“There is no debate about the horrific, Third World worthy gun violence in our society. The problem is that so many people are willing to tolerate it, justify it because of a poorly written, outdated paragraph in the constitution. 30,000+deaths a year, because freedom. Well, I want freedom FROM guns. I don’t want a bunch of yahoos with concealed carry permits itching to prove their manhood walking around. Studies prove that the states with the laxest gun laws have the highest rates of gun violence, that having a gun in your home makes you less safe, that suicides drop dramatically without gun availability. Who wouldn’t want to emulate Australia, or England, or Japan? I don’t want to live in freaking Somalia, I just want to know I won’t get shot if some moron thinks I cut him off on the highway. What the f**k is wrong with us?” – Pssdov commenting on Debate on Gun Violence Limited by Either-Or Thinking [via politicsusa.com]
Home Quote of the Day Quote of the Day: Freaking Somalia Edition
The only way to squeeze more BS into a single paragraph would be to have the current occupier of 1600 Penn. speak it.
He forgot to blame the NRA.
Otherwise it was a pretty good factless anti-gunner nonsensical rambling.
Let not your heart be troubled. He does blame the NRA in the linked article.
Pssdov’s comment seems representative of many of the regular rants that are posted by the brainwashed progressive utopia fantasizing anti-gun followers. At least s/he isn’t wishing mayhem and death upon those responsible enough to take advantage of their right to legally, effectively look out for themselves and family in the event an imminent deadly assault should befall them.
If Pssdov and his/her fellow half blind commenting antigun followers want to say something about the issue, s/he should at least *independently, unbiasedly* educate him/her-self as to the facts using unbiased sources looking beyond the rhetoric of the familiar anti-gun groups. After that they should personally familiarize themselves with this important, divisive subject (beyond one sided anti-gun rhetoric and propaganda). S/he should learn to shoot and become acquainted with a few of the people who oppose government gun rights incursions so his/her perspective is more…informed.
If s/he did so, s/he might discover that the people so easily demonized with a keyboard aren’t much different than he/her-self and that they share many of the same concerns.
I like the part where he claims guns cause suicides and then in the very next sentence he says we should emulate Japan. So much fail for so few words.
He has no more knowledge of the suicide rate in Japan, than he does about “third world violence”. Rather rote rant by a dolt who thinks he knows something.
I bet Japanese people committing suicide wish they had access to guns. Hell of a lot better than drinking Draino, which is a preferred method of theirs if I recall.
Guns for ethical euthanasia; good god, do they want people to suffer.
I’d certainly want to check out in the quickest, least painful way possible.
I love how so many on that side try to enduce change via insults, hate, and feeble attempts at shame.
“I love how so many on that side try to enduce change via insults, hate, and feeble attempts at shame.” They do that because that is all they have. They don’t have any data or convincing arguments based on reality. And they certainly have no way to actually and truthfully negate our rights. So all they can do is try to harass us into complying with them.
In fact, there were books in Japan teaching people how to commit a successful suicide.
Dickie J ,,beats kamikaze, or shanking youreself in the gut with a sword.
Japan’s suicide rate: 21.4 per 100,000, #7 in the world.
US suicide rate: 12.5 per 100,000, #30 in the world.
Not only is his argument completely BS but the facts actually prove the opposite. We can’t say guns prevent suicide but we sure as hell can say they don’t significantly increase it.
Yeah we should emulate a country like Japan that not only doesn’t have a the right to bear arms, but also doesn’t protect the right to free speech or the right to have a lawer at trial. Japan also lacks the 5th, you must answer police questions. There are also no Miranda rule to limit police interrogation techniques, Japanese police and prosecutors may detain a suspect indefinitely until he confesses. Really sounds great, doesn’t it?
Last I heard, Japanese police could just waltz into your house and give it a good going-over once every six months or so too. This guy is the perfect case of oral dysentery.
Yep, and they arrest people for defending themselves from attackers. Self defence is not a legal excuse for fighting in Japan. It is crazy, then again it is a country that gets off to tentacles.
“Well, I want freedom FROM guns. I don’t want a bunch of yahoos with concealed carry permits itching to prove their manhood walking around.” – Pssdov commenting on Debate on Gun Violence Limited by Either-Or Thinking
Well, I want freedom FROM opinions. I don’t want a bunch of yahoos with an ax to grind itching to prove their “superiority” on websites all around.
