Interesting E-Mail from StoptheNRA.com

[CO Liberal]

Especially near the end - looks like the gun lobby may be aiding the terrorists...

Underlining emphasis mine. - Wayne

* * * * *

Subj: We've stopped smiling
Date: 4/23/2004 1:56:44 AM Mountain Daylight Time
From: [e-mail] (STOPtheNRA.com)
To: xxxxxx

Dear friend,

We've stopped smiling after our victory defeating the NRA's insane bill that would have given legal immunity to the gun industry.

We've stopped smiling because there are only 55 legislative days left for Congress to renew the ban on assault weapons. When the ban expires, illegal AK-47s, Uzis and other illegal assault weapons will be legalized and back on our streets. Ten years of progress will be wiped out. President Bush is running around the country telling everyone that we must renew the Patriot Act. But he is silent on the renewal of the assault weapons ban. He is supporting the NRA over our children -- it's that simple. It's special-interest politics at its worst.

In Illinois just the other day, police arrested a man who had an AK-47 assault rifle, more than 1,300 rounds of ammunition, pipe bomb making components, and a book called Guns, Freedom and Terrorism by National Rifle Association CEO Wayne LaPierre. Apparently the man had plans for a killing spree of government officials and politicians. Do we have to wait for another Columbine to come to our senses?

We must send Bush/Cheney a message. Sign the petition at www.stopthenra.com.
http://www.stopthenra.com/site/R?i=wEnAipYvf8z-_v2Mejv72Q..

Do you care? If you do, it's time to help now.

Momentum is building. Next week Police Chiefs all over the country will be holding press conferences demanding the ban be renewed. The Reverend Jesse Jackson has taken up the cause and is traveling around the country speaking out. The New York Times has editorialized for the renewal, along with many other newspapers around the country. We are being successful -- but we need your help.

1. Forward this e-mail to everyone you know and ask them to sign the petition. We need one million signatures. We now have over 225,000 but we need one million to send it to Bush. Click here.
http://www.stopthenra.com/site/R?i=dE3jUNFDho_-_v2Mejv72Q..

2. Help us advertise. We have begun our print ads but we need $1 million to spread the word. Click here.
http://www.stopthenra.com/site/R?i=--GJvG2tarP-_v2Mejv72Q..

3. Come to Washington, D.C. on Mothers' Day, May 9th, and vote with your presence to stop the NRA and renew the assault weapons ban. Click here.
http://www.stopthenra.com/site/R?i=Ss1JIBjbrPr-_v2Mejv72Q..

An Al Qaeda training manual that was found in Afghanistan said the following:

"In countries like the United States it's perfectly legal for members of the public to own certain types of firearms. If you live in such a country attain an assault rifle legally, preferably an AK-47 or variations."

Show Bush/Cheney they don't have a choice. Sign our petition. Forward to a friend.

http://www.stopthenra.com/site/R?i=5zpzitc06T3-_v2Mejv72Q..
http://www.stopthenra.com/site/R?i=AAPBXgb1PpP-_v2Mejv72Q..

StoptheNRA.com

[Superfly]

1. How many times do we need to go over this Bullshit?

"When the ban expires, illegal AK-47s, Uzis and other illegal assault weapons will be legalized and back on our streets."

That is 100% BS. Those weapons are not banned by the AWB. The AWB prevents the manufacture of weapons with a combination of certain cosmetic features. Weapons with these cosmetic features manufactured before the ban were not affected at all.

"...supporting the NRA over our children -- it's that simple."

Won't somebody PLEASE think of the children?!?

"had....a book called Guns, Freedom and Terrorism by National Rifle Association CEO Wayne LaPierre"

The last time I checked, having books does not a criminal make. I have a copy of Mein Kampf in my bookshelf. Does that make me a Nazi sympathizer? I also have a copy of the "Anarchist's Cookbook". Does that mean that I "Apparently the man had plans for a killing spree of government officials and politicians"???

Jebus, CO. This is complete horseshit. I can't say that I am surprised it's coming from the anti-RKBA crowd. Liberals my fucking ass.

[demsrule4life]

3. Forward this email to all your friends

just what my friends would want, pro or anti, someone else begging them for money.

[MrBenchley]

7. Gee, dems...

Not all of my friends are cheap bastards clinging to guns and snarling at every Democrat they can find

[demsrule4life]

9. Money to feed their kids is much better spent

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[demsrule4life]

17. I see that you don't live in utopia either

http://www.tolerance.org/maps/hate/state.jsp?S=NJ&m=2

[MrBenchley]

28. Yeah, but I'm not on the internet

everyday trying to get folks like those assault weapons, either.

By the way, wonder how many of those charmers are pro-gun?

[CO Liberal]

50. There are Over 8 Million People in NJ, Dems...

So I'm sure there are more than a few assholes. And with the large Jewish population in the NY Metro area, I can see why there are Nazi groups.

The big burning question is ... how many of these hate groups are also pro-gun???

[OpSomBlood]

53. Assholes in New Jersey?

Take back that vicious false accusation!

[CO Liberal]

58. I Was Born & Raised in NJ

Yes, there are assholes there - many of them are Republican ofice-holders.

[CO Liberal]

42. But After The Kids Get Shot, Food Money is Academic

Think about it.

[Superfly]

8. This sounds like a letter written

by a bunch of neo-conservative soccer moms, "concerned for the children", because the big, bad NRA is "helping terrorists", dontcha know?

There is absolutely no way in hell a person can call himself a liberal or Democrat in one breath, and then deride a person because he had an objectionable book.

Those people missed out on their event 60 years ago:

[MrBenchley]

14. Gee, fly...they sound like liberals...

Unlike the sumbitches pimping for the NRA and trying to pretend this thug is being unjustly accused of anything.

[demsrule4life]

19. "they sound like liberals"

You know this how?

[MrBenchley]

31. Gee, dems...

Maybe you ought to hang out where people wear shoes indoors more often...

The one under discussion isn't much different than this...

http://www.democrats.org/environment/earth_day/index.html

or this

http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/takeaction/march_mod/index1.html

or this

http://moveonpac.org/50forthefuture/?id=2724-532035-BCw_bFNNbMZ080_fXx9ZUQ

or this

http://www.workingforchange.com/choicemarch/index.cfm

[Superfly]

143. .

.

[MrBenchley]

5. Gee, sounds like Wayne found his true audience

"Liberals my fucking ass."
Gee, that's pretty much what we liberals say when we read the RKBA crowd's daily dose of ignorance and bullshit.

[-..__...]

6. "there are only 55 legislative days left..."

:bounce: :toast: :bounce: :toast: :bounce: :toast:

[Superfly]

10. Yeah, no shit!!!

44 states with CCW.
The AWB expires in a few months.

My, what will those gun grabbing, conservatives in liberal's clothing do with themselves?

[Something Blue]

44. HA

"My, what will those gun grabbing, conservatives in liberal's clothing do with themselves?"

Remain usmiling, I should think... :)

[MrBenchley]

2. A bit more on the story from yesterday

It's Rupert Murdoch's NY Post, though...we'll have to see what real newspapers ssay before we take it as gospel...

"April 22, 2004 -- A Florida-based arms company is at the center of the international probe into a New York-bound ship seized in Italy while laden with thousands of Kalashnikov assault rifles, The Post has learned.
The AK-47s were apparently bound for Vermont.
Officials have linked Century International Arms Inc. in Boca Raton to the discovery of a cache of 7,500 AK-47s hidden beneath piles of properly labeled arms in several cargo containers confiscated in the port of Gioia Tauro in southern Italy several days ago.
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement was notified and joined the probe. Investigators determined the ultimate destination of the ship's stash of combat-style weapons was Century's giant warehouse in Fairfax, Vt., near the Canadian border, sources said.
Century's Web site does not show that the company sells AK-47s, a weapon commonly associated with terrorists and guerrilla movements around the world. The company does sell a similar weapon, the WASR 10 semiautomatic rifle. "

http://www.nypost.com/news/nationalnews/19310.htm

There is no reason to put these on the civilian market for every criminal, psycho and Tim McVeigh wannabe, no matter how furiously the RKBA crowd LIES here.

[iverglas]

41. oh goody

"Investigators determined the ultimate destination of the ship's stash of combat-style weapons was Century's giant warehouse in Fairfax, Vt., near the Canadian border, sources said."

As if the gazillions of handguns floating around down there and occasionally seeping over the border weren't enough to worry about.

I'd thought it plausible that the things were ultimately destined to, oh, ... Colombia. Perhaps someone's plotting some foreign insurrection a little closer to home. ;)

.

[MrBenchley]

51. Wasn't it the National Review

that advocated that the US commit terrorist acts in Canada and blame them on al Qaeda to make Canadians more committed to the Chimp's War on Terra?

[slackmaster]

62. Near the Canadian border, eh?

Clearly our "friends" up in the Great White North must be involved in this conspiracy somehow.

The smuggled firearms included the lightweight AK-47s and SKA and Mauser rifles.

And the Jamaicans too.

:freak:

Hey MrBenchley,

Why is it OK for YOU to cite a cheapshit right-wing gossip tabloid as a news source, but when a pro-RKBA person links to a photo on an RW site you go ballistic?

[-..__...]

4. Man, talk about fear mongering.

(and I thought gun owners were supposed to be the paranoid ones?):D

Illegal assault weapons back on the streets...
Childrens safety...
Terrorists...
Pipe bombs...
Killing sprees...
Columbine...
(no mention of the DC snipers?):eyes:

Sadly, the mentality of the people that this email appeals to are the ones who would enthusiastically embrace the Patriot Act... "for the safety of our children".

