree.

          Since you might not be familiar with the Oath of Office McChrystal recited, here it is: “I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.”

          Now, what part of his lobbying against the 2nd Amendment serves to “support and defend the Constitution”? How does speaking against one of the most important facets of the Constitution “bear true faith and allegiance to the same”? Lastly, how could he “take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion”, then launch a verbal attack on the people who own and carry firearms, classifying all of us as too stupid and untrained to do it safely?

          It’s safe to say his oath has been severely shredded, and is no longer worth the paper it was printed on. You may not see that as being a traitor, but what else do you call a person who swears to God they will defend the Constitution, then turns around and does the polar opposite?

          I know what I call them. YMMV.

        5. avatar K2 says:

          Again, I only wrote comments on GEN McCrystal to defend his military record against the uninformed. I wasn’t defending his anti-gun stance. I do not support the National Reciprocity at this time, because I do not want the Federal Government more involved in gun laws. The Progressive’s anti-gun agenda is incremental change. Allowing the Federal Government into the states’ conceal carry laws is a possible disaster in the making. Additionally, I believe each state has a right to make their own laws, hence why I don’t live in my home state of California.

          First, I understand officers oath of office having taken it several times as an Army officer in my 23 year career as an infantry officer. The last time was on an an Afghan National Army base in Ghazni, Afghanistan (BTW GEN McCrystal was the overall Commander).

          GEN McCrystal is not advocating against the Constitution, but a proposed law. He can do so in good conscience, because he is no longer on active duty. In fact, he could advocate abolishing the Second Amendment. The Constitution, is not written in stone. It can and has been amended.

        6. avatar Shallnot BeInfringed says:

          You have your opinion, and I have mine. Something tells me neither one is going to change. But I have a strong feeling that a huge majority of the posters here agree with my opinion, not yours. (Which is not saying you’re wrong, it’s just taking into account the general attitude of the denizens of the site where we are posting.)

          So let’s just end this peacefully. Have a great day, and I’ll do the same.

  63. avatar Jim Pat Flowers says:

    The Military Academy failed in teaching this man about Constitutional Rights and History.

  64. avatar Chiefton says:

    Dear General Mac,

    We, the People of this Republic, have long insisted and are constitutional permitted, to be armed and bear those arms without infringements. As a General, who has been part of our many military failures during and since the Vietnam war, can no longer be trusted to defend us effectively. As a result, the wise citizens of this country have chosen to be armed for their own defense and also the long term defense of this country. With that said, we thank you for your service but I must admit, your thoughts and strategies flat out suck.

  65. avatar M. Atkinson says:

    Pos

  66. avatar adverse5 says:

    Save a gun, carry a lawyer.

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