And because my feeling about this is so indescribably intense that I am at risk of becoming unhinged, is that sufficient justification for laws banning people from stating their opinion?
That’s what they have in France, another country this ass clown probably thinks we should emulate.
Dear Mr. Pssdov,
Why don’t you just move to Australia, or England, or Japan? Then you wouldn’t need to emulate anything. Additionally, I would, in turn, be closer to having freedom from people who want freedom from guns. Oddly enough, they tend to annoy me a bit.
Perhaps we should start a fundraiser to help him out with the moving expenses.
For every anti-gun freedom-hating serf in the U.S. there must be at least 10x their number who would rather live here, than in a place like the U.K. (where I am originally from. Incidentally you are 3x more likely to be a victim of violent crime in the U.K. than in the U.S. why? Because, guns save lives!) where you have NO RIGHT to defend yourself! Victims of crimes there who happen to get the better of their attackers are punished more strictly than the criminals are.
How about we setup an exchange program?
…That way, those serfs who would rather live in fear can move to their “Utopia” and those who would rather have a fighting chance can move here. Give it three years and the statistics will prove the point. It would be a Win, Win, Win.
I have been saying this for years!!!
People who stay then bitch and moan have no right to especially if “greener pastures”, i.e. Europe, Canada, and Australia already exist that follow their nonsense why don’t they move there instead of forcing me into their delusional, tyrannical, ignorant, stupid way of living.
Rhetorical question I already know the answer.
Hey we don’t want these people here either (Canada); we are only just starting to turn back the damage the libtards did and regain our true gun rights.
I think it’s funny that US progtards think of Canada as a “gun free zone”. Yes, the Liberals screwed us over repeatedly and saddled us with ridiculous iicensing requirements; but the truth is Canadians love guns (not to mention we need them, there are quite a few dangerous (non human) predators up here). The only reason the libtards couldn’t remove our gun rights completely in the 90’s is because they knew even the moderates wouldn’t have stood for it.
While the antis have always had the upper hand, it looks like more and more the sane side is waking up and starting to fight back. Hopefully we can take back and increase our rights with the Conservatives getting another majority this fall.
If there are millions of guns in this country why aren’t there millions of shootings?
Because everyone with guns have already committed suicide.
Yeah that’s why me, most my neighbors, most my friends, and most of my coworkers don’t go on shooting sprees daily. We committed suicide years ago because what else are you going to do with a safe full of evil guns?
Don’t ask them that, they get upset and start the name calling. In fact, they really hate this one: divide 30,000 by 300,000,000 (the number of total deaths with firearms by the total number of firearms). The answer is .0001, or .01 percent. That means IF each person was killed with a different firearm, that only .01% of firearms were used in any given year to kill someone and thus the reverse is that 99.99% of firearms are NOT used to kill anyone. In reality, of course, taking out the suicides that form the bulk of the deaths where firearms were involved, leaves you with an even smaller number. And out of that, how many were gang-bangers killing other gang-bangers? Take that out and the number is even smaller. I’ll keep my firearms and that little collectivist that wrote the article can move to one of his disarmed “utopias”.
Doing math means you hate the children.
Leftism is a dynamic religion. But like all dogma, its fairly easy to pull the underlying argument apart.
I see some people doing it over there. Good for them.
Hmm, 0.01% is the same as the death rate for measles and I have heard some suggest that those who won’t vaccinate should be shot (actually they said anyone who gets measles should be… they were unaware that some some with the vaccine are not immune)…. your argument may be reasonable. But it assumes the audience is able to listen to reason.
We have a public that panics at the drop of a hat. My child has less of a chance of being abducted by a stranger as being struck by lightning, but a majority in this country think we are less safe than the past (opposite is true) and that adults who let kids go down the block to a park without hovering over them should be arrested.
All they need is a single death, a single accident and you are shut out of rational discourse. As seen with the measles panic, you don’t even need that.
