Yes, this is really something my own mother posted on Facebook. I’ve tried to use logic and reason to get her to understand my point of view when it comes to firearms and the right to defend yourself against evil, but we’re talking about a woman who treats the Huffington Post like gospel. She’s one of the many Democrats who are low information voters when it comes to gun rights, only reading the party-approved bullet points without actually seeking to understand exactly how crappy the proposed gun control legislation actually is. She sees “universal background checks” and thinks it’s a good idea, without any thought as to the repercussions of the details of the specific legislation — she just wants it passed because “it’s the right thing to do.” I tried to make that point, but it’s apparently fallen on deaf ears. So I ask you: how would you counter this argument?
you can’t argue with stupid
I no longer try to reason with people who have that mindset, especially family. The emotional attachment is too big, whereas I can politely argue all day with someone I don’t know or care about.
He just hit the lottery!
Way to go, school!
Family…got to love them.
Or at least run over them with your “registered” liberal car,lol, Randy
To use the car on public streets maybe. I need no such license or registration to drive on my property. But the car argument is broken regardless.
Also…. driving is a privilege… owning a gun is a right.
Driving is a right, not a privilege. Sorry you’ve bought into the propaganda that it isn’t. You do, of course need to follow the rules of the road, or else you will be a hazard to the public. I see no reason why a car or driver needs to be licensed, however. Well, maybe smog checks for the purpose of protecting the environment, but that’s it.
If you drive unsafely, you should be fined or sent to jail (depending on the severity of your actions). But the right to drive is simply the modern version of having the right to move around on the planet.
The car registration argument needs to be laid to rest. Cars are registered for the purpose of COLLECTING TAXES. Roads and bridges must be built and maintained; this costs a lot of money. The registration and subsequent taxation of cars is one way to pay for this. Only if for some reason towns and states built shooting ranges for all their citizens would i see a sound comparison of gun and automobile registration.
Private sector could build all the roads. Generally speaking the government has granted itself a monopoly over this. The only reason we have liscence and registration is as a revenue raiser. I would say I shouldn’t have to do either when it comes to a car. But the liberal response would be, “if we didn’t have liscensing and registration, well that would just be anarchy.” anarchy being an incredibly misused word.
You can’t. Unless your mother is faced with a real world situation where her life is at stake or the life of a loved one she will probably never change. Love her because she’s your mother. But don’t follow this particular teaching of hers.
Your mother is under the spell or Normalcy Bias. You have my sympathies; I know how you feel.
Foghorn: have you tried hiring someone you know to try and break into her house while she’s home?
Because that’s a brilliant idea!
Maybe licensing and registration of cars is a good idea. After all, they kill a lot more people than guns.
There are times I find that it’s better to just keep your mouth shut.
When a Toyota Camry is involved in a hit-and-run, they don’t ban Toyota Camrys.
Let’s look at the insurance bit for a second… Say there are 30,000 firearm deaths per year. Even if you don’t subtract the gang-banger violence, DGU, etc… let’s say each of those 30,000 families gets a $1M “settlement”. That’s a total of $30,000,000,000/year that firearms deaths “costs” society.
Divide that by the 80 million+ gun owners (gotta be more than that by now), and you average $375 per gun owner. Would you pay $375/year to keep the gun grabbers off your back? I sure would (but we know that wouldn’t shut them up…).
I counter this argument by challenging said retard to come physically make me comply. Being 5’10” and 230lb (mostly upper body) tends to shut that argument down fast when logic does not work.
Inter arma enim silent leges
You can’t reason with people who have no reason.
Rights Privileges. You have a natural right to self preservation, there is no corresponding right to vehicular transport.
OR
I don’t see the gov. trying to license walking, walking insurance, walking registration…
What amendment protects the right to a car? I always seem to forget.
The 9th:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
My mother is a anti-gun liberal too so I feel your pain.
1) you have no constitutional right to a car
2) the government already poorly enforces car registration and insurance requirements because it’s underfunded and people who drive without insurance and get into accidents have zero liability. why would we replicate a broken system for gun ownership?
3) neither the gov’t nor criminals are afraid of your car
No offense, but you’re better off trying to teach quantum physics to a sea turtle.
I have a sea turtle eligible for a math PhD. Quantum physics is within easy reach.
Liberals and reason, though, neither are in the same cosmos.
