I can’t embed this video from usatoday.com’s editorial writer George Hagar [above]. Click here to view. Here’s the [alleged] reader’s [alleged] question for the Gannett flagship’s Ask USA Today feature: “A reader asks: What is stopping the United States from adopting a national ban on firearms in light of these many tragic shootings?” Now how would you answer the question without ONCE mentioning the Second Amendment? Wait. Would you? I didn’t think so. [h/t JC]
Wow. Was another reader’s follow up question “what color is the sky in your alternate reality”?
PLEASE stop pestering Mr. Hagar with DETAILS!!! He wants to ban guns, and he’s gonna HOLD HIS BREATH until it happens!
AREN’T YOU, Mr. Hagar?
We can only hope…
What is stopping the United States from adopting a national ban on firearms in light of these many tragic shootings?
It’s simple really.
1. It’s a natural right for a person to be able to defend themselves.
2. The tragic shootings. Perhaps if more people thought and acted as I do, there would be less tragic shootings.
Robert, on your upcoming exercise, please consider one thing: The “active shooter” is VERY unlikely to want to fight to the death after the first concealed carry holder shoots. You need to find a frightened rabbit to play the role of the active shooter. Bring Wet Wipes. He’s going to crap – and then shoot himself or gently surrender. Not always, but most likely.
@RF and Nick,
On a follow up thought, you might also want to try 10 round mags, plus 30 round mags just to prove a point…
It’s even simpler that that. A nationwide gun ban won’t work. No need to confuse people with concepts like personal responsibility or self-defense and facts like police response times longer than the duration of the crime or that the police has no legal responsibility to protect any individual citizen. How well have our drug bans worked? How effective was Prohibition at keeping alcohol away from the populace? I seem to remember learning something about ‘speakeasies’ and a repeal of Prohibition. Seems to me its high time we learn from history. After all, these ‘gun free zones’ don’t seem to be working out so well.
This is what we’re up against.
These people regard themselves intellectuals, simply because they graduated from a college or university.
and they stayed at a holiday inn too.
HA!
And they (evidently) have very strange Gene Wilder toupees.
Now, don’t go picking on college grads. I have an MBA and am on this side.
The point is, an education does not make you an intellectual. Intellect makes you an intellectual.
If that was an authentic question from a real person, it could illustrate a sad reflection of society. If real, that person apparently has no concept of the Bill of Rights and possibly the entire Constitution. It could be another indictment of our failed educational system but most likely it demonstrates some people could not care less about our history. Which allows idiots like Mr. Hagar to spout his brand of lunacy without the general population understanding why he is so wrong.
The last thing this full-blown ret*rd wants to do is introduce a reader to that Constitution thing, or that Bill of Rights garbage.
And Blammo is correct, an astounding number of college grads think they are Gods gift to military, law enforcement and world affairs, never mind that scant few of them ever wore a military uniform, shot a gun or got plastered drunk in some stinky whore house in some nasty port someplace/
Let’s remember: USA Today is written at a 5th grade reading level. This is a fact.
The average American reading level is fifth grade. I went to DINFOS (defense information school) as a photographer for the Marine Corps. A lot of my buddies were journalism students for the military. They were required to write on a fifth grade level because it’s average. I know it’s sad but it’s true.
College textbooks are only at a tenth grade reading level. Sad, but true.
USA Today is a newspaper but all I can find is a video?
Step one in banning private ownship of firearms is to repeal the Second Amendment. Amending the Constitution is not a new process, just not an easy one to accomplish.
A college degree needn’t make you opposed to guns. I have a PhD in physics and my wife has an MA in music. We own handguns, shoot and would be willing to use them to defend ourselves. We don’t object to others doing the same unless they are violent criminals or mentally ill.
One can write common sense at a fifth grade reading level and foolishness at a PhD level.
The problem, Kendahl , is that unlike you, Mr. Hager has been educated far beyond his intelligence.
“…getting those guns BACK…” They just can’t help but think all those guns came from the government, can they?
“…getting those guns BACK…” They just can’t help but think all those guns originally came from the benevolent government, can they?
India, perfect example of keeping guns OUT of the hands of citizens, but not the hands of criminals. Criminal will buy/use stolen or homemade guns. http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/india/101214/india-illegal-guns-gun-control-crime P.S. Rape, most often gang rape, is an epidemic in the largest cities in India.
http://world.time.com/2012/12/19/brutal-delhi-gangrape-outrages-indians-spurs-calls-for-action/ Perhaps if Indian women had the right to self-defense? Nope, that’s barbaric.
Mr. Colion Noir says “You Know You’re a GUN CONTROL HYPOCRITE IF…”
“You consistently call a magazine a clip.”
“You say magazine clips on national television.”
“You consistently call a magazine a clip.”
Sometimes I really hate when people get pedantic about the magazine/clip distinction, but then I turn around and find myself doing it, too. There’s no denying the argument of “How am I supposed to take you seriously in a conversation about guns when you can’t even be bothered to do the very basic level of research necessary to get the nomenclature right?”
Referring to a semi-automatic AR-15 as an “assault rifle” often seems to be purposeful obfuscation leading to FUD, so I can see why people do it. Referring to magazines as “clips” doesn’t lead to FUD, it doesn’t sound scary, it doesn’t gain them any ground. It’s just ignorance, pure and simple.
Someone PLEASE give Mr. Colion Noir Wayne Lapierre’s job. Mr. Lapeirre can still can maintain a real nice job at the NRA, but Mr. Colion Noir should be the voice and face of the organization. The OFWG image is not helping in the PR department.
Does Mr. Hager realize that the only readers of his rag are people bored to tears in car dealerships and airports?
And hotel lobbies. . . Does anyone, other than the big chains, EVER pay for that piece of garbage rag?
Agreed that he should have referenced 2A, but its also pretty interesting that his take is that even in light of the Newtown shooting, increased restrictions are by no means assured.
I would however also like to take exception to his comment that the voters are evenly divided between those who want more restrictions and those who want things left as they are. From polls I’ve seen, there is a significant percentage of people who want the laws loosened. Nice that he omitted that fact as well
He misses the Second Amendment, but let someone propose censorship of his paper, and he’d recall the First Amendment in short order.
By contrast, I’m someone who values all rights, whether I’m exercising this one or that one at the moment or not.
Our “Big Gov” needs to get even bigger and more powerful. We need to give them an even higher percentage (currently over 24% when 20% is the average) and our semiautomatic firearms (hell, lets just give them ALL our guns).
Liberalism is a mental disorder and suicidal for a republic.