“Studies prove that the states with the laxest gun laws have the highest rates of gun violence …” – Pssdov commenting on Debate on Gun Violence Limited by Either-Or Thinking
Except there are no such studies. Maine has the lowest violent crime rate in the United States. Vermont has something like the third lowest violent crime rate in the United States. And Utah has something like the fifth lowest violent crime rate in the United States. And yet it is exceedingly easy to legally purchase firearms and carry them in public in those states. Maine and Utah are both shall-issue concealed carry states. (Those states must issue a concealed carry license to anyone over the age of 21 who has no criminal record.) And Vermont is a constitutional carry state where anyone over the age of 16 can carry a concealed handgun in public as long as they have no criminal record. And there are no locations that are off-limits (e.g. “gun free zones”) in Utah for people who have concealed carry licenses.
In other words the person who wrote that post was lying.
Is this the same study that proves that people who aren’t me are wrong on the internet 78.224% of the time?
Is this the same study that proves that people who aren’t me are wrong on the internet 78.224% of the time?
You willfully misread that, you liar. That study proved that people who aren’t me are wrong on the internet 78.224% of the time. Not you. Filthy liar.
Everybody knows 73.481% of all statistics are fraudulent…
NO, 68% of all statistics are made up on the spot! 😉
Tut tut. Pssdov is talking about “GUN violence”. You can’t compare that to “NON-gun violence”. Everybody knows the only kind of violence that has any meaning is committed with a gun.
There is no need to be concerned with murder, robbery, rape, etc. committed with knives, bludgeons, fists etc., because that is totally meaningless.
“A corpse is a corpse is a corpse.” 😉
Now you have me humming the theme to “Mister Ed”.
Over 16, in Vermont? Really? I guess this is an example of “can’t BUY a gun (federal), but can carry one”? Cool. I guess most everyone there must have been murdered or committed suicide by now, eh?
Back in my highschool days I’d carry a hipower outside of school. It’s perfectly fine if your parents give it to you like I had. And if my daughter stays as responsible as she’s shown herself to be so far in a couple years I’ll be giving her something sitting in the back of my safe if she wants it.
I remember, after discovering California had no age limit for CCW (in practice it varies county to county, youngest being 18) that quite a few states had no or lower age restrictions than Federal law.
I think Vermont is 16 because 16 is the age at which you can legally own and possess a handgun in Vermont (outside of certain narrow provisions, like when supervised by parents). California’s lowest is 18 because ditto. You can possess a handgun at any age under certain conditions (and parents can give permission to have access to guns, thus negating the safe storage laws), but 18 is the age you can own one. Hence the youngest you could carry.
Federal law does have some restriction for possession before the age of 18. But I think it allows it without parental/adult presence at the age of 16, if you have parental permission. So maybe the Federal law is controlling and VT has no law here?
Are you sure that there is no such report or a study stating that the states with the most liberal firearms possession laws have the highest incidents of gun crimes? I keep hearing this same statement over and over from the antis. If there is such a study then we can look at it and discredit it if necessary
There might be, there are countless ways to lie with statistics.
And good luck trying to get a link from an anti!
Sadly, this represents the low or no information voter so pumped full of false self esteem and specialness, he or she is a useful (useless) idiot. Also sadly, he or she has a vote even though he or she obviously knows nothing otherwise you wouldn’t site Japan and suicide as a model.
“Studies prove that … suicides drop dramatically without gun availability.” – Pssdov commenting on Debate on Gun Violence Limited by Either-Or Thinking
Japan is quite possibly the most disarmed nation in the world — the gun control utopia that all gun grabbers dream of emulating — and yet their suicide rate is considerably higher than the United States which is the most armed nation in the world.
It looks to me that Pssdov is at best unable to check gun grabber “facts” and at worst a pathological liar.
Studies show that Japan’s suicide rate is so high because they can’t have guns. Range therapy is successful 88.8769% in solving suicidal ideation and thoughts and replacing it with breathing and concentration techniques that alleviate depresssion.
Yeah that paragraph looks about as devoid of factual information as an anti presonance freedom advocate.
Wow, I love typing on my phone…
Somalia is a strawman. The United States is nothing like Somalia, Pssdov.
“freedom from” gun violence??
So Freedom From – the Freedom To – own/carry a gun?
In other words no freedom at all?
Lets go further – Freedom From – the Freedom To – Have freedoms.
Hrafnkel Haraldsson, The United States was founded on the basis of freedom. I’m sorry you hate having to tolerate freedom. There is a host of other nations that may be better suited for you as we would prefer not relinquish our rights and freedoms because you do not like them.