As far as what the picture says comparing having to license and insure a car with the same requirement for a gun, I don’t see anywhere in the Constitution that guarantees anyone the right to own or drive a car. Therefore, the government can regulate that any way it wants to, whether you agree with it or not.
However, when they start regulating something that’s explicitly guaranteed by the Constitution and limiting, taxing, and otherwise restricting the exercise of that right, that’s when they’ve gone too far. If liberals want to give up their rights, that’s their business but they have no right to demand I give up mine in the process.
Ask her how she would feel if the government came to her house and confiscated her car in the name of public safety
Nick,
Tell her that there is nothing in the Constitution about the right to keep and bear automobiles. Ask her if she would like to be forced to register and get a license to exercise her rights guaranteed by the 19th Amendment to the Constitution.
It probably won’t help…
Tell her that you can buy a hummer with cash money park it in your backyard and only drive it off road then give it to your cousin with he makes parole and it’s all legal.
And nothing this is protected by the bill of rights like gun ownership is.
It’s a civil right mom!
It looks like he’s wearing an upside-down artichoke for a hat. Is he related to the Little Green Sprout?
If it’s your mother, stop. There is no way you can win this. Dave Ramsey calls it “powdered butt syndrome”. They have powdered your butt, therefore you can’t possibly know better than them. Get someone else to do it.
A car is a sometimes dangerous convenience. The right to defend oneself is a natural right. What we have learned in the history of man is that some humans endeavor to disarm other humans in order enslave them and murder them if they do not accept enslavement. Until and unless human nature changes, every person in the world has the natural right to defend himself from other humans. License, registration and insurance sound reasonable until one examines the history of licensing and registration: these have been used to disarm and murder populations all over the world, so it is good to stand vigilant against these measures. Insurance sounds reasonable, except for the fact that the people that attempt to impose this requirement on gun owners are usually the ones that try to circumvent and degrade the Second Amendment. We’re not stupid. We know what they want to do, which is why we oppose them whenever we can. If everyone in the country was armed and respected the Second Amendment, maybe we seriously entertain these thinly veiled attempts at disarmament. But obviously , we can’t and won’t.
Great points.
Simple. Nowhere in the US Constitution does it state “the right to own and operate a automobile”.
Ask her if she drinks wine.
Because alcohol is a far greater threat to society than guns are. And there is currently no licensing requirements to buy alcohol, no registration, no finger printing, and you don’t have to buy insurance to buy and consume alcohol.
Consider alcohol:
Drunk Driving deaths
Alcohol fueled domestic abuse of spouse and children
Public costs related to alcohol related injuries
Public costs related to chemical dependencies/treatments
Alcohol related loss of productivity/Man hours
How many children of alcoholics grow up to be alcoholics and/or abusers
and on and on and on…
And there is no benefit to alcohol other than “it’s fun”.
And it’s not protected in the freaking Constitution.
So if they’re all about protecting the kids…. then why even bother with guns when the obvious elephant is alcohol?
Why not ban alcohol?
Cause oh wait… we tried that.
I’d ask her if she ever enjoys a glass of wine. Why is she contributing to the alcohol epidemic. Why is she choosing to be a player in all this “Alcohol Violence” and shouldn’t we “Demand a Plan”. Or is she a law abiding alcohol owner/user? And would new restrictions only effect those people who actually obey the law and addicts would find a way to get booze anyway, and/or make it themselves?
Personally.. I’d love to see TTAG do and indepth comparison of alcohol and guns.
From the CDC:
Mortality
Number of alcoholic liver disease deaths: 15,990
Number of alcohol-induced deaths, excluding accidents and homicides: 25,692
EXCLUDING accidents and homicides…
That’s more than ALL gun deaths including suicides (which I’m sure some of those are drunk when they do it)
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/alcohol.htm
If you’re close to your folks, and in this case your mom, it’s going to be tough. Both my folks are gone now but I still remember “discussions” in which I only avoided lapsing into calling my own mother an idiot by sheer strength of will. That’s how utterly stupid the anti-gun argument usually is. But … this was my mom, and I did indeed love her dearly. So, I backed off well before calling her an idiot, which in fact, she was when it came to guns. Emotion ruled with my mom, and with many more women than with men. It’s not “sexist” to say so; look at any statistical breakdown on gun issues and you’ll see that wide gulf between those who rely primarily on logic (men) and those who rely primarily on emotion (women).
