What the hell is this amateurish anti-gun agitprop doing on The New York Times website? The Ghost of Gun Control is about as visually compelling as an international sailboat race. Drew Christie’s piss-poor “Op-Vid” depends heavily on Adam Winkler’s book Gun Fight. Christie riffs on it to offer on the usual mischaracterization of the “Wild West” as gun control heaven and a snide slam claiming that “many modern gun enthusiasts” are trigger happy Clint Eastwood wanna-be’s. The bit equating the 1792 federal law mandating firearms ownership to the gun grabbers’ desire to create a federal gun registry (ahead of potential confiscation) is particularly galling. Actually, no. It’s not galling. It’s pathetic. This video isn’t funny or entertaining. It’s rubbish. The Old Gray Lady has never sunk so low. Until the next time.
Thanks for the heads up, guess I won’t go out of my way to watch it…….
I sure hope that ghost is right. About the no more attempts at gun control for 20 years, I mean.
Tell you what, ghostie, if the Feds mandate that every able-bodied American has to own an AR-15, then yes, you can register those. (But only those. The guns I paid for are none of your business.)
Now get your translucent ass out of here before I start burning some sage.
This video was crap. I love how he tried to make his point using a bunch of people who were wrong. So because they were wrong, we should also be wrong and place a bunch of junk laws on good people?
That might turn the tide for ’em, by golly. You’d think with all of Bloombucks’ bucks they could buy sharper crayons than that.
Looked like a 3rd graders Power Point presentation, sheesh!
My heart goes out to RF, who has to view such crap in order to be able to report on it for us. If there was such a thing as brain bleach, I’d buy him a bottle. Oh, wait. I actually have some of that. It’s from Kentucky.
“as visually compelling as an international sailboat race.”
http://imgur.com/fmroIGj
This is the Ugly lull before the Ugly Storm (Troopers)
In the 1930’s they called it the “phony war”
Obama is simply putting all his Islamo-facist ducks in a row (ammo crisis, Credit Crisis for Gunnies, Import ban, 10,000 more cameras) before he signs’ his EO deleting the US Constitution. I would not doubt that he actually burns the original and substitutes the Koran, or Mien Kamph.
Query:
Will the Jews fight this time, and on which side?
“Will the Jews fight this time, and on which side?”
Probably like people from other religious and cultural-ethnic groups some will fight and some will not fight. Again like people from those other groups, the Jews will act as individuals and will fight on the side they choose to align with which means they will end up on both sides. Does that make it more clear?
It was an intentionally controversial statement meant to elicit deep introspection, and hopefully, discussion. Not just about Jews but about all Americans of all religious backgrounds. and their personal allegiance to the cause of human liberty
On both sides? Kind of like liberals on one side, neoconservatives on the other? No wait- they somehow keep ending up on the same side. Ok, maybe Hollywood vs. … Scratch that. Maybe, banking/finance vs. … Ah fuggitaboutit.
I actually like sailboat racing, thank you very much.
Yes, but how long can you *watch* it?
If it involves multimillion-dollar boats sinking and rich people thrashing in the water, I can watch that all day.
I agree with you Nick, so sorry the America’s Cup is no longer run around this area.
What they are ignoring about the founding fathers is that their act was to make sure everyone had a rifle not to find out who did with the intent to deprive them of it. You don’t see this argument used to often by the anti-gun crowd because it is one of the more easily defeated ones. In fact it actually points out that at one time the federal government REQUIRED you to have a gun and the only way they could be sure you had one was if you registered it. The intent behind that bit of regulation is quite a bite different than the intent behind regulations today.
As to the other stuff about Nixon, Reagan, NRA. There is truth to that. In fact the NRA was known for making a lot of “compromises” regarding the 2nd Amendment.
people keep bringing up nixon and reagan as if they think we will blindly follow the party line and do whatever they say. I think when that happens it is fun to flip it around and ask them if they really want to take the same side as the fellow who invaded cambodia, and the fellow who let the cia wreak havoc with multiple democracies in south america, installing puppet regimes friendly to us interests. Also remind them that the reason that Reagan signed the mulford act was due to racist pressure from people trying to weaken the black panthers.