Also this was humorous:
Especially humorous as the author of the article just went through enumerating Obama’s proposed gun bill effectively banning 30rd mags and other regulations.
Hrafnkel, banning my future purchase is effectively the same as gun confiscation and that is taking our guns.
You’re banging it out over there. Right on.
If you like those other countries so much go live in them . We don’t want you here. Taking guns away from legally own citizens will leave you with the so called trigger happy yahoos itching to shoot you after you cut them off or just don’t like your face. Then you can sit and wait for a cop to come along and maybe stop to see if your okay. The only thing that’s keeping criminals from shooting more people Fo little or no reason is the fact that they don’t know if you are armed and can shoot back. But you are more than welcome to pack you crap and go live in one of the countries you think are so great. When you go please do not come back and be sure to take all others that feel the same as you wit you.
I would like freedom FROM idiots with unearned opinions, but the 1st amendment means I’m just going to have to suck it up and ignore them.
The thing about freedom is that it means some people are going to do things you don’t like. This is an essential element to the concept.
I think pssdov might need to ‘study’ up a bit more, ’cause they got their facts all backwards.
Oh and by the way, that ‘little outdated paragraph in the Constitution’ is the one thing that protects all of the other ‘little paragraphs’. Not necessarily (and hopefully not ever) by any direct action, but by the deterrence to tyranny that it is unto itself.
But of course, being ‘liberated’ from any knowledge of our own history allows pssdov to believe that ‘nothing like that could ever here occur again’ – so why don’t we just trade our freedom for the promise of a little more safety? Pssdov and his/her comrades of course deserve neither.
Also, the constitution, all of it, is the most progressive price of political writing mankind has yet created. Limiting power over others is progressive. Granting power over others to an enlightened few is still granting power over others and is regressive, no matter the intent.
Price = piece
Violence is and always will be a bad thing. But the people committing the violent acts are almost always criminals who have managed to obtain their weapons ILLEGALLY. Almost always the articles covering a violent act there are drugs, money, gangs, or other criminal activity going on. Even in Chicago, Miami, Oakland, Camden, Newark….. most of the violence reported is due to CRIMINALS. CRIMINALS DO NOT OBEY THE LAWS. The LAWS ONLY AFFECT THE LAW ABIDING. Also the weapon is NOT what should be blamed for the violence. Suge Knight used a car the other day.
Well, we all now know Shannon Watts’ online handle – pssdov.
HEY ROBERT! This will likely be moderated, and if it is, I kind of agree with that choice:
Nah. Hers is pmsdov.
It’s Sunday morning, can’t you let us just be fat, dumb and happy for a little while? I was feeling like a Teletubby, now I am me again:-
The gun grabbers hate the Teletubbies too.
Finally, we have some middle ground to agree on 🙂 and it actually may be FOR the chillunz.
Well riddle me this then; A 2002 pole showed that the United states had around 11.8 million reported violent crimes, while the UK had around 6.5 million. Now factor in the fact that even though that’s only about half the amount violent crime we have, the UK has only about 1/5 the population of the U.S. Utopia my ass. But then again, it’s all about the illusion of safety.
The only problem with the UK stats on violent crime is that you can fart on a bus and be charged with assault. (It’s a joke, almost) what is really interesting is the murder rate pre 90s gun control and now. They were around .7 or .8 murders per 100k. They are now almost double that. So, their gun control laws had no positive effect on the murder rate. Billy from Amidst the noise put that one out there a while ago.
The UK murder rate is actually conviction in a given year not murders committed in a given year. The Brits guilty until proven innocent seriously. A death can’t be murder unless you have a murderer.
See this posting to get a handle on what the most likely UK murder rates — about 2 per 100k or about what it is in the United States for the parts of the country that are infested by gangbangers.
Thanks for the info. I’ll check it out.
The funniest thing that these anti and Fudd types don’t realize is that the second amendment is very clear “shall not be infringed”. If the authors had made it any clearer it would be even better for our side, I would bet my life savings on that.
I see what you’re saying, but if they had been even clearer, it would really make no difference. If they can ignore what the Framers actually did say, nothing further will get through to them.