Guys, this is why the disgusting tactic employed by the even more disgusting B. Hussein O’Bummer, of surrounding himself with parents of murdered school kids, was continued … even after there had been much discussion about how tasteless, tacky, and outright despicable it was to do that. Well, news flash here: O’Bummer also knew that many women would only see the tears and hear the quivering voices and that’s all they’d need to hear – from that day forward they were gonna vote anti-gun. And of course, guys like us watched the same display of low life tactics and were made nauseous that an American “president” would actually do such a thing. Anybody ever notice that this guy fights like a chick fights ? It’s all emotion and emotional appeals.
You can try to set aside the time you’ll need to talk with your mom about guns, but you’ll need to talk her language too. Maybe tell her about all the kids who are alive today because of a gun being handy. We’ve got to make that case since the lamestream media isn’t going to tell the truth about DGUs.
Maybe this is a question we should direct at those women among us who “get it” about guns. Winning many more women over to our side is so definitely worth it. A few million more American women, savvy about the 2nd Amendment and its importance … and we could actually kiss the gun control movement goodbye for a while.
Yes, bo the magnificent has done wonders with verbal taxidermy. Must be the hope & change he talked about, Randy
I’ve known Cynthia Tucker her entire life.
She’s a barely literate fool. Got her job in journalism in the early days of affirmative action, and has been single-handedly lowering the circulation of The Atlanta Journal-Constitution ever since.
Do you need a background check to send a letter in the mail? Publish a community newspaper? Get an internet connection? No? Why not? What’s the harm that could come from putting limits and licensing requirements on your 1st Amendment Rights? If it reduces the number of ricin-laced-letters, wild conspiracy theories, and internet predators and hackers even 1%, isn’t that a good thing? Think of the children!
Those who sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.
You can’t counter Mom – just won’t happen – so move on. (I’m in the same boat.)
Another day in this great oppressive concentration camp known as America. And my fiance wonders why I’ll never agree to let my child attend a public indoctrination center…er, school.
I wonder if he would have been suspended if he wore a shirt with a rifle that said “Repeal the 2a”
These brainless schools and their fascist policies must be made to suffer. Any liberty-minded parent or student should don this same apparel and walk in there, make the school get into so many petty lawsuits that they go broke.
Sounds like the father at least refuses to bow to Obama’s propaganda ministers. If I were him, I’d sit my son down and be sure he knows that this illegal arrest is a badge of honor for him and that I was proud of him, and he did nothing wrong. Perhaps the son’s old enough to learn the somber fact that he’s part of what will be the last generation of free Americans.
Now that man is a true American, possessing the courage and will so many lack today.
He’s not “writing his reps” then accepting his chains when his soft efforts fail. He’s fighting tyranny like an American should, with action.
From the G&A website: Recommended retail prices currently begin at $593 for a black All Purpose M500 Flex with 28-inch vent-rib barrel and Accu-Choke and go up to $887 for an OD green tactical M500 Flex with 20-inch barrel, railed fore-end and XS ghost-ring sights.
Read more: http://www.gunsandammo.com/reviews/a-pump-for-every-purpose-mossberg-flex-review/#ixzz2RDNrT4h0
Stupid is as stupid does.
I have given up on logic with these people. It is useless to point out that owning a car isn’t a civil right protected by the constitution. They only believe in their own civil rights, not the civil right of others.
I brought this up at work yesterday with a couple of fellow officers and we were just dumbfounded; I’d really like one of the schools in my jurisdiction to call something like this in…There’s no way in hell I’m arresting a kid for wearing that shirt, or even doing anything more than making a report for the record stating that the complaint was unfounded. IMO the teacher is the one guilty of disturbing the educational process. I’d like to see the criminal complaint…
I hope he makes out well in court!
…but we’re talking about a woman who treats the Huffington Post like gospel.
Yeah, I’ve got one like that, too.
I’m just glad it’s not genetic.
I have only done this once (never again!!). I actually drove my car in New York City. I think I could also drive it in Chicago and San Francisco if I wanted. When these places start to recognize my right to carry, the car comparison might be a little more relevant.