Finally state that in the 70s there was a grassroots movement within the NRA who was sick and tired of the anti-second amendment stance and power struggle took hold, resulting in the considerably more RKBA-friendly stance we have today.
The video, btw was not really that inflammatory. It was simply resigned and pathetic whining.
So I’m curious about the part claiming the founding fathers mandated gun registration along with annual inspections. That just doesng sound right after the shall not be infringed part of the 2A and yes I understand if there’s any truth to that it was to ensure those weapons were functioning and the video is using it out of context.
It wasn’t gun registration as a means to prevent you from owning. It was gun registration requiring you to own a gun. “A 1792 federal law mandated every eligible man to purchase a military-style gun and ammunition for his service in the citizen militia. Such men had to report for frequent musters—where their guns would be inspected and, yes, registered on public rolls.”
i didn’t know pierce moron had a kindergardener.
I hope casper fly’s up feinswine’s skirt, thats the last we will see of his sorry ass for awhile, Randy
Robert, you gotta watch some of the AC 72 racing in San Francisco. I watched the NYT ideo, and it was really lame, but those new 72 ‘ catamarans going 45 mph on hydrofoils is good stuff, and, when they crash, spectacular!
Bye bye Ghostie!
Don’t let the door hit ya on the way out, I don’t want ghost-butt prints on my door.
I won’t bother watching either…
This piece of crap is so full of crap it’s hard to know where to begin. Skipping the cheap shots at the NRA, Reagan and such I’ll confine myself to the Wild West and 1792.
The (rare) town ordinances restricting carrying were aimed at drunken cowpokes coming off a cattle drive or – in the case of Tombstone – the somewhat political battle between the Earps and the “Cowboys”. Control and restriction on any ownership? No.
Ironically enough Dodge City later lost the cattle trade because of it’s hoity-toity restrictions and controls. A form of boycott we can well emulate.
The Militia Act of 1792 had no restrictions or registration. No gun of the time had any serial number to register in any case. Most male citizens were simply required to have not only a functioning musket or rifle but ammunition, bayonet and basic camp equipment as well, which was only “inspected” for function once a year or so.
There was no restriction on any additional arms and many people owned just that.
Registration indeed! What nonsense.
The Militia Act was about the “well regulated Militia” meaning the militia was properly equipped. The meaning of “regulated” has changed somewhat since the 1700s.
Of course, the phrase “Well Regulated” in 18th century usage meant “effective”in the same way that Bach’s “Well Tempered” Clavier meant a clavier properly tuned, composed for and played.
In order to achieve this, the widespread ownership of arms, and training in their use was encouraged. Nowhere was there an intent to confine this to a single gun of any type.
Cavalrymen indeed, were usually required to own a carbine and two pistols. Handguns (both single and double barrel) were commonly carried, especially while traveling.
“Keep and Bear” meant – and means – what it says.
How about a video where gun control is portrayed as a beast that cannot be fed. That seems to be the most appropriate metaphor, since I have never ever seen a anti-gunner ever say “we have enough gun control laws now.” Every compromise, every small act, is a stepping stone to another gun control measure.
You’ve clearly never had you ass handed to you in a proper sailboat (small or large) race and not been able to function for 3 days afterward.
The gun grabbers are NOT giving up.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/26/us/politics/senators-quietly-seek-a-new-path-on-gun-control.html?hpw
-Mancin Toomey working behind the scenes to make a compromise that is more “acceptable”
-Lobbying (threatening) the Senators who voted against it.
See you libtard homos in 2033 then. Actually, see you in 2014 midterms……unfinished business. Then, you will REALLY get the message (not really, but your libtard candidates will get ghosted).
Robert –
“The Old Gray Lady has never sunk so low. Until the next time.”
**********************************************
Almost sounds like an apologia for the NYT.
That rag has been subletting the basement of the journalistic outhouse with the WaPo, for years.
Bob
Comments are closed.