Wednesday, October 10, 2012
Which Stance is Right for You?
This kind of lesson is perfect for the fantasy dwelling gun fanatics who love to imagine killing bad guys. The only problem is most gun nuts cannot pronounce isosceles. But the ones who learn to, can add that pseudo-intellectual aspect to their Neanderthal activities.
What do you prefer when pretending to kill people, isosceles or weaver?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
You were for training before you were against it.
ReplyDeleteHe was never for training. That is another one of MikeB's great lies.
DeleteI'm all for training. I consider it essential. But first you have to be qualified to own guns.
DeleteThe way that every good citizen is. That's what the text of the Constitution says.
DeleteUm, first of all I don't "love to imagine killing bad guys". I dream about never being in a situation where that might be a possibility.
ReplyDeleteWhat I love to imagine is that if a bad guy attacks, his attack is a complete failure, my family and I suffer zero physical injuries and minimal psychological injuries, and that justice occurs. Justice means the bad guy is captured and unable to harm other people.
It's a fine line. I'm glad you're so sure you're on the right side of it.
DeleteAn isosceles triangle is one that has two equal sides, pronounced ai-sos'-sel-ees. Mikeb, you want us to be ignorant so that we can't use guns effectively, but we refuse to play by your rules. There's nothing pseudo about the intellectual aspects of firearms. Shooting involves physics, chemistry, anatomy, law, and ethics. All of those interest me, and I learn as much as I can in each. My shooting practice is aimed at surviving an attack and defending my family, and I study the theoretical aspects both to understand the concepts and to be better able to act.
ReplyDeleteI prefer the weaver stance when target shooting. I don't fantasize about killing bad guys. The video you posted, and are bashing, was presented by your heroes--the cops.
ReplyDeleteI'm in the military and we shoot people shaped targets. The police do the same. We train to be able to kill people if we have to. Do you honestly think that those who serve in uniform are blood thirsty? The only difference is the uniform we wear. If anything, generally speaking our legal restrictions on lethal force are less than when I take off my uniform.
ReplyDeletemike's delusions know no limits, as this blog posting proves.
DeleteWhich is it Mike? Yesterday you said: "They, like most gun control folks, just want you gun owners to be qualified." Today, a lesson in doing just that is a "Neanderthal activity" that feeds the fantasies of those "who love to imagine killing bad guys."
ReplyDeleteBTW, that's a rhetorical question. We know how you really feel.
Delete"Training" is intended as an impediment to gun ownership. It shouldn’t actually- you know… train you.
DeleteYour question, rhetorical or not, doesn't even make sense. Both things are true. They (we) want you guys to be qualified to own guns AND some of you fantasize about killing bad guys and as a result are dangerous and sick.
DeleteWouldn't it more properly be phrased "neanderthalistic activity"?
ReplyDeleteIf you're going to question the intellect of others, try not to sound like a moron.
*shakes head*
While you're shaking your head, tell me this. Is "human activity" wrong? Should it be "humanistic activity?"
DeleteMaybe you're the one who sounds like a "moran."