This one’s easy. Throw the same scenario back at her. However in this scenario tell her that some well-to-do parents let their son borrow the car while away at college. The parents leave it up to the kid to re-register and insure the vehicle. That person then chose not to register his car or insure it using stolen or fake tags to drive on the street with no one else the wiser. Then one day that guy mows down a bus full of kids because he has mommy/daddy issues likely stemming from a lifetime of having to listen to liberal bullshit.
Our liberal government, in an attempt to wave the bloody shirt, decides to try and ban several different models of cars, in fact they say all SUVs are now “assault vehicles” similar to the up armored types that carry diplomats to and from work overseas. The government also bans the personal sale of vehicles from one person to another as well as online or in person auto auctions.
At the same time, several states try to enact legislation that makes it virtually impossible for law abiding drivers to get a driver’s license. But the worst is the ban on high capacity gas tanks. The logic that if you only have a one gallon tank a maniac would be forced to refill half way through his pedestrian massacre.
Obviously, none of these measures are common sense and only negatively affect law abiding vehicle owners.
If your mom attempts a rebuttal ask her if she has a DNR then invite her out for a Sunday drive. : )
I’d start by explaining that the criminologists researching the topic have generally found that laws mandating firearm registration haven’t actually reduced violent crime. (Those looking for proof should review the studies following up on John Lott’s research: Some supported his claim that ‘loose’ gun laws actually reduce crime, a number of others felt that his data weren’t robust enough to claim any relationship between lax laws and violent crime, and two concluded that weak gun restrictions led to higher crime rates.)
Then explain the predictable logic of the anti-gun crowd: If the current laws aren’t working, more laws are needed. If gun crime remains high despite registration laws, “we need BETTER laws”. This is the logic that inexorably leads to eventual confiscation.
REVEREND!
Theres nothing you can do, so don’t waste your time. just hide her car keys on election day, to loimit the damage to the rest of us.
The vast majority of immigrants who chose to become American citizens are terribly proud to be Americans, and, on the whole, are far better educated in civics than those who’ve been here for generations. “Man in the street” interviews demonstrate repeatedly that many natural born Americans are clueless about our history, about our form of government (or who happens to be running it) or about our rights as preserved by the Bill of Rights than immigrants who study and pass the citizenship test.
I would have to agree with you. Being from Canada and raised the way I was I found the transition to living here to be easier than getting my drivers license back in Canada. I am terribly proud to be American.
The biggest problem here is that these fools can’t differentiate between a privilege and a right.
Tell them to name a right, something they value that they consider their freedom to do, whether it’s state an opinion, go to the bathroom, pray to their own God, whatever.
Right when they move to do it, tell them to stop. They’re not allowed to unless they ask you, the government, for permission. Tell them then that you won’t allow them to because it makes children unsafe. It’s just common sense. In fact, if the person in question is religious, the prayer one (freedom of religion) could be a powerful one.
Then hesitantly grant permission for them to pray, but cherry pick which words and phrases they can use (take out God of course). At last, give them a piece of paper symbolizing a form and tell them they’ll be able to pray in 6 weeks with a 200 dollar license…if the government feels like granting it.
If that doesn’t get across why a right is so different from a privilege, and thus so important, then the person is either a willful idiot or a tyrant. Either way, not worth associating with anymore, and you can wash your hands of it.
Cars are not mentioned in the Bill of Rights. Its as stupid an argument as saying pressure cookers should be licensed.
Non-gun people are the ones who are paranoid and fear. They are the ones who don’t trust their law-abiding fellow citizens to choose how to protect themselves. MikeB(number number number) even admitted awhile back that they are afraid of us doing something crazy with our guns. The non-gun people are paranoid and afraid. Ask what she is afraid of and then listen and try to get her to see what she is afraid of.
Get a new mom. There are lots of Pro2A women who would love to have a fine upstanding Pro2A son.
Thankfully my mom is not anti, at least not to my face. The only family member that’s anti is my BIL. We do not discuss politics at family functions when I’m around because I will win the argument at all costs. No not through physical force, just through saying things that I believe are true but should not be said (his displays of suspect morals, his shit parenting and especially his shit parenting of an autistic child, the fact that his pool has tried to drown his children, etc, etc).
I took the public tour of the J. Edgar Hoover FBI Building in DC 25 years ago. Back then in the Reagan years they even put on a live-fire SMG shoot for tourists at their indoor range. Part of the tour took you past rack after rack of rare and mundane firearms, all behind glass of course.