[Superfly]

11. It's simple...

They're audience is weak minded people who will read this tripe and then post it on internet discussion boards.

[MrBenchley]

15. As opposed to intellectuals like this...

"The handwritten notes included a list of current and former federal officials and other politicians with the word "marked" next to them, Syfert said. When investigators asked Breit what he meant by "marked," Breit responded "marked to die," according to the criminal complaint and Syfert.
Breit said each of the officials had been "marked" because they held liberal or antigun views or were not supportive of the current administration, the complaint said."

http://www.thetimesonline.com/articles/2004/04/23/news/local_illinois/2e9d3628eb49ba0786256e7e0074098f.txt

[DoNotRefill]

140. Sounds like somebody....

read "Unintended Consequences"...

[MrBenchley]

145. Sounds more like the target audience

for this idiot...



But hey, crap like "Unintended Consequences" and "The Turner Diaries" are just the sort of paranoid, idiotic gibberish that appeals to the "gun rights" crowd--wonder why?

"Basically the book's plot is an elaborate justification for a group of people to go on a terroristic sniper campaign against cardboard 'evil' government officials.
It is an inadvertant indightment of the violent mindset of the extreme rightwing, who see their enemies through a simple black or white lens and view the probable resolution of the 2nd amendment debate in similiarely starkly violent terms.
It is a sick irony that the simplisticly atavistic mindset of those who enjoy this book is so similar to that of Muslim fundamentalism, given the fact that that movements is so uniquely despised by the american right."

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1888118040/inktomi-bkasin-20/ref%3Dnosim/102-5661770-4714549

[DoNotRefill]

155. The guy who wrote Unintended Consequences...

is a Democrat.

[FeebMaster]

153. He must have skipped the part about Joe Columbo. (nt)

[-..__...]

16. "Forward to a friend"

:D

[MrBenchley]

21. Says it all....

An e-mail from the Brady Center has the RKBA crowd hiking up their skirts and having a hissy fit...

And then in the next breath, they want to pretend this guy is nothing to worry about...

"Syfert said Rockford police were called to his home after Breit accidentally fired a round from a newly purchased AK-47 assault rifle.
The weapons and a series of incriminating writings were discovered during a search of Breit's home, Syfert said.
The handwritten notes included a list of current and former federal officials and other politicians with the word "marked" next to them, Syfert said. When investigators asked Breit what he meant by "marked," Breit responded "marked to die," according to the criminal complaint and Syfert.
Breit said each of the officials had been "marked" because they held liberal or antigun views or were not supportive of the current administration, the complaint said."

http://www.thetimesonline.com/articles/2004/04/23/news/local_illinois/2e9d3628eb49ba0786256e7e0074098f.txt

But then this IS the same bunch that not so long ago were screaming that they needed to have a popgun in their pockets to skulk to church...

[OpSomBlood]

23. Good...another criminal off the streets.

Remind me again what this asshole has to do with any other law-abiding gun owner?

This guy was a criminal planning a major crime. By your alleged logic, people like this are the reason that nobody should be able to own guns.

Oh, wait...I forgot, you don't want to ban guns.

[MrBenchley]

26. Wonder how many other gun owners like him

are out there, listening to NRA radio right now?

"By your alleged logic"
Jeeze, op, I'm not the one trying to make it easier for humholes like this to get their sweaty shaky hands on assault weapons.

Funny he wasn't gunning for your pal Pete Coors, isn't it?

[MrBenchley]

12. Here's the pro-gun "enthusiast"

"Authorities said Breit had a variety of guns and a sword in his home when he was arrested on Sunday. They also found several pounds of explosive material called black powder and the components needed to build pipe bombs.
Syfert said Rockford police were called to his home after Breit accidentally fired a round from a newly purchased AK-47 assault rifle.
The weapons and a series of incriminating writings were discovered during a search of Breit's home, Syfert said.
The handwritten notes included a list of current and former federal officials and other politicians with the word "marked" next to them, Syfert said. When investigators asked Breit what he meant by "marked," Breit responded "marked to die," according to the criminal complaint and Syfert.
Breit said each of the officials had been "marked" because they held liberal or antigun views or were not supportive of the current administration, the complaint said."

http://www.thetimesonline.com/articles/2004/04/23/news/local_illinois/2e9d3628eb49ba0786256e7e0074098f.txt

[slackmaster]

64. What is this "black powder" they refer to?

Could it be that magical substance made by wizards in China?

:freak:

[OpSomBlood]

66. And his car had 15 gallons...

...of a highly flammable substance known as "gasoline."

[MrBenchley]

70. And he has a gaggle of imbeciles

trying to pretend his arrest is somehow unfair, for some bizarre fucking reason....

[CO Liberal]

72. The Correct Term....

...for a gathering of imbeciles is not "gaggle" - it's "NRA Convention".

:-)

[MrBenchley]

73. LOL!!

The scary thing is, this is the sort of nutcase (pro-gun) Ann Coulter and her ilk have whistled up...

[OpSomBlood]

74. Not lampooning the arrest...

But lampooning the handling of the mystical explosive known as "black powder" in the article.

The rest of the world calls it gunpowder.

[MrBenchley]

76. Yeah, surrrrrrrrrrrrre....

More of that scrupulous honesty the RKBA crowd displays every day....

"the mystical explosive known as "black powder" in the article.
The rest of the world calls it gunpowder."

http://www.black-powder.com/

http://www.blackpowdernet.com/
(by the way, you'll notice the "thinking mans" thinking evidently does not extend to grammar)

http://98.net/ibha/

http://www.blackpowderjournal.com/

TOP 20 WEB RESULTS out of about 413,000. Related: black powder rifle, black powder gun, black powder pistol   

[OpSomBlood]

79. Thanks for the links.

The extra R's in "sure" really drove the point home.

And?

[MrBenchley]

81. Be sure and tell them they're using the term no-one uses....

[OpSomBlood]

84. My bad.

I wasn't claiming that the term "black powder" is never used. I was commenting on how the article went out of it's way to differentiate it as an "explosive" when it is commonly used as firearm propellant. That's when I made my "highly flammable liquid known as gasoline" comment.

But I can see how my phrasing could have been confusing.

[Low Drag]

136. Black powder

is used in muzzle loading rifles.
Replicas of the type used in Civil War and earlier.

It is much less powerful than modern smokeless powder. Most shooting enthusiasts buy in bulk to save money.

[OpSomBlood]

18. What's RIGHT with this e-mail?

>> We've stopped smiling because there are only 55 legislative days left for Congress to renew the ban on assault weapons. <<

You mean, renew the ban features that make semi-automatic rifles look like assault weapons?

>> When the ban expires, illegal AK-47s, Uzis and other illegal assault weapons will be legalized and back on our streets. <<

Anyone else find it odd that every piece of anti-gun propaganda contains specific references to AK-47's and Uzis? Could it be that those words trigger scary images to people who don't know much about guns?

An Uzi fires 9mm ammunition. If it is semi-automatic, how is this weapon "more lethal" than any other 9mm pistol?

>> Ten years of progress will be wiped out. <<

Where is the statistical evidence that supports the claim that the AWB has significantly decreased crime? Has the use of assault weapons in crime dropped from 2% to 1.5%?

>> He is supporting the NRA over our children -- it's that simple. <<

It's so easy to sound compelling whenever you bring up "our children." Unfortunately, the writer neglected to mentioned how assault weapons specifically endanger children "more lethally" than any other semi-auto.

Or do they just plan to keep using "our children" to justify every escalated level of gun control they propose?

>> In Illinois just the other day, police arrested a man who had an AK-47 assault rifle, more than 1,300 rounds of ammunition, pipe bomb making components, and a book called Guns, Freedom and Terrorism by National Rifle Association CEO Wayne LaPierre. <<

I have a few questions about this reference, which unfortunately can't be answered because the incident wasn't footnoted (Google searches came up empty for this). Was the AK-47 that was confiscated an illegal full-auto? Is the LaPierre book a guide on how to be a terrorist?

Pretty nice how they managed to corellate the NRA with terrorism. As far as I can tell, the only crime this guy committed was the possession of bomb-making matrerials, and he was rightfully arrested for it.

The theory of preemptive crime control is interesting, though.

>> Do we have to wait for another Columbine to come to our senses? <<

Columbine happened four years after the passage of the AWB. Anti-gun people often neglect to mention this little tidbit of info.

If the law didn't work last time, how in the hell is it going to work next time? If a fucked-up kid wants to go on a killing spree, there are bigger problems to deal with than the weapons he chooses to use.

Then, the coup de grace:

>> An Al Qaeda training manual that was found in Afghanistan said the following:

"In countries like the United States it's perfectly legal for members of the public to own certain types of firearms. If you live in such a country attain an assault rifle legally, preferably an AK-47 or variations." <<

So in other words, asshole terrorists like AK-47's...so therefore nobody should be allowed to own one.

They like communicating on the internet, too. And commercial air travel.

[MrBenchley]

22. For one thing, it pissed off the trigger-happy amongst us...

[OpSomBlood]

27. We're pissed because it's filled with lies.

If the anti-gun cause is so noble, then why can't they legitimately make their point without lies, distortion and "think of the children" gimmicks?

