Quote of the Day: How Did He Not See This Coming?

Luiz Simmons courtesy luizsimmons.com


“Maryland is armed to the teeth. We caused this rush, this stampede really, to purchase guns….It’ll be a generation before the effects of this bill will be felt.” – Maryland Delegate Luiz Simmons, Record gun sales soar higher in Maryland [at baltimoresun.com]


  1. avatar Gs650g says:

    A generation? Try never. These rules do nothing about real crime.

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

      “…the effects of this bill will be felt.”

      I think he meant reducing the number of legally owned firearms by law abiding citizens, not reducing crime.

      1. avatar Daniel says:

        Exactly. The whole idea was to remove guns from civilian hands. Fuck this guy and everyone that looks like him.

      2. avatar gs650g says:

        By criminalizing the ownership of certain guns he is creating new crimes without addressing crimes that truly need addressing.
        And he can bite me as well.

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

          I think the term is “victimless crimes”. They’re too busy creating a new class of criminal out of people who aren’t hurting anyone to go after those who actually are hurting others. As long as they can (ironically) claim to be “tough on gun crime” they and (sadly) their constituents will be happy.

    2. avatar Jus Bill says:

      Correct. These idiots live in their own fantasy world.


  2. avatar Jeff the Griz says:

    Threaten to take stuff away and it makes people want it more. Idiots, the politicians have done more for gun sales than any factor in the last several years.

    1. avatar SD3 says:

      Will it help put the universe back in balance of I buy another gun in Virginia?

      O.K., done!

      1. avatar Jeff the Griz says:

        It might, now if only I could win a lottery or something, so I could resupply my stocks, since that tragic boating accident.

  3. avatar Pascal says:

    They want to take our rights away incrementally anyway. They don’t care about short term losses or crime. The civilian disarmament complex simply wants one more step to banning guns.

    It also fits the script, government is great at making laws without consideration for the unintended consequences that may occur. These people all have very short vision. Most cannot see past to the next election cycle.

  4. avatar dwb says:

    I am only armed to the knees here.

    1. avatar Conrad says:

      Knees downwards or knees up? We could chip in and getcha an ankle holster?

      You know it’s bad when the Democrats are calling each other morons… 😐

      1. avatar dwb says:

        Democrats eating their young and calling each other morons is a good sign. ” armed to the teeth” is just the mating call of a gun grabber. I doubt this delegate has been to America, were they have real guns

  5. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    “It’ll be a generation before the effects of this bill will be felt.” – Maryland Delegate Luiz Simmons

    It will be a lot longer than that. Most firearms last a lot longer than one generation — depending on your precise definition of one generation. The Marlin .22 caliber rifle that I purchased in 1985 is in excellent condition and shoots just as well today as it did 28 years ago.

    Some firearms will be scrapped from misuse or improper care. And some people who like to put several thousand rounds through their firearm per year will wear them out before the next generation. But the vast majority — I would venture to guess at least 80% — will be in fine working order in 50 years.

    1. avatar Hal J. says:

      This brings up an interesting point…just how long will a modern firearm stay functional, given proper storage and maintenance? I suspect your “80% will still work 50 years from now” estimate is very conservative…I’ve shot bolt-action rifles and revolvers that were over 100 years old without a single malfunction.

      1. avatar Jim R says:

        Well let’s see. Figure on a handful being lost in fires or other accidents. A few more for “catastrophic failure”. The majority of the guns lost are likely to be lost to poor care and lack of maintenance. A few will be just plain worn out from heavy use.

        But in 50 years? I see probably 80-90% of all guns on the market now being gone. Regulated out of existence, confiscated and scrapped.

        Call me a pessimist but I don’t see us winning this fight.

        1. avatar jh says:

          The question is How many people will actually let their firearms get confiscated ?

        2. avatar Jus Bill says:

          A lot fewer than those that won’t after they discover that confiscated goods are NOT tax deductible losses.

      2. avatar Ardent says:

        Well . . . I have a GEW 98 8mm Mauser Rifle that was manufactured at the Danzig munitions plant in 1917. According to it’s form and armorers marks it underwent a partial K98 conversion in Berlin in about 1939 or 40. It shows marks of having been turned back into an armory at the end of WWI and it’s conversion and subsequent capture by US forces in WWII suggest the rifle has seen two wars. It’s nearly 100 years old, spent 50 years in a basement rusting. . . but having been cleaned and given a little TLC it’s still a robust and accurate rifle, if terribly ugly.

        A well made and even remotely maintained gun can remains a viable weapon for at least 100 years.

        Given the number of Turkish Mausers, SMLE’s and etc that saw one or two wars but are still around putting rounds down range I suspect that my rifle is not unique in it’s longevity. Considering the guns being purchased today will most likely not encounter a war in their lifetime, they might well be viable indefinitely, even thousands of years into the future.