I guess they moved the collection to Quantico. No more tours, I suppose.
I’ve loaded my rifle and it’s set in the corner behind the door in my bedroom for over 2 months now. It’s not shot anyone yet, I’m going to return it. I think it’s defective.
I was just happy to see that when KMOV reported this here in the StL they called that a HUNTING RIFLE rather than another commonly mis-used name!
by not using my weapons to defend anyone with obviously inferior genetics. (I kid).
Texas is trying to amend for their sins. Sure it is slow going, and yes you have a few liberals who pretty much are screaming at a brick wall, but having said that the vast majority do want an armed and polite society. The the chances of Kalifornia style gun legislation coming to Texas is pretty slim.. Just sayin..
Gun control is like herpes, it never goes away and follows you everywhere.
Move to a Mexican border town, they get their guns for free from the US govt.
There is no Constitutional Amendment guaranteeing a God given right to own or operate a car. That is the difference.
I have a mom the same way. I just ask myself “what’s the point?” and say nothing. meanwhile she comes over to make my kids (older) lunch and has to move the rifles (locked, in their cases) off the kitchen table since that’s where we stage them for cleaning.
Integrity compels me to state the sad truth that the RKBAs days as a Federally recognized right are numbered.The demographic charts tell the story;whether immigration amnesty is signed into law or not,in under 20 years the masses of liberal young white voters in addition to the higher rates of minority and female voters will result in Democratic dominance of our national government.Say hello to Europe style one party leftist government.
While I seriously doubt well turn into the UK,don’t plan on EBRs and 10+ round magazines staying legal for much longer at the Federal level. By 2020,well probably have a permanent national AWB again.
You get guns… for now. Unless a state passes a law making legislative representation based on land possession rather than head count, every single state is one ‘tard town from being outvoted. CO is just the latest example. CA is probably the longest running.
So you can have guns for now, but heaven help you if some TX jack boot makes you his special friend for the day, or if you suggest that maybe the earth took more than 7 days to create… If a job lines up, OK is looking a lot better.
The only opinions on the Second Amendment I’m interested in are from those who believe that it means what it says.
I’d start by getting new parents.
Some of the Austin suburbs are much more ‘red’. LaRue is in Leander, and STI is in Georgetown, for instance.
Living here in the South, I don’t really think any state is 100% safe from gun control, it’s just a part of the political landscape. That being said, in the South, West, and lower MidWest…there are ALOT more of us 2A types than there are the liberal types…so your odds are better here.
A person essentially lend a hand to make significantly posts I’d state. That is the very first time I frequented your website page and to this point? I surprised with the research you made to create this actual post extraordinary. Great activity!
Rob,
As you know, RI has no places off limits. Texas has a laundry list of no carry zones.
Texas also has horrible knife laws, a ban on switchblades and carrying knives over 5 inches (give or take).
Texas may also be a democratic state in 12 years due to illegal immigration (amnesty)…. Enjoy “gun freedom” in Texas while it lasts.
The funny thing is if he is really afraid of .50 cals and their long range ability someone could use a .416 barret or .338 lapua mag to reach out and touch someone just as easy
“the immigration bills currently under consideration in Washington are ultimately designed to create millions of new Democrats”
FIFY.
I have several arguments for this one. First: you have no Constitutional right to a car. Second, a registry for cars is to facilitate returning them to their rightful owner should the car be stolen, since we tend to leave cars outside unattended. We do not leave guns around outside unattended, and if your gun is stolen, most police departments have policies against returning firearms. You basically file an insurance claim and buy a new gun. Third, a registry has ZERO crime prevention or solving value. How is having a list of gun owners and what they own going to help prevent or solve a crime? The quick answer: it doesn’t. The only way governments use registries is to have a “shopping list” to come and seize weapons at a later date.