So far, the "rationale" I've heard for the AWB has been:

- "assault weapons" fire faster than "conventional" guns
- "assault weapons" are more powerful
- "assault weapons" are the weapon of choice of criminals

And not one of these three points are even remotely true. Again, if this cause is so noble, then why do its proponents have to lie?

[Superfly]

33. They lie because they are WEAK MINDED people.

And the *ONLY* recourse of a weak mind is to lie.

[MrBenchley]

38. And you got such nice playmates too...

Honest, strong-minded folks like these...



This yobbo's mind is so strong he needs to wear protective headgear to keep it from busting through his skull...



And of course, the guy synonymous with strength of mind and honesty

[DoNotRefill]

142. Hmmmm....

this:



as opposed to this:



What's your point?

[MrBenchley]

146. Gee, refill, the point is screamingly obvious

Which one is going to fight to renew and strengthen the assault weapons ban? John Kerry, the candidate I support.

Chimpy's had three and a half years and hasn't done dick...although the overwheming majority of American voters support the ban. It's clear his gun control stance is as phony as his environmentalist stance.

Hey but "enthusiasts" such as yourself don't need to worry about not having a candidate....Roy Moore is pro-gun all the way...and one sick bigoted fuck.

The RKBA crowd has such NICE playmates.

[MrBenchley]

36. Who the hell do you think you're kidding, op?

The plain fact is all of those things are true...despite the lies of the RKBA crowd.

[OpSomBlood]

40. Facts don't matter to Benchley.

>> - "assault weapons" fire faster than "conventional" guns
- "assault weapons" are more powerful
- "assault weapons" are the weapon of choice of criminals <<

All of these things are true? Really?

How exactly does a banned semi-automatic rifle faster than a legal semi-automatic pistol? One shot per trigger pull. That's the same rate of fire, for those scoring at home.

How are assault weapons more powerful than hunting rifles? The ammunition they fire is substantially smaller and less energetic.

How can assault weapons be the weapon of choice of criminals when they are used in about 2% of gun crimes?

Nobody ever accused you of being factual, Bench.

[MrBenchley]

45. Gee, op, if you ever get near a fact, send off a flare

"Nobody ever accused you of being factual, Bench."
But it's notable that those who accuse me of the opposite never have anything but crap from places like the stentorian to back them up.

[OpSomBlood]

52. Why don't you actually address the issue?

Or are you deflecting because you have nothing worthwhile to add?

You claim that all three of those "points" are true. Can you back that up in the face of facts that unquestionably prove contrary?

How do semi-auto rifles fire faster than semi-auto pistols? How are they more powerful than hunting rifles that use more powerful ammo? How can they be the weapon of choice of criminals when they are used in 2% of gun crimes?

Of course you can't back it up. It's easier take a personal shot at me for linking to an image on a right-wing website. An image that you have not yet refuted as being authentic.

[MrBenchley]

59. Sure thing, op...

Soon as you link to the section of NJ law you "quoted"

"How do semi-auto rifles fire faster than semi-auto pistols? How are they more powerful than hunting rifles that use more powerful ammo? How can they be the weapon of choice of criminals when they are used in 2% of gun crimes?"
Geew, sounds like nobody needs an assault weapon, if those things are true. You "enthusiasts" can just muddle along choking your chubbies over photos of hunting rifles and semi-autro pistols.

[OpSomBlood]

60. First, I did post the link.

It was the same link that was referenced earlier in the thread. I extended the courtesy of posting it again for you.

Secondly, you just deflected the debate from whether or not those talking points are true to whether or not people "need" to own assault rifles.

So, does that mean you concede that those pro-AWB talking points are lies? And can we extend this conversation to other potentially dangerous items that people own but don't need?

And also, who gets to decide what we "need"? The government? Sounds like a great arrangement.

[MrBenchley]

65. And so the quote you posted was false

and the well regulated organized militia is the National Guard.

Nuff said.

[OpSomBlood]

67. What is the non-organized miltia?

The statute made it clear that the organized militia (National Guard) is only part of the overall NJ militia. So again, who are the non-organized militia and what are they armed with?

[Name removed]

69. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MrBenchley]

71. And the quote you put up was false

[OpSomBlood]

75. http://lis.njleg.state.nj.us

There's the "false" website where I got the "false" New Jersey statute regarding who "falsely" belongs to the militia.

Sure looks like a hoax website to me.

[MrBenchley]

77. And the quote you claimed was there

is not.

[OpSomBlood]

78. Title 38A:1-2 - Composition of militia

I cut-n-pasted directly from the site.

Denying that something exists doesn't make it vanish.

[MrBenchley]

82. Peddle it to Pete Coors...

[FeebMaster]

83. Wow. You sure told him. (nt)

[OpSomBlood]

85. Ah, yes...Pete Coors.

The person who is most directly pertinent to this discussion.

[MrBenchley]

86. Maybe he can hire some folks at the Heritage Foundation

to brew up some sort of phony scholarship showing us that "unorganized" and "well regulated" are synonymous.

[OpSomBlood]

87. Nobody is making that claim.

The NJ Statute clearly differentiates between the unorganized and well regulated militias. It states that all able-bodied citizens belonged to the overall militia, regardless if they are in the National Guard (or "organized" militia).

My question to you was, who is the unorganized militia and what are they supposed to be armed with?

[MrBenchley]

88. Gee, op

Next ask me which sort of militia is described in the second amendment...the well regulated one or the unorganized one.

[OpSomBlood]

89. Why don't you tell me what kind of militia is unarmed?

Because that doesn't seem like much of a militia to me.

[MrBenchley]

90. Gee, op...

Considering what things DO seem like to you....

Tell us, which units of the National Guard bring their OWN guns?

[OpSomBlood]

91. You aren't going to win by distorting.

The National Guard are the organized militia. The organized militia does not represent the entire NJ militia. The entire militia is every able-bodied citizen under the age of 45. Your own statutes state this clear as day.

I'm not sure if you are just failing to understand the simple point I've laid out, or if you are intentionally repeating the same true but irrelevant point over and over in an attempt to veer the conversation off course.

[MrBenchley]

92. I already won

and you're just rehashing the same imbecilic right wing talking points that every gun nut does.

"The entire militia is every able-bodied citizen under the age of 45."
And the Second Amednment covers only well regulated (organized) militia...i.e., the National Guard. Which is not called upon to supply its own guns.

All else is horse shit...and feeble-minded horseshit at that, of the sort that fetches morons to the Montana Freemen and the like.

[OpSomBlood]

93. Imbecilic, nut, feeble-minded, horseshit, moron.

The words of a master debater.

[MrBenchley]

95. And a perfect description of the rancid RKBA creed...

[OpSomBlood]

94. Congratulations, by the way.

On steering this conversation away from the three false pro-AWB talking points to the New Jersey militia, which is completely irrelevant to this thread. God only knows how you got us from there to here.

You really are good at this, but I won't let you off the hook. Will you admit that these points:

- Assault weapons fire faster than "conventional" guns
- Assault weapons are more powerful
- Assault weapons are preferred by criminals

are all false? Or is this where you childishly bring up Pete Coors and Stentorian because you have no logical counter for the argument?

[MrBenchley]

97. Why not?

It's not like you ever got anything but this tedious right wing crap.

But I'll tell you what...if assault weapons aren't faster or more powerful then YOU DON'T FUCKING NEED AN ASSAULT WEAPON.

Simple as that.

You want to pretend newspapers are lying, Democratic senators are lying, everybody else is lying...go ahead.

But next ask me if I believe YOU.

[OpSomBlood]

98. That's not a reason to ban them.

Neither you nor the government have the right to decide what people need.

[MrBenchley]

99. The hell it isn't...

No civilian needs a military weapon...especially given the disgraceful corruption and scummy practices of the gun industry as it is now.

You want to claim they're no different than conventional ones...so why the hell should we bend? If they're the same, then your needs are already met.

But of course both of us know the Brady Center is telling the truth on those three points. The gun lobby itself told the world those three points were true when they scuttled their ugly "immunity from liability" bill rather than accept an amendment that said they couldn't put assault weapons in the itchy twitchy fingers of nutcases and criminals. Just like they put the lie to the "criminals don't get guns at gun shows" crap they'd been peddling.

The difference is that you want to pretend otherwise.

Me, I'm going to vote for the candidate that's going to renew and strengthen the assault weapon ban, because I know he's not lying. Fuck the GOP and the gun lobby.

[hansberrym]

138. Including the Supreme Court

From Miller:
"The signification attributed to the term Militia appears from the debates in the Convention, the history and legislation of Colonies and States, and the writings of approved commentators. These show plainly enough that the Militia comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense. ‘A body of citizens enrolled for military discipline.’ And further, that ordinarily when called for service these men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time"

[DoNotRefill]

141. They ARE armed...

they have case-cutters and sharpened sticks.

[slackmaster]

68. Ipse Dixit fallacy

and the well regulated organized militia is the National Guard.

Nuff said.

Otherwise known as a "Sez you", or a personal opinion presented in the guise of an authoritative legal one.

[OpSomBlood]

96. Look at all the posts under this one...

Where Benchley brings up irrelevant topics from other threads in an effort to deflect the very simple questions I asked. He's so entrenched in the pro-AWB mindset that he absolutley refuses to admit that these three biggest arguments:

- assault weapons fire faster than "conventional" guns
- assault weapons are more powerful
- assault weapons are the preference of criminals

are all completely false (i.e., lies). He'd rather ramble about who belongs to the New Jersey militia than address the issue at hand.