Idk, I believe that if the framers of the Constitution had written 2a to say A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep, build and use arms in the defense of themselves or the state, shall not be infringed. Yes people would still ignore this, but much clearer I just wish our framers had a crystal ball they would have given the federal government even more restrictions.
…and a detailed description of “…arms…” would have nice and ended much disagreement on both sides of the issue.
If I had a time machine I would convince them to put the 10th and 9 th amendments first, but also to reword the 2nd to something like, “the power to restrict ownership of arms or weaponry shall be denied to all levels of government, including federal, state, county, and city.”
Or something along those lines. I’d also encourage them to explicitly state moor often the idea that the federal government cannot do anything it wants, or sees as necessary towards some end, as more and more Liberals seen to think.
I’d also encourage them to clarify “general welfare” and “interstate commerce”.
Oh and I’d record the speech of the day.
Then I’d go shoot Karl Marx before he published.
If I had a time machine.
“…and a detailed description of “…arms…” would have nice and ended much disagreement on both sides of the issue.”
That would have had the potential to be disastrous if they had gotten the description wrong and we ended up with a second amendment that protected our constitutional right to own black powder flintlocks, bayonets and swords.
Funny how the author of this does not mention Chicago or other areas that have very strict gun laws and also have so much gang activity and gun violence. In fact he does not mention any of the verifiable facts that would destroy his thesis. Another gun grabber that spews propaganda and does not check his facts. No surprise really.
Vermont has one of the highest rates of gun ownership and the lowest level of violence – both involving guns and not.
About their only gun law is that open or concealed carry requires parental permission if you’re under 16.
They’re about as non-Somaliiaesque as can be.
What’s not to like?
Is it just me but do anti-gun people come across as totally self absorbed “it’s all about me” mentality?
Mr. Pssdov, “yahoos with concealed carry permits itching to prove their manhood walking around.” Please explain why you think it’s a guy thing? Maybe your the one with unresolved “manhood” issues? News flash for ya; a lot of women conceal carry as well!
I once used Japan as an example of high suicide rates and the individual did not understand the concept of per capita and would only argue Japan has less suicides overall than the US. Just another way people have been groomed to misuse data. Beyond that I have read “the studies” on suicide ranging from 1994 to 2012 and not one indicates firearms impact the likelihood of an individual committing suicide. Firearms are a more severe and effective method, but the studies that actually follow up on individuals show those that are involuntarily “saved” are highly likely to try again with more aggressive means.
As for crime stats I think this individual need look no further than Chicago, a giant relatively gun free zone. Perhaps he would also like to hear about a tiny, unknown country far away from us called Mexico. It might also do some good for him to see all those countries he talked about have rising crime rates, especially compared to our falling crime rates, including gun crime. So with all our “guns on the streets” crime has stopped and with all that state “control” elsewhere crime has risen.
In short that comment must be sarcastic because literally everything in it is the exact opposite of reality.
2nd paragraph autocorrect error: read “crime has dropped” not “crime has stopped”.
I once used Japan as an example of high suicide rates and the individual did not understand the concept of per capita and would only argue Japan has less suicides overall than the US. Just another way people have been groomed to misuse data.
There are more guns than people here on my ranch. By quite a large factor. And the suicide rate is zero. Not rounded down to zero, but actually zero. Likewise the incidence of “gun violence” or even “violence,” not that they give a flying rodent’s hindquarters about that last category.
By his “logic” whatever it is I am doing, including all those guns, works perfectly.
“Ad hominimem, strawmen, and racecards, oh my! Are any of you aware that the NRA won over %95 of the races they were involved in for the first time in their history last November? Do you think it’s because or despite the claim that %99 of the people want more difficult background checks (or whatever obviously lie you’re pulling out of your ass today)? Is it because or despite the country sharing your desire to stick it to christian conservatives? Has it occurred to any of you slick tongued little hipsters that your childish exchanges with us are the primary thing pushing the grown up voters our way? Spoken by a proud “ammosexual.”
Posted on the article just now. Don’t see how they could censor it, considering the bile from the regulars, but you know these people.
edit: holy cow, they give you more than a week to edit your comment! “He who controls the past…”
Heh heh……….ammosexual……..I like……..I hereby declare myself out of the closet….
On Vermont, most of the text of their State Constitution dates from 1777, before the Bill of Rights or any other part of the U.S. Constitution.