At this point, they’ll say, “that’s paranoid — nobody’s coming for your guns.” I then point out that not only do we have historical examples of just such confiscations, but they aren’t from some ancient time or some faraway place. They’re from New York and California. In New York, owners guns that were suddenly dubbed “assault weapons,” including semi-auto shotguns, were given an “amnesty” period in which to turn them in, and then police went around and scooped-up those not voluntarily surrendered. Then there was the SKS ban in California. As is the usual tactic with the gun ban crowd, they demonize a particular gun, in this case the SKS rifle. Although they weren’t an oft-used “crime gun,” the SKS uses the same cartridge (you say “bullet” to antis) as the scary-sounding AK-47, so the CA legislature banned it in feel good legislation. After promising gun owners that their registry would “never be used” to confiscate their weapons, they again offered a brief “turn in your gun for pennies on the dollar” amnesty period and then began confiscating weapons. I recall reading one story of an LA cop who was a gun collector being rudely awakened one morning by members of his own department who came for his SKS rifle. This laid bare the naked politics of the whole affair: seizing a weapon from a law enforcement officer who would never be a problem to anyone. Seizing guns is always the point of a registry. See what she has to say about that.
” the majority of which are or will be beholden to big government for their citizenship and”
don’t count on that. First, newly minted citizens are often the most protective of their rights, especially since they don’t have them in their originating country. Second, the #1 reason for being in the NICS database is… being an illegal alien. I am pretty skeptical of reported gun ownership. I mean who answers yes to a phone poll, “are there any valuables, guns, or undocumented illegal aliens in your house?”
Mental note: call FBI, ask to borrow guns.
Like most here I agree, you can’t win this argument with your mom. You are both coming at your opinions from differing mindsets. Your mom is a mom. Mom’s are wired to not like anything they perceive as remotely dangerous. Mom’s always see their kids (no matter what age) as “children” that must be nurtured, protected, etc. And most importantly, when it comes to guns, their official position is : You’ll shoot your eye out.
Don’t waste your time trying to convert mom. Thank her profusely for all she has done for you, and for raising a strong, independent adult that can form his own opinions in such matters.
Let’s extend her logic to other fundamental rights. Tell her that we should register all people with a religion, make them pay a registration fee and start a national registry. While we’re at it, tell her we should make all Muslims buy terrorist insurance… just in case they decide to go full Muhammad on us. Tell her that its especially important to get all the Jews on the list, because those kinds of lists have been historically helpful to well-intentioned governments enforcing “public safety.”
Well, I’d bet dollars for dimes that she doesn’t even read it, much less actually do any of her own research, but I wrote her anyway. Gotta start somewhere:
Ms. Tucker,
After reading your recent op-ed on the failure of the recent gun-control legislation, I thought that it might be beneficial for you to start exploring a little about the history of modern gun control. I hope to spark your intellectual curiosity so that you can find out that that history is an ugly one which has its roots in Jim Crow legislation with the intent to deprive certain citizens of most of their natural and constitutionally protected rights via the legislative process. You might also be surprised to discover that the modern NRA aggressive pro-2A stance is a direct ideological descendant of the more radical elements of the 1960s civil rights movement that sought to protect those same rights by force of arms if necessary. This is the actual history, and it’s relatively recent.
This video is an OK place to start. It will introduce some of the themes which you can fact check yourself, if you are actually curious and wish to learn more about the issues so that you can have a more informed opinion on gun control – either pro or con. It could be more intellectually rigorous, but you are probably better able to be so in your own follow-up research:
http://nogunsfornegroes.com/basefile/movieplay-ngn-swf.htm
Adam Winkler also wrote a good piece on the subject in The Atlantic that’s a bit better than the film:
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2011/09/the-secret-history-of-guns/308608/
It’s also clear from your op-ed that you haven’t spent much time actually speaking to any gun-rights advocates, or spent much time among gun owners, or at gun shows, or even browsing the internet sites where guns are traded. I would encourage you to do so, as I think that you’ll learn a lot there as well. After doing so, I would challenge you to try and legally buy a gun yourself without submitting to an NCIS background check, either at a show, or on the internet. It’ll be much harder than both your article and the pro gun-control lobby suggest that it is.
As you dig into the subject with some honest effort, good faith, and intellectual rigor, I do believe that you’ll be hard pressed to emerge with the same opinions that you expressed in the article. Hopefully it may also become clear that given the actual statistics concerning gun control and gun crime, the demagoguery that’s taking place around the Newtown incident and the subsequent political push for addition gun control is quite telling. Within our lifetimes (and certainly those of our parents and grandparents), governments acted aggressively to disarm the black population via gun-control legislation in order to ease the confiscation of their natural and constitutionally protected rights as part of the Jim Crow system, often using the same arguments that modern gun control proponents use now. In the face of the actual facts and statistics (particularly those regarding the semi-automatic rifles commonly and mistakenly referred to as “assault rifles”), we would be foolish indeed to presume that the current push for gun control has a substantially different intent. Particularly when you consider that we have a president who has asserted the right to kill American citizens, on his say so, without due process, and asserted that right with legal justification that he’s keeping secret. That’s a pretty radical departure from an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution, and objections to that type of attitude about our status as citizens (in light of the recent push for gun control) can’t fairly be classified as having racist roots or overtones.