Benchley, you stated, "The plain fact is all of those things are true...despite the lies of the RKBA crowd."

By "those things" you meant the three points listed above. Then, you stated, "Geew, sounds like nobody needs an assault weapon, if those things are true."

To which I asked, who is to decide what people "need"? Another valid question which you've utterly deflected.

[MrBenchley]

102. Op, you can peddle right wing gibberish until you're blue in the face

but it won't make it true.

None of those statements is false. If they were, then nobody would need an assault weapon and the gun lobby wouldn't have scuttled the immunity from liability bill they were desperately trying to hide behind.

And to answer your new questions Americans are more than able to decide what anybody needs and doesn't need. The AWB was challenged in court a shitload of times by nutcases (mostly, not on second amendment grounds--why do you suppose THAT is?) and upheld each time.

John Kerry is going to fight to renew and strengthen the assault weapons ban, if Tom DeLay and his ugly mob manage to block the bill now in Congress. I'm joining him.,

[Low Drag]

137. US Military says so....

The current M16 round, the 5.56mm/.223 Rem is underpowered. Troops is Iraq are finding out when used in the short M4 the 5.56mm does not drop enemy troops fast enough at close range. E.g., they can still shoot back after being hit multiple times.

There is a project to replace the round with a 6.8mm round that is a short version of the .270 hunting round.

All so-called assault rifles are low powered, my .35 Rem lever action rifle is much more powerful.

[Maurkov]

80. pipe bombs

the only crime this guy committed was the possession of bomb-making matrerials, and he was rightfully arrested for it.

Actually, it doesn't say what he was arrested for. Nothing on that list made him automatically a criminal. The problem with "pipe bomb making components" is that these materials are common and not specific to making bombs. I have gunpowder and pipe at my house, too. This does not make me a terrorist.

[Superfly]

20. The anti-RKBA "enthusiast"

Notice the striking similarities?

[MrBenchley]

24. Gee, buy that at a gunshow?

Funny, gun nuts love to pretend the Nazis were hot for gun control, but all the imbeciles sporting swastikas today peddle this "gun rights" horseshit at the top of their diseased lungs.

But then that's one of those flat-out lies about history that "enthusiasts" spout at the drop of a hat.

[demsrule4life]

25. He could of bought it in NJ

there is enough of them there.

[Superfly]

30. Nope, never did buy it

my parents were screwed by the NAZIs in Germany 60 years ago, and I swore I will fight those assholes who trumpet the same Nazi ideals today.

Those kinds of "liberals" make me sick.

I wonder if the anti-RKBA crowd turned in any of their neighbors today? If not, how do they live with themselves, not performing their Patriot Act duty.

Those A-holes are going to put Bush right back into office.

[MrBenchley]

34. Too too funny...

"I swore I will fight those assholes who trumpet the same Nazi ideals today."
Gee, hope you don't go to Knob Creek...or any gun show. They're lousy with modern-day Nazis.

"Those A-holes are going to put Bush right back into office."
One set of assholes is trying...but it's the rotten bunch you're pimping for...

[demsrule4life]

39. I didn't see no fucking humor in his post

So just what are you doing to get them shut down in your state?

[MrBenchley]

47. For one thing...

I'm trying to keep the fuckwads from getting assault weapons, unlike some people.

[OpSomBlood]

55. No, you're trying to keep everybody from getting one.

So don't distort your position with qualifiers.

[Wickerman]

57. Op - check your PM Box

[MrBenchley]

32. Yeah, but here they're treated with the contempt they deserve

We don't have ignorant yokels pimping to get them assault weapons.

[OpSomBlood]

29. Neo-Nazis are pro-gun...

...so every person who is pro-gun must be a neo-Nazi.

Benchley logic at work.

[MrBenchley]

35. Gee, op, swell playmates you got.

[OpSomBlood]

37. I don't know any neo-Nazis.

I've never even met one. In fact, a neo-Nazi would probably not like me very much, based on my ethnicity.

But thanks for playing, Bench. We've got some nice parting gifts for you.

[CO Liberal]

46. Then Go To Your Local Gun Show

I'm sure you'll run into quite a few neo-Nazis. Especially around the Nazi memorabilia tables.

[MrBenchley]

48. I'm sure their rhetoric will sound familiar to stentorian fans

[OpSomBlood]

54. Zing!

Wow, you're on fire today Bench! You even get bonus points for originality!

[Name removed]

100. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Something Blue]

154. and 4 becomes 5

[Young Socialist]

122. neo-nazis may be pro-gun but they're anti-RKBA

RKBA is right for the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms. this means all the people, including racial and religious minorities. neo-nazis just want guns for themselves.

[Township75]

43. THIS IS FUCKING AWESOME!!!!

I didn't know the expiration date on the AWB would make it legal to purchase AK-47s, and Uzis.

Wow, the end of that backwards law will be better than what I thought!

This is so grea....oh, wait! THis email is from the Brady Bunch, and the Massive Moron Marchers?! WTF do they know about gun laws.

[MrBenchley]

49. They know the sort of scum who oppose gun laws....

You know, town, charmers like THIS guy...

"Syfert said Rockford police were called to his home after Breit accidentally fired a round from a newly purchased AK-47 assault rifle.
The weapons and a series of incriminating writings were discovered during a search of Breit's home, Syfert said.
The handwritten notes included a list of current and former federal officials and other politicians with the word "marked" next to them, Syfert said. When investigators asked Breit what he meant by "marked," Breit responded "marked to die," according to the criminal complaint and Syfert.
Breit said each of the officials had been "marked" because they held liberal or antigun views or were not supportive of the current administration, the complaint said.
Breit is being held without bond and a detention hearing was scheduled for Friday. A message left at a telephone number listed for Breit was not immediately returned Wednesday night."

http://www.thetimesonline.com/articles/2004/04/23/news/local_illinois/2e9d3628eb49ba0786256e7e0074098f.txt

Or these "strong minded honest" folks (snicker)


Some swell playmates the RKBA crowd's got...

[Name removed]

56. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[slackmaster]

61. Same tired old hysterical nonsense

"In countries like the United States it's perfectly legal for members of the public to own certain types of firearms. If you live in such a country attain an assault rifle legally, preferably an AK-47 or variations."

I guess they still haven't heard about the National Firearms Act of 1934.

:eyes:

[OpSomBlood]

63. All that quote did...

...was prove that the terrorists are as ignorant of our gun laws as the anti-gun lobby wants the public to be. Maybe we should start posting images of terrorists to somehow correlate them with all anti-gunners.

No, that would be childish and beneath us.

[Liberal Classic]

101. Aiding terrorists

Using drugs aids terrorists, owning guns aids terrorists. Hooray. If I hear such-and-such aids terrorists I'm going to puke.

[MrBenchley]

103. Get ready to flash the hash....

The gun lobby and their rancid pals do indeed aid terrorists...

"A training camp linked to Islamic militants has been operating in Alabama, and European law enforcement officials believe Muslim extremists were using it to prepare for a holy war.
British authorities also thought that militants from overseas were training in the United States to take advantage of America's gun laws, sources told ABCNEWS. The looming question for law enforcement is whether there is a connection between the camp and the al Qaeda terror network.
An investigation by Britain's Scotland Yard led to the discovery of the camp in Marion, Ala. The facility is called "Ground Zero USA.""

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/wnt/DailyNews/WNT_alabama_camp020725.html

"More than 20 months after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, a government report out Tuesday warned that foreign terrorists still can take advantage of loopholes in U.S. gun laws and lax government enforcement to buy all of the assault weapons and explosives they need to strike again on U.S. soil.
Just as worrisome, federal authorities aren't taking the problem seriously, either. The report found that agents who conduct required background checks on would-be gun buyers don't even bother to check international terrorist watch lists used by airport security personnel and border patrols.
Among the loopholes they can exploit:
--Firearms, including semiautomatic assault weapons, can be purchased without background checks at gun shows if the seller is a "private" individual, not a licensed dealer. Members of terrorist groups, such as Lebanon-based Hezbollah, have bought these weapons in the USA.
--There are no limits on the number of assault weapons or high-powered rifles that can be purchased at a single gun show."

http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2003-05-20-edit_x.htm

"Yesterday we learned that Ashcroft will use every means at his disposal to fight terrorism - as long as it's all right with the National Rifle Association.
It seems that Ashcroft is ready to dispense with every civil liberty in existence in the name of an as-yet-undeclared war on terrorists. Ashcroft will snoop around their bank accounts, their tax returns, their e-mail messages, their conversations with their attorneys, hold them indefinitely without charges, and even deny them access to our courts. But he draws the line at searching the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) audit log to see if suspected terrorists have purchased guns.
You heard right. Ashcroft is willing to suspend all sorts of rights and liberties to determine whether a suspected terrorist got an e-mail from Aunt Minnie, purchased a Tickle Me Elmo Surprise from Toys-R-Us.com, or missed a decimal place on his 1040EZ. For some reason, however, Ashcroft has no interest in whether the suspected terrorist purchased 157 high-powered semi-automatic rifles during the last three weeks.
Why wouldn't the Justice Department want the FBI to have this information? Wouldn't the FBI have a passing interest in whether a suspect was armed to the teeth? There is only one possible explanation: Giving the FBI access to this information might make the NRA mad. The National Rifle Association, which recently declared Ashcroft "instrumental in helping America maintain our 30,000 annual gun deaths," might take offense if anybody starts snooping around gun purchase records. Never mind that refusing to access the NICS log makes Ashcroft a liar, breaking his promise to use every means at his disposal to fight terrorism.
Kids, if there were ever a shred of doubt as to who Republicans like Ashcroft are really working for, it was removed yesterday. Nothing comes between the attorney general and the NRA. Not even a war against terrorism. Not even at the potential cost of the lives of FBI agents and civilians."

http://www.theangryliberal.com/12-08-01.htm

"Eastern Alliance forces launched a three-pronged assault against al-Qaida defenders on Monday following days of intense US bombing. By this morning, the assault transformed what had been al-Qaida's main base in Afghanistan into a scene of devastation.
Outside an al-Qaida gun training centre, paper targets from the National Rifle Association, the pro-gun lobby in the US, littered the ground complete with names and scores written in Arabic."

http://archives.tcm.ie/irishexaminer/2001/12/12/story19097.asp

Happy heaving! And don't forget to clean your porcelain friend after you finish your technicolor yawn...