        1. avatar Brad_in_MA says:


          My 1945 Mosin Nagant M44 shoots “minute of dinner plate ” at 200 yards with standard issue spam can surplus ammo, if I do my part. With proper cleaning & maintenance, I’m sure it will shoot that well in 2045 and Lord-willing, 2095 !!!!
          – Brad

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

      Not to mention that firearms can be rebarreled and most any other part can be replaced. The part that’s classified as a “firearm” is just the frame, which is basically a solid chunk of steel, aluminum or plastic with a few moving parts attached to it. If they somehow passed a national ban on the manufacture or import of any new firearms there would be a huge industry pop up to maintain the ones we’ve got. The frames could last for centuries. The only way to get rid of them is to come and take them (and I don’t think they’re prepared to try that).

  6. avatar Jim says:

    Actually Mr. Simmons, the drop in crime will happen fairly quickly.

    1. avatar B says:

      “Crime” rises due to people not following their retarded laws. So they pass more laws. Wouldn’t be surprised if violent crime goes down in the meantime, but that won’t be reported since it doesn’t fit the narrative.

    2. avatar ropingdown says:

      Good observation, as only the ‘more guns’ unintended consequence will factor in as an effective crime-reduction strategy.

  7. avatar jh says:

    I did my share. i bought more this year than i have bought in my whole life . Maryland land of the oppressed

  8. avatar BLAMMO says:

    Non-“people of the gun” may not want or figure they don’t need a gun.

    Until the government tells them they can’t have a gun.

    1. avatar Jeff the Griz says:

      This is a large portion of why I wanted an AR, I was just a lad when the big ban happened and it made me want one badly because I couldn’t have one. I jumped on the chance as soon as my budget allowed after the ban lifted.

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

        Before Slick Willy the Mini-14 was far more popular than the ARs, but BR kowtowed to the antis and kept his Mini off the banned list and now they run a distant second. The antis have WJC to thank for the AR craze.

  9. avatar Daniel C-W says:

    The common concern now among many here is that the State legislature will now go after guns they didn’t ban and find ways to create punishment for arms acquired over this past year.

    When SB281 was introduced last year, registration was made mandatory — even on guns you already had registered with them. The feature test was more strict, including telescoping stocks, heat shields, and of course, pistol grips, among others. It would have been a criminal penalty to not register that included jail-time. Asshats like the above quoted were dismayed that many of the more restrictive provisions were struck out.

  10. avatar Bob says:

    Oh he’ll feel the effects sooner than that. Next election cycle I think. All those guns went to people that hold certain beliefs. Those people are now pissed and waiting.

    ‘Course it might not be enough to offset all the votes they buy with welfare checks in the sh!thole that is Baltimore.

    1. avatar Jus Bill says:

      I just have to wonder just how many state convicts will be voting absentee this year…

      1. avatar Jus Bill says:

        …NEXT year. Sorry, not enough coffee.

  11. avatar Shire-man says:

    “Do you allow your own actions to be constrained by the paranoia and fears of others?”

    Asks O’Malley. If I weren’t so used to this sort of mindless hypocrisy I’d be bashing my head into my desk about now.

    1. avatar Ing says:

      Apparently, what you do in this case (if you’re a politician in O’Malley’s vein) is use your fear and paranoia to restrain the actions of others.

    2. avatar Chip says:

      “… I’d be bashing my head into my desk about now.”

      With a moment of thought you might realize it would be more effective if a different head was being bashed into the desk.

      Not that I am promoting physical violence, Just the thought of it.

  12. avatar Wes S. says:

    Apparently State Delegate Obvious there can’t see that the rush to buy guns *is* one of “the effects” of that bill.

    Clearly, additional applications of the cluebat are required. Or perhaps a dose of tar and feathers.

    1. avatar gloomhound says:

      +1 and then some.

  13. avatar FrankM says:

    And he set himself up for a convenient excuse for when the crime rate doesn’t drop.

  14. avatar RockOnHellChild says:

    It’s interesting when these people make comments like this and show their hand…

  15. avatar Mike says:

    OK…”Tinfoil Hat” time guys…every single time this “anti-gun” Bills are put into place, a huge buying spree ensues. Maybe the “Anti-Gunners” are really agents working for the Weapons Industry, making us buy more of their product with these frequent “we’re gonna take your guns” scares…

    1. avatar Jus Bill says:

      And enduring the subsequent drop in sales of prohibited arms for years or decades afterwards? Doesn’t make sense to me.

  16. avatar Mark N. says:

    Ah, Karma’s a bitch….

  17. avatar S_J says:

    Most punchable face I’ve seen in a while.

  18. avatar Jay1987 says:

    Submitted without comment.

  19. avatar niceguns says:

    I see a problem coming down the pipe. There is no way another democrat can win anywhere except California, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island and they know it, but they are not afraid. That only tells us that they are going to win by fraud in every election. I wish we can head that off some how…

    1. avatar gs650g says:

      Democrats are the Party of Free Shit. People vote for benefits everytime. No one votes against someone with a free phone and health insurance.

  20. avatar Pat says:

    Never vote libtard (democrat) again.

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