They say if you live long enough you get a date with Jennifer Love Hewitt. By the same token, you’ll encounter a mainstream media report chronicling a defensive gun use where no shots are fired. Here comes one of those rare gems now (the DGU not JLH): “Their M.O. this time was almost identical. The driver pulled the car to the end of the car wash’s driveway, and the three men got out and approached Watson [not shown],” dallasobserver.com reports. “One of them gestured toward the man’s car and asked if it was his. Then, he pulled a black pistol from his waistband. What the robbers don’t seem to have realized was that the man, Charles Watson, is a retired Dallas cop. He’d been on alert since he first seen (sic) the car approaching and had watched carefully as the men walked toward him, spreading out for tactical advantage, and positioned himself accordingly. In other words, he was ready . . .
By the time the robber could get the gun from his waistband, Watson had drawn and had his no-longer-concealed handgun trained on him. The two accomplices, who were reaching for their guns, stopped dead.
This tableau — a former cop holding three would-be robbers at bay in the Easter morning predawn — lasted only for an instant. First the man who had pulled the gun, then his two friends, turned and sprinted back to the waiting Corolla, which sped away. They haven’t yet been caught, though Watson may have scared them straight for the rest of the holiday at least.
I doubt that. But it makes a great story, minus the happy ending.
“Police State” is my phrase of choice.
The pro-gun site North West Firearms has a thread running with regulars organizing a fund raiser for this man. The call is for 100 donations of $20 each.
http://www.northwestfirearms.com/general-firearm-discussion/131245-c-c-gun-sales-leaves-cancer-victim-nothing-shameless-end.html
I was using the term personally before I saw it show up on this site. I think it is an accurate and precise descriptor.
Okay boys and girls take a deep breath and consider something… suppose the look on her face means something else. Our president cannot legally ban firearms but he CAN put the squeeze on ammunition. Using current laws, add a little propaganda, the popular view of a nice little UN Treaty to a spending spree and what she said is dead-on, “the bullets will have been shot and there won’t be any more available.” Yes, she’s your prototypical daft bint in office, but she could have just realized she said something she shouldn’t have for a whole different reason. After 31 years behind one of their badges and having my professional beliefs and ethics pushed aside over and over, I’ve become a little bit of a conspiracy nut myself.
Of course you should use the term here. We’re all grown ass men and women and (most of us) have the common sense to know that you aren’t belittling or making light of the plight of slaves here in our country’s past. Slavery is a dark and complex mark on our history, but we cannot allow ourselves to be afraid to use the term.
Slavery has been present across the globe since the dawn of civilization and people need to stop instantaneously associating the word “slave” withAfrican Americans.
RF, you use the term appropriately in my eyes because a man who is unable to defend himself as he sees fit is therefore beholden to rely on a higher power for protection, much like medieval peasants had to rely on their local Dukes and Lords for protection whenever my barbarian kinfolk swept down from the North for a bit of pillage and plunder.
So sure, the new slave states may not be forcing labor (yet) upon the citizens in return for protection, but forcing them to give up arms is most definitely a mark of slavery.
If you don’t mind displaying a profound ignorance as to what slavery actually is (and obviously you don’t), do continue.
Listen to Obama’s Speech
I’d rather douse my testicles with gasoline and light a match.
In the infamous Dred Scott decision, declaring that Negros were never equal to citizens, the decision includes the argument against recognizing the full humanity of Negros:
“It would give to persons of the negro race, … the right to enter every other State whenever they pleased, … the full liberty of speech in public and in private upon all subjects upon which its own citizens might speak; to hold public meetings upon political affairs, and to keep and carry arms wherever they went.”
So yes, restricting the right to keep and carry arms is pathognomic of not just a state of slavery, but of dehumanization.
N.B. that the gun grabbers are the same people who are attempting to restrict the “full liberty of speech in public and in private…” by invoking PC criteria such as “hate speech”.
The student at the Florida University who protested against being forced to stamp on a piece of paper with the inscription “Jesus” is currently under suspension because her protest led to the “professor” feeling intimidated.
It behooves us to recognize that the attacks on the Second are simply part of a more generalized attack on our rights as free human beings.
But absent a term for a dehumanizing state, slave state will have to do.
Your reference to Maryland as becoming a slave state is exactly accurate. Unfortunately we cannot depend on the Supreme Court to defend the Bill of Rights. As soon as Scalia or Thomas retires Obozo will be able to appoint another traitor to the court similar to Sotomayor or the other broad (name escapes me at the moment). This will assure that the “emergency” cases the regime will bring to the court will be acted upon immediately and will be the death knell of our Constitution.
Under the literal definition of the word, I suppose you would be incorrect in your usage. In the spirit of the word however, the Government arbitrarily laying down w/e rules it wants with the “subjects” having no real recourse, I would call these states “Slave States”.
On the other hand, I can see how some might be offended by it. I wouldn’t. If my state had anything resembling what Colorado, Conn, NY had, then I’d be the first to call it a slave state. I’d give it one election cycle to try and affect some change (while making plans to “strategically re-position”) and then I’d pack my bags.
Using the word slave isn’t going to make those laws any more or less un-Constitutional, illogical, unethical, or oppressive. Whether or not you call them slave states isn’t going to change my opinion of those governments and those who voted them into power.
To answer your question; Meh… do what you want.
I just spent a considerable length of time applying the amendments to the latest version of the bill. As far as I can tell, the bill bans the following:
Semi-auto rifle with detachable magazine and two of the following
1) folding stock
2) grenade or flare launcher
3) flash suppressor
Semi-auto pistol with detachable magazine is good to go. No evil feature list. (Note: pistols on the expressly banned list, like a Tec-9, are still considered assault weapons).
Semi-auto shotgun with a folding stock or any shotgun with a revolving cylinder is banned.
The bill also lists specific rifles (and their “copies”) which will be banned. It looks to be the federal list circa 1994. Scar is not listed. ACR is not listed. There is also a lot of ambiguity in this section. Considering that criminal laws are interpreted narrowly, I think there is a good argument that piston ARs are not prohibited, maybe even more, depending on the application of the word “copy.”
As for magazine limits, the law still has the same loophole that transfers are banned but possession is not. Meaning you can still go out of state, buy all the mags you want, and bring them back with you. With this loophole, the mag limit is not the end of the world.
All in all, it could be a LOT worse (not that I supported it. I don’t). I do think that the constant rallies made a difference with the feature list. People are starting to realize that pistol grips and telescoping stocks are not evil. They’re just ergonomic.
I think the one thing I would add is the he’s just plain wrong on his gun control agenda. Once again, they’re trying to treat the symptom instead of the cause. Guns are no the cause of the violence. Guns are just one tool used by those who would commit violent crimes. Find the cause of these criminals anger, or whatever, and we can then start talking about how to end it.
Rob, that’s not overkill. I hiked in Glacier National Park with a Glock 20 with hard cast buffalo bore ammo. I also brought bear spray as well because sometimes spray is better than a firearm, depending on the circumstance.
Marlin 1894 CP
http://gastatic.com/UserImages/109956/903070854/wm_3669177.jpg
Unsure of all the legalities involved, I would hope the longstanding Constitution would trump any law to the contrary. Unfortunately the admin. has shown it’s disdain for the Constitution and any law it doesn’t agree with, it has set precedence in selective enforcement. I too believe a storm is brewing… It seems there’s a lot of dust gettin kicked up but not many tracks made, not yet anyway.