[Liberal Classic]

104. I can't stand McCarthy-ite attitudes

When they come from the left or the right. You and Ashcroft are in good company. How long before the left is going to demand to round up the usual suspects? The extreme left and the extreme right can both go f*ck themselves as far as I am concerned.

Terrorists by definition are criminals, do you really believe they care about obeying the law to acquire a semi-automatic weapon? Not at all.

[CO Liberal]

105. So Why Make It Easier For Them To Get Them????

There is no compelling public need for assault weapons in the general population. Period. And that's why the ban should be renewed, IMHO.

[Liberal Classic]

106. I have two resposes for you

One, is the efficacy argument the other is the self-defense argument.

One, the AWB currently debated is a cosmetic ban. People talk about loopholes, but the AWB will ban one weapon but not another despite identical ballistic characteristics. All it does is prohibit import based on cosmetic features, little else. The AWB doesn't make rifles harder to get. It is a "feel good" law that bans the import certian evil-looking variants. This is the worst kind of law, one that infringes on the rights of citizens while at the same time fosters a sense of false security.

Determined terrorists will acquire fully-automatic weapons from black market sources and bring them with them. Banning civilian market semi-automatic weapons is ineffective. Improved border security represents an improvement, the AWB does not. Taking all weapons away from us leaves us dependant on the police who have minimum response times. Don't get me wrong, I want police there asap but until then I would rather that an ordinary citizen have the opportunity to return fire. I would rather give ordinary citizens the change to fight back, such as in Israel.

[MrBenchley]

108. And they're both hooey....

"All it does is prohibit import based on cosmetic features"
Then you ought to be able to muddle along without those cosmetic features, shouldn't you?

"Determined terrorists will acquire fully-automatic weapons from black market sources"
So why not let the Bullseye Gun Shop in Tacoma cash in, eh?

[Liberal Classic]

111. Naturally, I disagree

I wish we could define terms. I tried to get you to define terms a while back, but you kept spinning around your definition of collective until I had a headache. I hate to sound so pedantic, but you tend to dance around the issue until I forget what we're talking about.

The AWB is all about cosmetics. If you want to talk about other laws, such as Brady, or the '68 Act, please specify. If we're discussing the AWB which is due to expire, then the debate is not about ballistics, it's about cosmetics. The AWB classifies and bans for import weapons based on cosmetic features. If we're talking about the general right to own weapons, then it's a different topic.

If you want to talk about dealers who break the law, well and good. However, one cannot categorically paint all dealers as criminals. This is the well known fallacy of insufficient sample.

Smuggling of illegal automatic weapons can be traced through the illegal drug trade. Most fully automatic weapons smuggled into the country come through Mexico, likewise smuggling of illegal conversion parts. Organized crime cares absolutely nothing for U.S. gun control laws, and frankly I fail to see why you would think pseudo-Islamic terrorists would be any different.

[MrBenchley]

113. Hey, if you need cosmetics on your gun...

duct tape a picture of a "scary looking gun" to the barrel. I know you can get your hands on those because the RKBA crowd are always starting threads so they can beat their meat over this gun or that.

"This is the well known fallacy of insufficient sample. "
Actually it's the fallacy of I don't give a good crap. I'd like to see congressional hearings into gun lobby practices. And you're still not answering the question--why should it be made EASIER for scumbags to get their hands on guns that represent a public menace.

"Most fully automatic weapons smuggled into the country come through Mexico, likewise smuggling of illegal conversion parts."
Not so...most gun smuggling in Mexico goes the other way, from the US scumbags.

"Organized crime cares absolutely nothing for U.S. gun control laws, and frankly I fail to see why you would think pseudo-Islamic terrorists would be any different."
Hey, here's an idea...why don't you explain to them that assault weapons are only cosmetically different than ordinary guns? Think they'll believe that?

Me neither.

[Liberal Classic]

115. Do we agree that cosmetics are less important than ballistics?

"Most fully automatic weapons smuggled into the country come through Mexico, likewise smuggling of illegal conversion parts."

Not so...most gun smuggling in Mexico goes the other way, from the US scumbags.

I agree that the border with Mexico is porous, and that there is some cross-smuggling going on. However, let me reiterate that organized crime in the U.S. gets automatic weapons and conversion kits from across the border.


"Organized crime cares absolutely nothing for U.S. gun control laws, and frankly I fail to see why you would think pseudo-Islamic terrorists would be any different."

Hey, here's an idea...why don't you explain to them that assault weapons are only cosmetically different than ordinary guns? Think they'll believe that?

Good. At least we've settled on cosmetic features being unimportant.

[MrBenchley]

117. No, I'm not going to agree on any part of this crapass rhetoric..

I see nothing but good reasons to fight for renewing and strengthening the Assault Weapons ban, for which President Kerry will fight.

"At least we've settled on cosmetic features being unimportant"
Which makes it damn silly for the gun lobby to have scuttled the "immunity from liability" bill....and puts the lie to the "it's only cosmetic" crap.

[Liberal Classic]

120. You're just being contrary

I'm not trying to trick you into anything. Sheesh!

I support your right most strongly to throw yourself behind the AWB.

Under the current law a weapon with such features as wood stock and a thumb-hole grip is legal whereas the same weapon in plastic trim with a bayonet lug is not.

To me this is bad law. It is difficult to administer and prone to error.

[MrBenchley]

123. With good reason...

[Liberal Classic]

126. No reasons listed in that post

Did you his the "post message" button too soon?

:)

So, am I a humhole or what?

[MrBenchley]

127. Been there, done that...

And I sure don't have any doubts about you...but then I haven't for a long time.

[Liberal Classic]

130. Doubts about ... ?

And I sure don't have any doubts about you...but then I haven't for a long time.

So, you're saying there really is a change that I'm a humhole?

What other negative things can you say about my person? I'm intrigued.

:P

[MrBenchley]

109. This "criminals will get them anyway" horseshit

gets old fast...

The plain fact is that the gun lobby does all it can to put those guns in criminal hands.

[MrBenchley]

107. I can't stand people pimping for assault weapons

and peddling right wing rubbish on a daily basis.

"You and Ashcroft are in good company."
Gee, he's not my playmate....he's the demented piece of shit the RKBA crowd is snuggling up to...

"Attorney General John Ashcroft, in testimony before Congress yesterday, for the first time refused to offer support for re-authorizing the federal ban on assault weapons. Ashcroft's comments before the Senate Judiciary Committee represent an apparent reversal of Bush Administration policy as well as Ashcroft's prior statements before the committee. "

http://www.jointogether.org/gv/news/alerts/reader/0%2C2061%2C562008%2C00.html


"The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said individuals had no right to bear arms under the Second Amendment.
``The historical record makes it equally plain that the amendment was not adopted in order to afford rights to individuals with respect to private gun ownership or possession,'' Judge Stephen Reinhardt wrote for the majority.
The interpretation conflicts with U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft, who told the National Rifle Association that the Second Amendment gives individuals the right to bear arms. Following the publication of Ashcroft's letter to the NRA and other Ashcroft statements, a flood of criminal defendants petitioned federal judges to vacate their weapons convictions.
Judges, however, balked at the petitions and upheld the laws prohibiting felons from possessing firearms and other gun prohibitions. Many of those cases are on appeal."

http://www.thatsracin.com/mld/mercurynews/4677241.htm

""I believe it wrongheaded," Ashcroft said of the 1994 ban on assault weapons, for example. "It . . . has severely restricted the rights of law-abiding citizens to participate in many activities involving guns." The Supreme Court decision that allowed states to impose restrictions on protesters outside abortion clinics, he said on another occasion, "weakened the First Amendment's speech guarantees."
Ashcroft held a hearing in September 1998 on the Second Amendment, which he called "a source of individual rights." The amendment says: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
Federal courts have held that because of this introductory reference to a militia, the amendment does not guarantee unrestricted individual rights to keep and bear arms, but rather the rights of the states to maintain an armed militia. "This argument makes no sense to me," Ashcroft said at the hearing. "

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A54993-2001Jan12?GXHC_gx_session_id_FutureTenseContentServer=b55dcb6196ebec36&language=printer

[Liberal Classic]

110. Please show where I have posted newsmax or something

"You and Ashcroft are in good company."

Gee, he's not my playmate....he's the demented piece of shit the RKBA crowd is snuggling up to...

Ah, but you, my friend, are peddling McCarthy paranoia. The same paranoid propaganda used to tar those who oppose the drug war. I'm pretty sure (not certian though) that you Benchley are against the drug war. Surely you've heard people labled as terrorists beause they believe in legalization and regulation.