At the time, they were still an independent republic which had formed during the Revolutionary War. They joined in 1791.
On guns, it states:
“That the people have a right to bear arms for the defense of themselves and the State – and as standing armies in time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up; and that the military should be kept under strict subordination to and governed by the civil power.”
blah blah hyperbole blah blah blah smearing blah blah fantasy blah blah blah bigotry blah blah lies blah more hyperbole blah blah blah
Does that cover it?
No he didn’t, he forgot the part where “blah blah blah deprive you of your means of defending yourself against thugs blah blah blah.”
The link to the original article was very interesting…
The writer and the commenters who wrote in support of the article,
must be among those “many pro 2nd amendment progressives”
that Dan Baum was describing in his post a few days ago.
A litany of outright lies and propaganda.
It’s interesting to note the amount of mental violence some of those democrats have. This, more than anything, gets me.
The thought of disarming while these folks with their rabid mental processes are free on the streets is down right scary.
He wants freedom from guns? As far as I know, everyone is free to become citizens of the countries that he listed as models for gun control. Goodbye.
Another useless person that believes that his/her wants trump the rights of others.
but but but feelings?!?!!?!?!
Is that photo proof that H&K has a different pricing schedule in the US and Africa?
In the linked article, I love how the author attempts to paint us as paranoid because none of the federal proposals would take our guns away and, in any event, they did not pass. The author is so typical of many writers who blatantly ignore what happened in various states after Sandy Hook. News flash: gun owners are intelligent, informed individuals who look at things beyond what happens at the federal level. New York’s Safe Act and its ilk from other deep blue states showed the true colors of the progressives in this country, and that it is why we are not interested in a freaking “discussion.”
“Studies prove . . .” Whenever you hear this always, always suspect the absolute worst from the source. The implication is that the presenter of this fact has empirical evidence to back up the point they’re trying to make, a point which usually includes a demand that you stop doing something you’ve always done that they want you stop doing because “studies” say you should. Even genuine empirically conducted research can, and usually is, the subject of hotly rendered legitimate, scientific criticism. Anyone who says that something is “settled” in science is outright lying. To paraphrase the philosopher of science, Karl Popper, a scientific theory that can’t be disproved is essentially worthless.
There goes climate change. Poof!
I suggest visiting the page and interjecting some wisdom into the debate. As always, the anti-gunners get really peeved.
Warms the very cockles of your heart, doesn’t it?
Even the sub-cockle region as well…
I left about 39 comments there – I did see your one comment. It’s all that superbowl prep time taking you away huh?
I tried to leave 4 comments and they all were moderated out. I’m actually surprised there are any dissenting comments on that page, which is why I thought I could actually comment and have it go through.
I pointed out the disconnect when it comes to the paranoia argument; that gun owners are all painted as paranoid freaks that are close to the brink of insanity, yet the opposition wants to set regulations based on their irrational fear of all gun owners, claiming that they are apparently going to snap at any moment and shoot them because they calmly merged lanes. It’s really amazing to see people describe themselves so well and not even realize it.
Then there’s the issue of “no one’s coming for your guns” when we have real examples of people having to give up their legally owned property. To these people it just doesn’t register that “they’re not coming to take away our guns, just some of the guns you own because other people are afraid of them” actually means they mean to take away our guns, you know, the ones we actually own and are in legal possession of as of this moment. They wouldn’t see it as taking away our guns unless they took away all kinds of guns imaginable. This is equivalent to saying, “we’re not taking away your children, just the ones that have two arms, legs, and eyes”.
Next up, “who needs fully automatic guns with 30 round clips?” Whoever wants to buy them because this isn’t about needs. You can make a comparison to cars, food, housing, clothing, purses, or anything. Who needs a 500hp BMW parked in a 6,000sq ft house with a closet full of Armani suits? No one, but this country isn’t about what we need. Furthermore, magazine capacity doesn’t impact lethality in any way, as shown here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCSySuemiHU
I was very polite despite all the name calling against me – yet I was still blacklisted due to my differing opinion. They blacklisted my IP address and any email accounts associated with it. – so I routed through a proxy in Germany to dump some more comments on them since I know they are enjoying them so much.
That’s the kind of people they are – silence those differing people.
Hrafnkell Haraldsson needs deported to Scandanavia where he belongs. That way he will be away from gun violence . . . oh wait . . .
