Thursday, March 21, 2013
Colion Noir on NRA News
These guys are like two bullshit-artists blowing smoke up each others asses.
I loved what Colion said, "It was love at first shot." This is what happens to many insecure and frightened men who suddenly find the cure to their lack of empowerment. Immediately afterwards they construct elaborage justifications for gun ownership like "I could probably take on one guy, but two or three or four." They actually convince themselves that it's a serious possibility that they'll be attacked someday by "two or three or four" guys and having the gun will save the day.
The real reason of course is the feeling of empowerment the gun gives them. It compensates for a psychological inadequacy. And once experienced, they'll go to any length to maintain it.
Now, that wouldn't be so bad except for the down side. People should be able to own whatever fetish items of talismen they want to feel whole, but with guns it's not so simple.
Gun accidents are not the statistical anomaly the gun fanatics keep saying. Besides the hundreds of deaths that occur each year, there are many times that who are seriously wounded. These are the direct result of gun proliferation.
Even worse is the gun flow into the criminal world. Through various means, lawful gun owners are the source of almost all the guns used in crime. The more diffuse gun ownership is, the greater the gun flow is into the black market.
Please leave a comment.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
These are a couple guys discussing an issue logically. Your competing analysis oversimplifies things and accuses all gun owners of being psychologically disturbed deviants. You're the one blowing copious amounts of smoke, lying, libelling, and making an utter fool of yourself.
ReplyDeleteYou go on and on about this psychological inadequacy so much that it comes off as projection. I'd feel sorry for you if you weren't trying to infringe my rights because they make you feel so inadequate.
Please show me where I've done this.
Delete"accuses all gun owners of being psychologically disturbed deviants"
You said ALL, right?
"The real reason of course is the feeling of empowerment the gun gives them. It compensates for a psychological inadequacy." Continually calling guns fetish items, etc. etc.
DeleteOr are you quibbling that I said that you say this about all gun owners. To be sure, you carefully toss in terms like "many" or "most" here and there, and you pat us on the head and tell us we're not the problem ones so that you can get away with your generalized smears and then protest, "I didn't say ALL of you were that way."
You paint with a broad brush to insult all gun owners. It's your goal, and I'm not going to get bogged down in semantics.
Oh, you know my goal, do you? You're a shitty mind reader.
Deletehttp://mikeb302000.blogspot.it/2011/08/my-official-goal.html
Oh, WOW! You have a "my official goal" post, so obviously I must be wrong--you can't have other goals for certain tactics that are in service of that overarching goal.
DeleteAs for your Official goal--at least you admitted that you want to disqualify half of current gun owners, and thus confiscate their guns.
Two questions:
1. What standard are you going to use to disqualify this half? Making a new set of requirements? Or just making a legal minefield so that half of us get felony convictions that disqualify us?
2. What do you think would be the reaction if you got your way and 50% of gun owners were told to turn in or otherwise rid themselves of guns, or risk 10 years in prison?
Proper gun control laws along with the one-strike-you're-out policy would eliminate the approximately 50% of gun owners who are unfit. It would take time, but that's the way to do it.
DeleteI've written plenty about those two subjects, look them up if you want.
What you call proper gun control laws would eliminate all but the wealthy and connected. Your proposals would make guns toys for people who can afford lawyers and physicians to work through the miles of red tape. For someone who claims to be on the side of the 99%, you act so much like an arse-kisser of the 1%.
DeleteSo your answer is a nebulous set of controls. Your previously described tests and training (that we don't know all the details of), your expensive licensing, permitting, inspections, extra insurance (that would never pay any victim for reasons we've explained), and other means of pricing people out of being able to own guns. And finally creating a minefield to disqualify people over time.
DeleteYou skipped the second question. How do you seriously expect people to respond if you get these gun laws and they see that they will no longer be allowed to own guns, or if they will, it won't be for long because they won't be able to dodge all the mines.
Do you really expect that all of the people will just roll over and hand over their guns? If so, I have some great stock in the Brooklyn bridge that I could sell you.
Most people would adhere to the new gun control laws no matter how strict they were. The reason is, as you guys keep telling me, most people are basically law-abiding.
DeleteMikeb, you've been out of America too long. You've forgotten how much we hate control freaks and elitists.
DeleteBut here's something else to consider:
Inexplicable Colion Noir hatred = racism.
Mikeb, the point that they made here is that gun control doesn't work. Why do guns do bad things in Chicago and Camden, but not at the same rate elsewhere? But hey, we all should take advice from gun control freaks as to what is useful as a self-defense tool. That's like asking an astrologer how to treat asthma.
ReplyDeleteOf course, since you, Mikeb, think you're qualified to judge us gun owners psychologically, you indicate that no one need to have any knowledge of an subject of conversation. You moan about what goes on in our minds, and as Anonymous said, that ends up looking more like projection than analysis. Do yourself a favor and stick to things that you can speak intelligently on.
Here's a list of those subjects:
I'm not a gun owner, in fact my political views are liberally oriented and even I can see that this blog has a poorly rationalized (and thankfully poorly represented) anti-gun agenda.
DeleteColion makes good arguments against the lack of logic of the anti-gun debate and alludes to the fact that the source of violence is systemic to the American economy. Putting the blame on guns and video games just obfuscates the real issues that cost lives.
Ben, maybe you should come around some more before declaring that even you can see how "poorly rationalized" we are.
DeleteIf you did that you'd see that I don't blame guns. I suggest gun availability is a major factor in the problem of gun violence about which something should be done.
Mikeb said, " lawful gun owners are the source of almost all the guns used in crime."
ReplyDeleteCould it be any more clear that this is a call for total gun confiscation of all law-biding gun owners?
orlin sellers
No, that's not clear at all.
DeleteIf you want to get rid of the source and the source is lawful gun owners, what other conclusion should we come to?
Deleteorlin sellers