Is this not the same crap as McCarthyism? The usual suspects?

Is this not the same crap you're trying to stick on me? Yep.

Because I own a gun, I must "hate uppity women and blacks" (your words not mine) which makes me a racist. Tar me as a racists, imply that I am a terrorist, too. It's not too much of a stretch.

Could we not dispose of the disgusting name calling and tar and feathering?

I seriously doubt anyone posting to this board is really a terrorist or racist. More likely that people are just making ad hominem attacks, don't you agree?

[MrBenchley]

112. What a pantload...

"you, my friend, are peddling McCarthy paranoia."
No, I am pointing out that thgis demented loony Asscrack is espousing THE SAME FUCKING POSITION AS THE RKBA CROWD. He's even using the same idiotic arguments.

"Surely you've heard people labled as terrorists beause they believe in legalization and regulation."
No, I haven't. I saw Chimpy's idiotic "if you take drugs, you support terrorism" which is idiotic not because it's false, but because Chimpy is turning a blind eye to HIS terrorists as they flood the world with opium from Afghanistan. Just as Negorponte, Abrams and a big chunk of his dishonest appointistration turned a blind eye to the Contras smuggling drugs into the country in the Reagan years.

"Because I own a gun, I must "hate uppity women and blacks" (your words not mine) "
No, the humholes who hate uppity blacks, gays, women, Jews and pretty much every fucking thing that represents civilized progress are also peddling the same rancid "gun rights" LIES. I can't begin to think why someone would peddle the same rhetoric on an issue that Tom DeLay AND John AssKKKroft AND Wayne LaPierre AND Grover Norquist AND Larry Pratt AND David Duke AND the Aryan Nation all agree on...unless they shared other values too.

But then I can't imagine who could honestly share Asscrack's dishonest view while accusing others of holding that view.

"Is this not the same crap as McCarthyism?"
Not even close. And I remember actual fucking McCarthyism.

[Liberal Classic]

114. Terrorism and the drug war

Now we're getting somewhere.

"Surely you've heard people labled as terrorists beause they believe in legalization and regulation."

I saw Chimpy's idiotic "if you take drugs, you support terrorism" which is idiotic not because it's false, but because Chimpy is turning a blind eye to HIS terrorists as they flood the world with opium from Afghanistan.

There was an article here in J/PS about the opium growing season in Afganistan. This is interesting. Do you believe in "if you take drugs, you support terrorism?" You did say it was not false, only that the Republicans are hypocrites when using it.


"Because I own a gun, I must "hate uppity women and blacks" (your words not mine)"

No, the humholes who hate uppity blacks, gays, women, Jews and pretty much every fucking thing that represents civilized progress are also peddling the same rancid "gun rights" LIES.

So, for the record, are you saying I am not a humhole?

I wholeheartly agree that racists such as the Klucker Klan lie.

I think we have some disagreement, though, about the nature of their falsehoods.

[MrBenchley]

116. We're getting farther afield.

"Do you believe in "if you take drugs, you support terrorism?" "
What the hell kind of a half-assed question is that? Are you trying to pretend that the Cali cartel are pacifists?

It's damn hard to pretend that cocaine use and the terrorism in Colombia are disconnected. You'd almost have to be so out of touch with reality to do so that you would say keeping assault weapons off the market was "just like McCarthyism."

"Afghanistan risks degenerating into a state controlled by "narco-terrorists" and drug cartels unless the soaring level of opium and heroin production is curbed, the UN warned yesterday. "

http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0%2C3858%2C4785591-108920%2C00.html

"So, for the record"
Tell us...what are the odds that John Kerry and pretty much every other Democrat of note is wrong, on an issue where John AshKKKroft is right...especially when it's an issue where AshKKKroft agrees with Larry Pratt?
Especially when it's an issue where AshKKKroft and Pratt agree with David Duke?
Especially when it's an issue where AshKKKroft, Pratt, and Duke agree with Pat Buchanan?
Especially when it's an issue where AshKKKroft, Pratt, Duke and Buchanan agree with the Aryan Nation?
Especially when it's an issue where AshKKKroft, Pratt, Duke, Buchanan and the Aryan Nation agree with THIS humhole?


Such lovely playmates the RKBA crowd has....

[Liberal Classic]

118. Perhaps, but you didn't answer my questions

-------------
I saw Chimpy's idiotic "if you take drugs, you support terrorism" which is idiotic not because it's false, but because Chimpy is turning a blind eye to HIS terrorists as they flood the world with opium from Afghanistan.

Do you believe in "if you take drugs, you support terrorism?" You did say it was not false, only that the Republicans are hypocrites when using it.
--------------

What the hell kind of a half-assed question is that? Are you trying to pretend that the Cali cartel are pacifists?


Of course not. However, you said Bush's statement "if you take drugs, you support terrorism" was idiotic, not because it was false, but because the Republicans are hypocrites.

So, I ask again to elaborate. Does your answer imply that "if you take drugs, you support terrorism" is not idiotic under a Democratic administration?


----------------
"Because I own a gun, I must "hate uppity women and blacks" (your words not mine)"

No, the humholes who hate uppity blacks, gays, women, Jews and pretty much every fucking thing that represents civilized progress are also peddling the same rancid "gun rights" LIES.

So, for the record, are you saying I am not a humhole?
-----------------

Tell us...what are the odds that John Kerry and pretty much every other Democrat of note is wrong, on an issue where John AshKKKroft is right...especially when it's an issue where AshKKKroft agrees with Larry Pratt?

Again, you avoided my question.

Do you believe that I am a humhole?

[MrBenchley]

119. Since you didn't answer mine, tough titty...

[Liberal Classic]

121. Let me go back

I'll read it again.

When you give me a straight answer will be the first time.

[MrBenchley]

124. Not necessary

The answer is so obvious as to seem silly...what are the odds that John Kerry and pretty much every other Democrat of note is wrong, on an issue where John AshKKKroft is right...especially when it's an issue where AshKKKroft agrees with Larry Pratt?
Especially when it's an issue where AshKKKroft and Pratt agree with David Duke?
Especially when it's an issue where AshKKKroft, Pratt, and Duke agree with Pat Buchanan?
Especially when it's an issue where AshKKKroft, Pratt, Duke and Buchanan agree with the Aryan Nation?

[Liberal Classic]

125. Okay, this was what you were asking:

Tell us...what are the odds that John Kerry and pretty much every other Democrat of note is wrong, on an issue where John AshKKKroft is right...especially when it's an issue where AshKKKroft agrees with Larry Pratt?

I have two resposes to this question, neither of which addresses probability. However, I don't think you're asking a question of statistics, so I will approach the question as such.

One, taking current events into accound one cannot say that "pretty much every other Democrat" is necessarily in lock step on this issue. Take for example this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=50967&mesg_id=51137&page=

I believe this shows that Democrats are not a monolithic culture. There is always room for disagreement on issues, this issue as well as many others. One cannot simply write off the Democrats who voted in favor of this bill as idiots. To do so is wrong. This is the same sort of closed mindedness of which Republicans are often accused.

This is certianly not the only issue where Democrats disagree. I maintain that debate on this issue is healthy and Democrats should not fear disagreement.

Two, just because the Nazis believed a thing or just because the Soviets believed a thing, does not necessarily make the things wrong. Again, this is simple logic. Skinheads and neo-nazis are all generally opposed to drug use and in favor of the drug war. Does this mean that drug use is good and the drug war is bad because the Nazis believe the opposite? Of course not.

[MrBenchley]

128. Who the hell do you think you're kidding?

Fat Slob is ALLEGING there that Democrats supported an entirely different issue than the Assault Weapons Ban (and wasn't able to back that allegation up with anything but hot air, to boot!)

"just because the Nazis believed a thing"
Again, we're not talking about what just John AshKKKroft advocates. We're talking about a position on assault weapons John Kerry and pretty much every prominnent Democrat opposes, that AshKKKroft advocates.
And AshKKKroft and David Duke advocate that same position on assault weapons.
And AshKKKroft, Duke and Larry Pratt advocate that same position on assault weapons.
And AshKKKroft, Duke, Pratt, and Pat Buchanan advocate that same position on assault weapons.
And AshKKKroft, Duke, Pratt, Buchanan, and the Aryan Nation advocate that same position on assault weapons.
And AshKKKroft, Duke, Pratt, Buchanan, the Aryan Nation and Grover Norquist advocate that same position on assault weapons.
And AshKKKroft, Duke, Pratt, Buchanan, the Aryan Nation, Norquist and Wayne LaPierre advocate that same position on assault weapons.
And AshKKKroft, Duke, Pratt, Buchanan, the Aryan Nation, Norquist, LaPierre and Ted Nugent advocate that same position on assault weapons.
And AshKKKroft, Duke, Pratt, Buchanan, the Aryan Nation, Norquist, LaPierre, Nugent and Trent Lott advocate that same position on assault weapons.

And it's a position buttressed by an argument that gun lobby itself showed to be a lie.

"I maintain that debate on this issue is healthy"
Gee it wasn't me desperately trying to sidetrack debate over to the drug war....

[Liberal Classic]

129. I'm not kidding with you

I'm trying to be calm and write in a conversational tone. I left off the "And, And, And, And" as echoing your main point. I wasn't trying to leave anything off. Nor was I trying to "sidetrack" the debate to the drug war. The drug war is inseparably tangled into our foreign and domestic policy, particularly the areas of border security and gun control.