He doesnt want to live in Somalia,
He wants to live like Australians, or the English, or Japanese…
And he wants to be able to drive in an inconsiderate, rude manner, and be totally free and immune from reactions….
All are available if he would Just take the plunge and leave.
What the f**k is wrong with
That makes more sense.
That was so bad, I thought it was a parody piece. I was working up a reply in my head along the lines of “C’mon guys, the antis are misguided and mistaken and some of the worst of them know exactly what they’re doing in driving toward civilian disarmament. Sure, at various times, you’ll hear these assorted sophistries bandied about, but it’s pure caricature to embody the whole of the idiocy liberal litany in one single speaker. Nobody is THAT comprehensively, thoroughgoingly, massive-head-wound-trauma level, unfathomably stupid. C’mon.”
Then I went to the site and read the rest of the comments……
Who cares about the rhetoric, man the guy in that picture is operating like a boss.
I wonder if the anti gunners actually believe their own lies.
30,000/320,000,000 = not statistically significant (even before we subtract the suicides).
Now about that statistically-significant 17% of all deaths annually caused by medical errors….
On a lighter note:
WHICH “studies prove that the states with the laxest gun laws have the highest rates of gun violence”?
And for today’s Daily Double, what is the Japanese name of the “suicide forest” that sits at the foot of Mt. Fuji and continues to reap its grim harvest despite Japan’s lack of gun availability?
So how does one pronounce Pssdov, anyway? Is that an actual name, or a typographical error?
I read it as “pissed off,” but that’s likely just me.
He is a cousin of Russian chauffeur Pikup Andropov on Car Talk.
Good handle, by the way; my favourite calibre.
Considering the rant, I read it add “pissed off” also.
I don’t want to live in a country controlled by Washington DC just because of a poorly written, outdated article in the constitution. I want freedom from bullsh!t.
We live under the Constitution and the Bill of Rights…..we are a Republic…..if you want to live according to other laws and rights by all means do so….there are like you said alot of other countries out there with a host of governments…..I will not stand in your way……don’t let the door hit you in the ass on your way out.
Another Prog that thinks the 2A was to allow hunting.
Maybe said commenter should take a brief trip to Somalia, so he can see what it’s REALLY like to have a bunch of gun-toting lunatics running around everywhere doing whatever the hell they want. Maybe it’ll give him a little perspective.
Or maybe the little [email protected] will double down on stupid. Never know.
The desire for freedom “from” things is the definition of fascism.
liberals should be sterilized and deported.. or executed works just as well
Funny, because that’s the exact same stuff they say about the people THEY disagree with.
What “debate”? As far as I can tell, the Constitution isn’t up for “debate”. Lawless heathens.
Glad I finally have some downtime to comment on my favorite blog. Ahhh yes, this is the type of anti whose rhetoric makes me smile. Here’s everything else he doesn’t even bother to take into account:
The vast majority of U.S. gun related deaths are caused by suicide and criminal turf wars. Because suicide and a life of crime are consciously made choices to which alternatives have always existed for the now deceased party involved, they don’t count. So what does that leave us with? The occasional single or double-victim murder involving a firearm, which has been around as long as the firearm itself, and the recent phenomena that is the school shooting. The latter was brought about by various parenting failures of the past fifty years, but that’s a whole different barrel of monkeys…
Anywho, after removing the suicide and crime-related fatalities from that annual 30k, a comparatively smaller toll remains. 30k by itself is already well under one percent of the entire population of the USA, three-hundred million strong and rising, so the actual percentage is smaller than that. Our population is also larger than all other countries’ he mentioned, but it’s not just a numbers game.
Culturally, very few countries grasp the idea of what a life defined by “freedom” or “liberty” is, warts and all, like we do here in the U.S.A. We are (or were by recent trends) the last country on earth to be governed as closely as possible by Darwin’s “survival of the fittest,” given the circumstances. Apparently, some people just couldn’t handle that degree of personal responsibility and danger in day-to-day life.