Respectfully,
An African-American Family Against Additional Gun Control (and there are lots of us).
hhmmm. Well yup that is about what we are seeing even here in California. We were outnumbering the Mom’s Demand Action and bussed in medical students by about 3 to 1. Admittedly by 9:00 PM after 12 hours, most if not all people had headed out, but we still have 40 or so dedicated folks who hung around, compared to 1. Yup 1 anti. It might not have changed events for the committee hearing but believe me, when the other folks in the legislature hear about it, it will stick.
Those facebook comments are bat shit crazy. Still pulling that 90% number out of their @ss when there crowds are just pitiful. NAMBLA has bigger crowds, and less children.
FEWER children!!!
I’m a hopeless optimist & think it’s going well considering what has been thrown at us. The trick has been to break their blitzkrieg & I believe we have stuck a pin in that bat eared balloon, now we just need to slug it out, Randy
Some great comments, I haven’t read them all so I apologize if I’m repeating anything.
Ask how she feels about the government mandating that speed limiters and breathalyzer ignition locks be installed on all cars, at the owner’s expense? All new cars will have them installed and of course increasing the cost. Having to wait 10 days before she gets to take home the car she just bought? Getting a background check to make sure she’s not taking any medications that could hinder her driving? Having to go through a car dealer and pay them a fee to sell her car to someone else? Having to go through a car dealer and pay them a fee to sell her car to someone else (repeated for clarity)? X point ‘safety’ inspections performed by law enforcement, which they can do at any time you’re on the public roads (tire tread depth, fluid levels, brake wear, shocks/struts, ball joints/tie-rods, etc…)? In order to let someone borrow the car she wouldn’t mind going back to the dealership and pay a fee, right? Same thing for when it’s returned? Now if that 1986 Buick Regal in the back 40 that dear old dad was gonna ‘restore’ gets stolen, she’s ok with having to report it (and potentially get it back) because she’d be facing a stiff fine or even jail if anytime between 48 hours and the rest of her life that car is in an accident and hurts someone? She’s also ok with surrendering her Corvette because the government deemed it to be too fast and dangerous, or her Expedition because she doesn’t need all those seats for just her, right? In fact, to get a truck she doesn’t mind showing ‘good cause’, because you need to have a good reason to own a truck, duh. In fact, she’s fine with the government limiting cars to people based on what is ‘common sense’, so unless you have a family bigger than 4 your choices are Ford Taurus or a Honda Civic. You can’t get a minivan unless you can prove it will be at 75% capacity per trip, on average. But she’s good with that, right? When she gets gas the station manager will record it along with her mileage and put it into a national database which will keep track of her fuel economy to be compared to standards for that vehicle, others with that vehicle and the national average overall. She’s fine with the government using this to configure how much you pay for gas which the station manager sets after he runs your id. I like your mom….sounds like a cool lady 🙂 How good is her lasagna?
Robert,
Just watch out for Mike “I will ban your guns” Martinez. He is on the Austin City Council now and hopes to be the next Mayor. Just look up “Mike Martinez Gun Ban” on YouTube.
I have a Millennium Pro PT-140. Not a problem for me. As for the manual safety, each to their own. Some people want them, some don’t. So long as you practice in the method you decide to carry. I’ve carried with safety on, and with safety off. I also have a PT-111. Like both pistols, controls are the same, so no issue of rechecking where controls are when carrying either pistol.
mine had a 3 stove pipes in the first 150 rounds. took apart the magazines and oiled and lubricated them (one was absolutely dry). Since then, I’ve had 100% reliability as well…
Go PA stemwinder,lol, good one, Randy
do you think the student would have been singled out, if he had been wearing a t-shirt saying ”help obama ban assault rifles”with a picture of the weapon on his t-shirt?