I have a third reason to add to my answer to your question. For clairty, here is your question and what I wrote in response:


``Tell us...what are the odds that John Kerry and pretty much every other Democrat of note is wrong, on an issue where John AshKKKroft is right...especially when it's an issue where AshKKKroft agrees with Larry Pratt? ...''

I have two resposes to this question, neither of which addresses probability. However, I don't think you're asking a question of statistics, so I will approach the question as such. One, taking current events into accound one cannot say that "pretty much every other Democrat" is necessarily in lock step on this issue. Take for example this thread:

(thread redacted)

I believe this shows that Democrats are not a monolithic culture. There is always room for disagreement on issues, this issue as well as many others. One cannot simply write off the Democrats who voted in favor of this bill as idiots. To do so is wrong. This is the same sort of closed mindedness of which Republicans are often accused.

This is certianly not the only issue where Democrats disagree. I maintain that debate on this issue is healthy and Democrats should not fear disagreement.

Two, just because the Nazis believed a thing or just because the Soviets believed a thing, does not necessarily make the things wrong. Again, this is simple logic. Skinheads and neo-nazis are all generally opposed to drug use and in favor of the drug war. Does this mean that drug use is good and the drug war is bad because the Nazis believe the opposite? Of course not.


To reiterate my answer to your question:

One, Democrats are not totally unified on the issue, and have never been. I was making no claims based on the poster of the thread, only the fact that Democrats can and do disagree on this issue at least.

Two, "AshKKKroft and David Duke advocate the same position" is the classical genetic fallacy. Any student of debate and argumentation knows how often the name of the Nazi Party is invoked fallaciously. Nor can this be construed as support for AshKKKroft on my part.

Three, I've said before that the aims of the NSDAP and that of the modern skinhead neo-nazi movement towards gun control is fundamentally different that that of the posters advocated on this board. People such as I support the right of all people including minorities creeds and races the right to self-defense and weapon ownership. That is one of the most important things I try to tell you that you, that I am not a racist. You seem to conveinently ignore that I reject racism, anti-judaism, hatred towards women, and would rather believe that I "hate uppity women and blacks."

So, I have answered your question. Please answer mine. Am I a humhole?

* ("AshKKKroft and David Duck" Kluckers and Quackers hehe)

[MrBenchley]

131. You're sure not kidding me...

"One, Democrats are not totally unified on the issue"
The AWB is in the Party Platform. Do you deny that John Kerry supports the AWB? Do you deny that John Edwards supports the AWB? Hell, even Howard Dean supports the AWB.

"Two, "AshKKKroft and David Duke advocate the same position" is the classical genetic fallacy."
Horseshit. Saying that David Duke and John AshKKKroft advocate the same position WHEN THEY ADVOCATE THE SAME POSITION is not any sort of fallacy at all.

"Any student of debate and argumentation knows how often the name of the Nazi Party is invoked fallaciously."
And anybody who's been to a gun show knows that there's nothing fallacious about linking Nazis to gun shows. So what? There's nothing fallacious about the fucking question.

"You seem to conveinently ignore that I reject racism, anti-judaism, hatred towards women, and would rather believe that I "hate uppity women and blacks." "
Gee, if only I hadn't said exactly the opposite...that those who are racist, bigoted, backward pieces of shit are peddling this rancid "gun rights rubbish. But even allowing that I had alleged that about you, what the hell does THAT have to do with the question? The answer: A big fat ZERO.

"So, I have answered your question."
Yeah, surrrrrrrrrre....what you've done is removed all doubt about the one you wanted answered.

[Liberal Classic]

132. Thanks for at least answering my post

"One, Democrats are not totally unified on the issue"

The AWB is in the Party Platform. Do you deny that John Kerry supports the AWB? Do you deny that John Edwards supports the AWB? Hell, even Howard Dean supports the AWB.


Sure, but does everybody agree 100% with the platform all the time? No, of course not. Is there something wrong with Democrats who deviate from the platform? Are they all idiots?

"Two, "AshKKKroft and David Duke advocate the same position" is the classical genetic fallacy."
Horseshit. Saying that David Duke and John AshKKKroft advocate the same position WHEN THEY ADVOCATE THE SAME POSITION is not any sort of fallacy at all.


Whether Ashcroft himself may be a fascist or not isn't the issue. The issue is pointing to Ashcroft and saying, "He is a like a member of the Nazi party. He also supports gun control, therefore gun control is wrong." Logically this is like saying you shouldn't buy a Volkswagen Beetle because it was developed by the Nazis. You're not arguing that the Volkswagen Beetle is the wrong kind of vehicle for the purpose at hand.


"Any student of debate and argumentation knows how often the name of the Nazi Party is invoked fallaciously."
And anybody who's been to a gun show knows that there's nothing fallacious about linking Nazis to gun shows. So what? There's nothing fallacious about the fucking question.

It is the genetic fallacy. I suggest you look it up. Profanity doesn't make you right, either. I guess I could swear and it would make me fucking cool, too. How many gun shows do you go to? Do you just know intuitively that everybody who goes to those things are fucking Nazis?

You have a Nazi sonar-detecting fatty-gland in your forehead or something? :)


"You seem to conveinently ignore that I reject racism, anti-judaism, hatred towards women, and would rather believe that I "hate uppity women and blacks." "
Gee, if only I hadn't said exactly the opposite...that those who are racist, bigoted, backward pieces of shit are peddling this rancid "gun rights rubbish. But even allowing that I had alleged that about you, what the hell does THAT have to do with the question? The answer: A big fat ZERO.

But it has everything to do with the question, and I am answering you in detail. I doubt any of the regulars in J/PS even vaguely resemble racists. Racist trolls get tanked. Shooting off at the mouth gets posts pulled. Can't we all get along? Have you ever bothered to say "I know you're not a racist, but..." or anything like that? No, it would be giving me too much credit.

One, not all Democrats are against gun ownership. You are wrong there. Two, you are making the genetic fallacy when you call people Nazis. Anyone can look up the genetic fallacy on Google and see that you are wrong there, too. And three, you don't know what Nazis are about if you think they support gun ownership for blacks and Jews. This is a classic strawman argument, which is fallacious as well. I'm no lawyer or anything, but it would be nice to debate instead of always calling people names.

You have already called my posts as being the ubiquitous "pantload." Perhaps a "yeah, shure!" is in order.


"So, I have answered your question."
Yeah, surrrrrrrrrre....what you've done is removed all doubt about the one you wanted answered.


LOL

So, will you answer my question directly? You think I am a humhole? How so? Don't make me look it up on Google. :P

[MrBenchley]

133. Again....

"does everybody agree 100% with the platform all the time? No, of course not"
Do most prominent Democrats, including the Presidential candidate, have a sizable disagreement? No, of course not.

"The issue is pointing to Ashcroft and saying, "He is a like a member of the Nazi party. He also supports gun control, therefore gun control is wrong.""
Jeeze, all I did was point out the humholes who think assault weapons ought to be on the market and ask what the odds all of them were right and John Kerry was wrong. It's fucking noticeable that you keep dancing around not willing to answer that.

Well, I'll tell you. The odds are nil. There's not a fucking chance in hell.

"I doubt any of the regulars in J/PS even vaguely resemble racists. Racist trolls get tanked."
Funny, so do enthusiasts...usually because they've stopped fooling anybody.

"Have you ever bothered to say "I know you're not a racist, but..." or anything like that?"
Nor have I ever done a fucking thing but point out that racist pieces of shit ilke Larry Pratt and Ted Nugent head up theTWO LARGEST gun owners groups with nary a murmur of opposition from gun owners, and that every racist that can be found in public life is peddling this dishonest "gun rights" rubbish. Funny how everybody in the RKBA crowd will spin and distort what I say, just as you did, but will never fucking acknowledge that it's true. WHICH IT IS.

Do you want to pretend we haven't had RKBAers link to pages with racist trash? Do you want to pretend that we haven't had RKBAer's fighting to pretend that some prominent racists AREN'T racists?

"I'm no lawyer or anything, but it would be nice to debate"
Gee, it would be nice not to have "Democrats" sticking up for one of Tom DeLay's legislative priorities, too. And it would be nice not having "Democrats" pissing and moaning every time somebody mentions what racist pieces of shit there are in the gun lobby. And it would be extra nice to have "Democrats" not peddling the same brain dead pap that right wing imbeciles peddle.

Deal with it.

[Liberal Classic]

134. I answered your question, why won't you answer mine?

It is because you are being evasive?

You asked:


Tell us...what are the odds that John Kerry and pretty much every other Democrat of note is wrong, on an issue where John AshKKKroft is right...especially when it's an issue where AshKKKroft agrees with Larry Pratt?

I answered, assuming you weren't looking for a numerical answer:

One, not all Democrats are against gun ownership. You are wrong there. Two, you are making the genetic fallacy when you call people Nazis. Anyone can look up the genetic fallacy on Google and see that you are wrong there, too. And three, you don't know what Nazis are about if you think they support gun ownership for blacks and Jews. This is a classic strawman argument, which is fallacious as well.

Do you care to answer my post, or contine to imply I am a racist?
Have you considered debating as an adult would? What is a hum-hole and exactly how am I one?

[MrBenchley]

135. No, you didn't...

You tap-danced all the fuck around it.

"What is a hum-hole and exactly how am I one?"
Some answers are so obvious as to seem silly....

[Liberal Classic]

139. Mr. B, I'm trying to get along

But you make it so difficult.

You tap-danced all the fuck around it.

