Thursday, April 28, 2011

Ignorant Fudds

Another 'I'm a gun owner but...' comment on Huffpo.
I have guns in my home and would feel uncomforta­ble not having them for protection­. However, there should be sound and effective gun laws that restrict automatics­, large magazines, assault rifles, along with gun training, gun registrati­on, etc. These laws in no way prevents gun ownership as stated in the 2nd amendment. As for the NRA, it is the closest terrorist organizati­on we have in the United States. NRA Board of Directors are paid a very high salary for something that is already guaranteed by the Unites States Constituti­on.

So obviously this individual has no clue just who was involved in two recent Supreme Court cases and why. You know, the fact that 'registration' was used to prevent ownership of firearms.

Or the fact that Chicago is using training requirements to continue restricting ownership even after they lost that last case.

How about those 'intermedi­ate power sniper rifles'?

Or the likelyhood this individual knows nothing about the terms he's used except for what he's read in the papers. Because it doesn't effect him, he doesn't care.

And calling the NRA a 'terrorist organization' is just stupid. Disagree w/ them? Fine. But don't be a complete ignoramus.

Unorganized Militia GearUnorganized Militia Gear
Follow TrailerDays on Twitter
Unorganized Militia Gear


LC Scotty said...

Blank Post

Thirdpower said...

Fixed. Blogger hiccuped on me.

Chas said...

Some people should stop eating daftburgers.

BobG said...

Anytime I see a statement that begins with "I'm a gun owner but..." my bullshit meter starts to peg.

Link P said...

Like David Codrea is fond of saying, "That's pretty big but."

Sigivald said...

I'm a gun owner, but ...

I think I should have a lot more machinepistols and I shouldn't have to have tax stamps and messy compliance issues to do so.

Mostly because he doesn't want me to, but also because one would be a blast at the range.

See, "I'm a gun owner, but" doesn't always have to lead to something bad!

Cargosquid said...

He's a gun owner, but...

I wonder how he'd like it if suddenly he's required to spend thousands to keep those guns he SAYS he has. You know, for that safe storage, that training, and the confiscation of his sniper rifles and room brooms. And if all he has is a revolver, he better keep it unloaded. In fact, why DOES he need six rounds in his no-safety auto feeding, machine of death?

Better that he gets a nice safe...single shot .22 rifle..oh wait...that could bring down a plane.

Just a taser...nope. Too dangerous. Pepper spray can blind.....

Ah, well. For defense he can just follow the suggestions of the police to yell, "fire" and vomit on the attacker.