Wow, so RI is preparing to go full retard. Great. We could use another test case for the SCotUS to strike down. The crazier they make the provisions the more likely it is we will win.
Nick,
This may already be addressed above, as I didn’t read all of the comments.
With my mom, (she’s 88, i’m 54, shooter, retired cop), I hit her where it made sense. The book argument and the 1st amendment.
Certain books banned because of their color. Banned because they are too small or too big. Banned because it has two titles? Banned because it has too many pages, or not enough pages. Banned because it was written in the wrong country.
Or that you have to pay a $200 dollar tax on every one, plus get fingerprinted and have a background check…
This brought some explaining from me to mom. When she saw the light, she just said, “I see your point”.
TO: All
RE: An Additional Thought
The other day I was talking about weapons with a woman who had professed that she’d rather die than kill someone with a firearm.
Then her son proposed a scenario….
…what if the guy is pointing a gun at my son….YOUR GRANDSON?
At which point her ‘mama bear’ came into full display…SHE’D GUN THE BASTARD DOWN!
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[The Truth will out….it’s just a matter of ‘perspective’…..]
Go Rabbi!
The penalty isn’t as bad as I had expected from my local fools. I was expecting the DEATH PENALTY. These morons are going to stick it to us really good this time around, and our new laws will be far stricter than anything CT. RI will finally be number 1 at something besides handing out welfare.
I’ve lived in Pennsylvania off and on for many years (born and raised) and one of this state’s most redeeming features is its uncharacteristically reasonable and realistic gun rights.
Except for Philly. But who goes there anyway…
What is going to happen on July 1? Same arbitrary date as the Colorado ban…
Wonder what the big federal play will be, require date and serial number for manufacturing? “common sense for tracking criminals and terrorists” and all… Only way it becomes enforceable
usually when you crib content from reddit it’s within a few days. what’s with the 2 week delay on this one?
I’ve been shot at by kids this young. I still regret breaking down my overwatch position 15 minutes before an 8 year old with a PKM wandered out into the open. Someone else got to shoot at him. They missed. Bummer.
Show her this
http://www.michaelzwilliamson.com/blog/item/we-need-to-regulate-cars-the-way-we-regulate-guns
Sounds like what the NY Führer and his minions shoved down our throats in the middle of the night. Only he make any magazine over 10 illegal, even old ones and we can only load 7 in a 10 shot magazine. Nearly all infractions are felonies so even if they go lighter on the sentence you loose all gun and voting rights forever (probably their real plan).
Good luck RI.
Well the ammo shortage isn’t affecting them, soo that’s cool right?
RI,another NE shithole.Screw em.
Counter that specific idiotic post? I’d start hammering her with a never ending stream of “We need to ban high powered assault vehicles”, “No one needs more than four cylinders”, “Turbochargers and superchargers belong on the racetrack, not our streets”, “No one needs more than 50 hp”, etc. Oh, and constantly ask why she owns that death machine and why she “needs” a car that big and that fast.
Eyes and ears! Eyes and ears!!!
Three-gun categories for anyone interested. This is on a California Gun forum.
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=577054
“Wonder where the gun trail will lead us for the two bombers? They had no permits to carry the guns and they were pretty good at using them. Where did they go to practice shooting? Those illegal guns, assassinated a police officer sitting in his vehicle. Another in serious condition in the hospital. No paper trail for the guns. Just the way the NRA wants it. To me our NRA is a terrorist group of its own making.”
– Keith Olbermann
Damn near every one of the cops in Watertown was equipped with an “assault rifle”. They obviously think that’s the best tool for the job. Seeing as I would have to protect my family from the exact same threat for which they chose an “assault rifle”, why would I settle for anything else? I’m supposed to accept that all I need is whatever DiFi will allow me when I don’t have body armor, a team of guys to back me up, or a tank?
Sounds like he’s got the same deep thoughts running through his head one might expect from the girls in the swimsuit edition. Although the one in the string bikini has a PHD in biology I think.
They didn’t see this coming? Did i read that right. For us who work in places that deal in reality, there are two words that usually are said to managers like this: “You’re fired!” What kind of idiot would not see this coming? It is absolutely astounding to see the level of incompetence in government, especially when a mistake from that area of government can cost someone their life or their freedom.
I’m glad the NYPD weren’t missing with.45s during the Empire State Building “firefight”.
flaming brown paper bag on her door step is in order here….