Some links for you:

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/genetic-fallacy.html

http://www.fallacyfiles.org/genefall.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_fallacy

[MrBenchley]

144. Funny, you didn't have anything to say

when I gave you the links showing the gun lobby AIDING TERRORISTS...you know, the allegations you were hinting were some sort of lie, but are ABSOFUCKINGLUTELY TRUE. All you did was start snivelling incorrctly about "McCarthyism."

And you're still tapdancing...but since you brought up Nizkor, let's show what THEY think of this rancid "gun rights" creed:

"Sometime Klansman and neo-Nazi Louis R. Beam has been a leading advocate of anti-government sedition and various forms of "Aryan" violence for more than a quarter of a century.
In 1968, Beam joined Robert Shelton's United Klans of America (UKA) and in 1976 switched to David Duke's Knights of the KKK. His chief responsibility in the Klans was to instruct the "knights" in guerrilla warfare.
In 1981, Beam became "Ambassador-at-Large" for Aryan Nations, a violence-prone, Nazi-like hate group headquartered in Idaho. Beam has been touted as a possible successor to the organizations 77-year-old leader, Richard Butler. He has built a computer network for the group, featuring an assassination "point system" through which a participant could be designated an "Aryan Warrior" based on the importance of the politician, civil rights leader, police officer, or minority group member that he managed to kill.
In 1983, Beam told a crowd: "I'm here to tell you that if we can't have this country, as far as I'm concerned, no one gets it. The guns are cocked, the bullets are in the chamber. ... We're going to fight and live or we're going to die soon." His philosophical watchword, reported stated in a 1970s terror campaign against Vietnamese fisherman in Texas, is "Where ballots fail, bullets will prevail."
Beam recently attended a gun rights rally whose sponsoring group, according to the Spokane Spokesman-Review, includes militia members and sympathizers."

http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/orgs/american/adl/paranoia-as-patriotism/louis-r-beam.html

Be sure and write them to mention what a fallacy they're committing.

[Liberal Classic]

157. You may have the last word then

Since you seem to like having the last word, you may do so.

I think it is entirely possible that the Ku Kluckers would find common cause with radical Islamic terrorists. There are clear links between them going back to the Nazis in WWII in the Middle East.

However, I am not a Nazi or terrorist and I believe in giving Jews and African-Americans (and GLBT for that matter) the right to arm themselves in self defense in protection against violent political movements which seek to murder them. I am not opposed to having some legal measures regulating their proficiency and conduct, so long as their right to self defense is not violated.

We may yet meet again in another thread in which you will never directly acknowledge my existence of my positions.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=genetic+fallacy&btnG=Google+Search

[OpSomBlood]

147. It's easier to fill up space than it is to confront the issue.

The character of the other people who support lifting the AWB has nothing to do with the ban itself. It's strange...those of us who are against the ban seem to always present facts and ideas, while you seem more content to resort to name calling and guilt by association.

Why are you so unwilling to present a real case in favor of the AWB? Why has every debate about his topic devolve into ad hominems lumping all gun owners together with the very worst people on the pro-gun side?

The AWB is a poorly written piece of legislation that serves no purpose but to test the waters for further gun control. A cursory examination of the law proves this, and even the legislators who wrote it acknowledge this.

You yourself even conceded that the reasoning laid out by the supporters of the ban are false. You followed that up with, "well then, nobody needs these guns."

So in essence, you are in favor of banning an entire class of firearms based on your personal recreational preferences. In your opinion, there is no legitimate use for an "assault weapon" and therefore they should be illegal.

This is a drastic departure from your stance even a week ago, when you were preaching on about how much "more lethal" these weapons were. Now that we've proven that they are not, you have shifted to a "nobody needs them" stance.

Benchley, your persistence on this issue does not supercede your lack of substance.

[MrBenchley]

148. Who the fuck are you trying to kid, op?

"The character of the other people who support lifting the AWB has nothing to do with the ban itself."
It's a damn good indicator of what a fucked-up idea letting the AWB lapse is. If it wasn't, the RKBA crowd wouldn't have to dredge up another selection from the Tim McVeigh book club, like somebody did here.

"Why are you so unwilling to present a real case in favor of the AWB? "
Jeeze, I been doing that in spades. But since you're too busy pissing and moaning to get it, here goes again.
A) Assault weapons are a public menace
B) There's no reason to allow this public menace
C) The overwhelming majority of the voters want a strengthened AWB
D) The Democratic candidate for President supports a strengthened AWB
E) Almost every prominent Democrat of note supports a strengthened AWB
F) The politicians and pundits who do not support a strengthened AWB are the scum of the earth, opposed to just about every other liberal or progressive idea around as well
G) The argument for letting the AWB lapse contain internal contradictions which show them to be lies

"You yourself even conceded that the reasoning laid out by the supporters of the ban are false."
Maybe in your dreams. What I showed was that if those crapass arguments for assault weapons that the RKBA crowd keeps yammering about were true, there'd be no fucking need for assault weapons.

"This is a drastic departure from your stance even a week ago, when you were preaching on about how much "more lethal" these weapons were."
Again, maybe in your fucking dreams. But not here on DU.

[OpSomBlood]

149. BenchleyLogic.

Repeatedly spouting off "facts" without supporting them doesn't make them more valid. You keep claiming that assault weapons are a menace to society, but refuse to acknowledge that they are mechanically no different (and often less powerful) than legal "conventional" firearms which you have expressed no interest in banning. This is a serious logical paradox which we'd all appreciate you addressing sometime this decade.

And again, you use famous people on either side of the issue as reasoning. Ted Nugent is against the AWB, therefore everyone against it is a psychotic asshole like Nugent.

Why is this kind of "logic" not acceptable with regard to other issues? How would you respond if someone said, "irresponsible drug-addicted prostitutes support the right to get an abortion, what nice playmates you have"? Or maybe, "drug dealers are scumbags, so therefore everyone in favor of legalization or decriminalization is a scumbag, too"?

Your ad hominems on the AWB are no different.

[MrBenchley]

150. Cry me a fucking river, op....

"they are mechanically no different (and often less powerful) than legal "conventional" firearms"
Then you don't fucking need one. Simple as that.

But you and I both know that if that were true, the gun lobby wouldn't have killed their disgraceful "immunity from liability" bill when the amendment was attached.

"This is a serious logical paradox"
No shit, sherlock. Why do you suppose all these humholes are fighting so hard to keep the AWB renewal bottled up in committee if assault weapons are weaker than ordinary guns? (Perhaps it's because, like pretty much every other part OF the rancid gun rights creed...IT'S HORSESHIT.)

"How would you respond if someone said, "irresponsible drug-addicted prostitutes support the right to get an abortion"
You mean like the sort of right wing loonies who pimp for the gun lobby often do? Too fucking funny.

[OpSomBlood]

151. Needs vs. wants.

Your argument makes no sense. You acknowledge that semi-auto assault weapons operate the same exact way as legal semi-autos, then use that as reasoning for why nobody needs them. Again, who is to decide what people "need"? You? The government?

I thoroughly enjoy shooting my "assault rifle" and I feel that as long as I am safe and responsible with it I should be allowed to own it. The way I handle and store my rifle makes it completely impossible to cause harm to another human being. There is no debate over whether I need one...the fact of the matter is that I want one.

We keep going around in circles here. There are loads of things that people don't "need" that can be dangerously abused. Cars (which kill many more people than guns) instantly come to mind.

The gun manufacturers are right to want immunity from liability when it comes to a criminal's actions. Why is your standard not applied to any other industry? If someone steals my car and runs over a kid, is it the auto maker's fault? If someone takes a baseball bat and beats an old woman to death with it, is it the bat maker's fault? How are guns any different?

I think gun makers should absolutely be held liable if their product malfunctions and causes an injury. But it is ludicrous to hold them responsible for what the end user chooses to do with it when it functions exactly as designed.

[MrBenchley]

152. Horseshit versus truth

"The gun manufacturers are right to want immunity from liability"
Gee, then they sure were fucking idiots to jettison that bill, weren't they? I suggest you just have a big old weeping jag over how tragic it is that they're subject to the same liability laws as every other business in America, despite the fact that some people have a gun fetish.

[OpSomBlood]

156. Not the same liability laws as every other industry.

Because you think that it is acceptable for the manufacturer to be liable for the actions of a criminal. In fact, I listed two other industries where such a scenario would be considered ludicrous.

As I said, if a gun malfunctions (i.e., explodes in a shooter's hand) and causes an injury or death, then there is a strong case for liability.

[Low Drag]

158. Not to interrupt the flame fest,

but would you like to know why most folks want to buy the AR15 type rifles?

There are many perfectly good reasons.

[OpSomBlood]

159. Don't bother.

We've tried to tell this guy that there are plenty of perfectly legitimate sporting uses for semi-auto "assault rifles" (including hunting) but he doesn't care. He'd rather call you a shitheel than engage in a dialogue.

In his infinite wisdom and knowledge on the topic, he has decreed that nobody needs an semi-auto "assault weapon." Therefore, they should be banned.

Never mind the fact that they operate no differently from any other semi-auto, or that they are used in a tiny fraction (generally less than 3%, before and after the AWB took effect) of gun crimes.

They look scary to him, and apparently that's all it takes these days to ban something.

[Wickerman]

160. Well now, we don't seem to be plowing any new ground here

so I believe this will be a lock.

Come back next week for the same lively discussion of the same topic. The names will change - the players will be the same.



DU Schoolmarm