Along come these recently imagined “rights.” The “right” to be safe, to not be offended, to earn a certain income, etc. These are all talked about today as if they are fact, but have never existed. Also new is this juvenile fantasy that the world can and must exist without poverty, war, hunger, or some other eternal, abstract function of human nature itself which has been with us since day one. Combine these with the popularity of socialism, communism, or some other collectivist poison which has infected our education system for decades, and you get the following as a result: a denial of reality by generations of people who are too afraid, or lazy, to live a life involving risk and uncertainty of any kind. These are often the people who talk about how they want everything to be “fair” or “equal” for everyone from cradle to grave.
The sad truth is that far too many people, this author included, are willing to destroy every last real right and shred of respect for self-reliance, personal responsibility/accountability, and success we have in order to make their irrational fear seem normal by way of these new “rights.” I guess the joke is on them though, because their ideal utopia won’t make a damn bit of difference in the way life on earth as a human being has worked for ages.
So move to Japan…where the sentiment may be to arm up and stop being a pacifist ,have a real army and fight some Muslim terrorists.
Someone’s been drinking some of that sexist, racist, classist Kool-Aid made n’ marketed by Nanny Loonberg and the rest of his felonious goons.
The best way to disprove ALL of this is in the video “Number One With A Bullet”
The British government once wanted “freedom from guns” for our forefathers and the other colonists. We all know how that worked out. Do the Progressives really want to replay that piece of history again? Do they even conceive the ramifications if we go there? They need to know that they will never get their gun-free utopia. Now, if they want to talk about measures to reduce crime that actually work, I am listening.
Well, I want freedom FROM guns. No, you really want freedom from freedom.
I’m sure this clown would sign the petition in this video — to get rid of those pesky rights in the way of government’s authority.
Literally. Not. One. Piece. of factual information in that entire pile of screed.
I don’t know if its physically possible to be more demonstrably wrong in one conversation.
Oh I can tell you plenty of things wrong with you, guy. :p
It’s not outdated nor is it poorly written. Let’s see you come up with better. Experience has shown that we suck at it. Just saying…
I remember a Bobcat Goldthwaite routine about Somalia: He said, “Why are we sending aid to people in Somalia? I they don’t need aid, they need to pack up and MOVE. I mean, we have stinking deserts here, but we don’t live in them! Instead aid, send them UHaul brochures!
I think if this guy thinks the US is like Somalia, first he should visit Somalia. I think 24 hours there and he would never make such a statement again. Second, if he still thinks the US too much like a third world country, he should move to somewhere somewhere more “civilized” like NJ or DC.
“if he still thinks the US too much like a third world country, he should move to somewhere somewhere more ‘civilized’ like Europe or Australia.”
Fixed for you since that is what they really want.
I am tired of this kind of brainless tirade. Completely lacking in critical thought and devoid of even the most basic fact checking. It’s as if he took every cliched and debunked liberal argument and just consolidated it all into one vomitus.
Here’s the super irony of his diatribe, gun owners in Somalia have to be licensed, something not done in the most of the US. They are not permitted to own automatic rifles. The problem isn’t with Somalia’s lack of laws, it’s with the country’s lack of law enforcement. No one pays any attention to the laws because they know they don’t have to. Imagine that, criminals don’t pay attention to laws. Who’d a thunk it?
Gun control is a fool’s paradise. Somalia is an extreme example of course but as a former British colony, it has had strict gun control for decades. It hasn’t worked out so well for them.
Actually it was run by Italians. Somaliland in the northwest part of the country actually functions like a state because that part of Somalia was British.
Funny how the British generally got it right with localized control while other colonizers like France and Italy who had complete control ended up leaving their former colonial holdings as failed states since they were never given a chance to learn how to govern.
Even if that were true, the more telling statistic is that regardless of state gun laws, the cities with the tightest gun laws have high misuse of guns. If we took cities with tight gun laws out of the national statistics, we’d be one of the gun-safest nations around..
Wow and wow and wow again.
He actually, literally and blatantly asserts that “no one wants to take away guns” while in the adjoining paragraph claiming that the 2A should be rewritten with the words “while serving in the militia.”
How does this nimrod’s keyboard not short out in protest of such hypocrisy?
The fact that he compares the US to Somolia is and should be offensive to the entire world. He is comparing the plight of those destroyed by civil wars and ethnic agression to concealed carry holders and thier assumed measurement of manhood. Lets look at real facts and real numbers, relating to gun violence in those god forsaken lands. This is what we would call a Fallacious Comparison. Check and mate.