If I may, the NRA was very vocal in the fight concerning assault class weapons, such the M-16 and the AK-47. While these two weapons in particular are not the issue, the debate was that citizens had the right to hunt with assault class weapons.Or (Regarding the Thune amendment):
I disagreed on the principle of the argument. Citizens do not need fully automatic assault class firearms to go hunting. The statement was absurd, but upheld by members of the NRA.
If a person unable to purchase a gun in one state, can simply skip to a state where he will pass the tests and receive a concealed carry license can then return to the original state, he is now in effect in violation of the original states law, designed with public safety in mind.Assuming that this individual is really a gun owner, what this shows is that our biggest enemy is not the Brady Campaign or Josh Sugarmann but outright ignorance. Obviously they have not read a single thing about either issue beyond what they saw on TV or read from 'authorized journalists'.
"Assault Class Weapon" is right out of the gun banner lexicon.
Had she bothered to actually READ the amendment she would have noted that it specifically said:
to allow citizens who have concealed carry permits from the State in which they reside to carry concealed firearms in another State that grants concealed carry permits, if the individual complies with the laws of the State.
Now, when called on it, she's hopping around saying she 'remembers' the NRA pushing fully autos (those 'assault class weapons again) for hunting but that semi-autos are 'excessive' anyway.
Hopefully our continued discussion opened her eyes a little. She seemed to be basing her entire philosophy on firearms based upon her personal experiences and needs. She couldn't see the 'need' for a semi-auto rifle yet chose a semi-auto handgun for personal self defense. She couldn't see the 'need' for national reciprocity because she doesn't regularly travel, ignoring the choices or needs of those who do carry across states.
7 comments:
Sadly, that degree of outright ignorance is not terribly uncommon these days, as I am quite sure you are well aware...
Unfortunately, at this point, I am forced to categorize such ignorance as willful and malicious - given the powers of the wonderful internet that the almighty AlGore provided us, anyone can learn about damn near anything these days. Chosing not to do so is indicative of something deeply wrong with the individual in question, and something to absolutley not be tolerated.
I am all for giving people the benefit of the doubt, and we should always strive to educate those who do not appear to grasp the finer points of the debate... but if/when they start militantly defending their informationally-lacking positions... well, then they have already lost.
Just went and read every comment.
Got vodka though, so it's cool.
I hope in your education of this young lady, that you informed her that the 2A and everything that the NRA stands for, is NOT about hunting, but about personal responsibility and self-defense. Teach her later when she's more ready for it, that that self-defense is also against our own government.
The hunting is just a bonus that's hitched along for the ride, and part of the heritage of our forebears.
B Woodman
III
What do you expect from the Huffington Post?
She is probably a Liberal Gun Grabber posing as a gun owner.
I noticed this kind of thing back during the campaign. People and organizations who were supposedly pro-gun rights made statements in support of Obama - saying he wasn't a gun grabber and he supported the 2nd Amendment.
Of course, they were people no one had ever heard of and they haven't been heard of or seen since.
I think this is just a variation on the same theme.
You know what? No. I'm not going to go read it. I have no trouble believing she's that ignorant in real life--one of our weaknesses is our tendency to talk about "gun owners" when we really mean "shooters" or "activists." Gun owners are just people who own guns. Nobody expects "computer owners" to be passionate or knowledgeable about net taxation issues and the like; that would be silly. But I still catch myself saying "gun owners won't let you get away with that." Well, sure they will, or at least most will.
But whatever. I'm going on call in half an hour, and right now I'm taking my radio and going to bed. I'm not going to read her crap and that's that.
I think I'm growing as a person.
Well, I have wanted to say this for a long time, I too am a gun owner, BUT...
But I'm NOT a criminal, I am a LEGAL gun owner, I own a number of guns, some with high capacity and large caliber, I have never committed a gun crime, I have never murdered anyone and I carry a gun everywhere I go.
But that doesn't mean I won't go crazy and one of these days actually buy another gun!!
Wow, I feel so much better getting that off my chest!!
Just because she's a shooter and has a carry permit doesn't make her any less of an Anti.
This is no different than Rosie O'Donnell or Barack Obama advocating the stripping of our rights while ensuring the law will not strip their armed security of their weapons.
Her take seems very selfish, and also highly illogical (When she travels she doesn't feel the "need" to bring her pistol...is she not "openly gay" out-of-state, or do the states she travels to not have bigots? Also are the only potential dangers a person faces always based on bigotry? I hope for her personal stake she at LEAST gets a recognized carry permit for the states she travels to. Better safe than sorry).
But she overlooks other people's needs. I travel through sections of Boston where people can take issue with the color of my skin, or simply take issue with the fact that I many have cash or valuables that don't belong to them. Until recently my right to self defense was greatly curtailed. Moreover these risks don't change when I cross a state line.
Hopefully she'll step back and listen to herself a bit and see exactly what she's advocating.
Still her line of discussion where this new law will somehow embolden people to break federal laws, who otherwise would have not broken OTHER federal laws (ie fake residency to avoid a restrictive home-state carry permit, vs. just carrying illegally) gets me to think she might be perfectly willing to shoehorn her ideology into whatever shape best avoids reality.
Keep us posted.
Post a Comment