tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post3000295355289162683..comments2024-02-05T03:41:13.688+01:00Comments on Mikeb302000: The NRA's New Year's ResolutionsAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09806175370305006933noreply@blogger.comBlogger32125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-58297461266698740802015-01-07T20:53:40.742+01:002015-01-07T20:53:40.742+01:00You call us liars when we call a gun control law w...You call us liars when we call a gun control law with "ban" in its title a ban since it doesn't meet your definition. Then, after admitting that there are at least some gun controllers who want to ban all guns and confiscate them, you insist that not only are you justified in saying that "nobody wants to take your guns", but that this statement is TRUE.<br /><br />Hate to say it, but not only is the statement false, but you've admitted as much above here in this comment thread, and by your own standards that makes you a willful liar trying to deceive people into following your side.SJnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-32170514285012491972015-01-07T19:10:44.350+01:002015-01-07T19:10:44.350+01:00"there are groups by the thousands"
I p..."there are groups by the thousands"<br /><br />I presume you mean groups (plural) which have thousands of members.<br /><br />Name them and show us where they support a total ban on civilian gun ownership.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09806175370305006933noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-87284363901972461802015-01-07T18:05:49.410+01:002015-01-07T18:05:49.410+01:00Ridiculous claim? Are you saying no anti gun group...Ridiculous claim? Are you saying no anti gun group is calling for a total ban on guns? I hope not because you would be so obviously wrong. Silvianoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-61625180667647526612015-01-07T17:41:33.513+01:002015-01-07T17:41:33.513+01:00Kurt, when Silvia said "Banning guns would BE...Kurt, when Silvia said "Banning guns would BE a fantasy nightmare." she's talking about total civilian disarmament. She reinforced this idea in her next comment by making the ridiculous claim that there are "groups by the thousands" that do want that. When pressed most of you abusers of the word ban fall back on a less than total ban as qualifying for the expression. <br /><br />To answer your question, the AWB was not a ban in the true and total sense of the word. But we know what we're talking about when we use it, unlike the changeable tricky way you often use it. <br /><br />The gun show loophole is another example of a misnomer that communicates clearly what we're talking about. Only you crybaby gun nuts turned that one into a torture.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09806175370305006933noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-28476655445785558952015-01-07T06:52:25.053+01:002015-01-07T06:52:25.053+01:00The fair statement is "some people don't ...<i>The fair statement is "some people don't want to take every gun from everybody." How about you stick to that?</i><br /><br />And if Mikeb agrees to that, maybe we won't argue that "<a href="http://mikeb302000.blogspot.com/2015/01/salon-interview-with-shannon-watts.html?showComment=1420373704748#c5805027776962540368" rel="nofollow"><i>approximately</i>" all "gun control" advocates</a> want to take "<i>approximately</i>" every gun from "<i>approximately</i>" everybody ;-).Kurt '45superman' Hofmannhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14091930034162667742noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-39703063346519527552015-01-07T04:58:40.516+01:002015-01-07T04:58:40.516+01:00The fair statement is "some people don't ...The fair statement is "some people don't want to take every gun from everybody." How about you stick to that?TShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04667036856347626234noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-75146617533601617812015-01-06T18:56:26.817+01:002015-01-06T18:56:26.817+01:00I wouldn't call you reasonable, but you have s...I wouldn't call you reasonable, but you have stated you don't support a ban. Yet, there are groups by the thousands (a much larger group than you and your blog represents) that do, so don't pretend part of the anti-gun crowd doesn't want a ban. Silvianoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-51153687440297815482015-01-06T15:07:29.725+01:002015-01-06T15:07:29.725+01:00Aren't you guys tired of abusing the meaning o...<i>Aren't you guys tired of abusing the meaning of ban yet?</i><br /><br />Aren't you tired of trying to defend a double standard for what constitutes "legitimate" use of the word "ban." I've never heard you complain about calling the 1994-2004 federal "assault weapon" prohibition a "ban."<br /><br />This, despite it have numerous "loopholes," allowing manufacture and sale of nearly identical guns, just by virtue of taking off some largely meaningless "assault feature" like a bayonet mount (which "gun control" supporters complained bitterly about endlessly).<br /><br />That "ban" of course also had a "grandfather clause" (and we know <a href="http://mikeb302000.blogspot.com/2013/09/maryland-weapons-purchases-soar-in.html" rel="nofollow">what you think of <i>those</i></a>, Mikeb), and it was vastly more generous than the corresponding section of more recent bans, such as Connecticut's. In the federal ban, any "assault weapon," and any "high capacity" magazine manufactured (and already in this country, if it had been imported) before the effective date was not affected at all by the law--owners could resell them, you could buy them in gun shops, etc. Connecticut, on the other hand, required that all the "assault weapons" already owned be registered (and rather quickly). They could never be sold in the state, or even passed on to heirs (and were magazines grandfathered <i>at all</i>?)<br /><br />In other words, Mikeb, is it "abusing the meaning of ban" to call the 1994 AWB a "ban"?Kurt '45superman' Hofmannhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14091930034162667742noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-43608047426942774842015-01-06T13:15:18.420+01:002015-01-06T13:15:18.420+01:00It's true that "nobody wants to take your...It's true that "nobody wants to take your guns," as long as you're talking about certain guns and certain people. Some guns are off limits, or should be, and some people are disqualified from ownership, or should be.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09806175370305006933noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-81898845524069859392015-01-06T13:12:50.489+01:002015-01-06T13:12:50.489+01:00Aren't you guys tired of abusing the meaning o...Aren't you guys tired of abusing the meaning of ban yet? There are very few people who want to ban all civilian ownership of all guns. And those who do express such extreme positions don't speak for the rest of us, who are reasonable, common-sense, gun control advocates (myself included).Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09806175370305006933noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-89172635145095996162015-01-05T21:02:58.175+01:002015-01-05T21:02:58.175+01:00Chicago banned handguns, Mike. And then when peop...Chicago banned handguns, Mike. And then when people pointed out how it didn't work, they cried that it was because the rest of the state, country, and world didn't also ban handguns which is why the criminals still had them.TShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04667036856347626234noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-90384581000911003972015-01-05T20:13:58.416+01:002015-01-05T20:13:58.416+01:00"Well, whether you call it a big difference o..."Well, whether you call it a big difference or a subtle one, I liked it better this way"<br /><br />Of course you do Mike, it is disingenuous and thats the antis and your SOPAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-63875217316173940032015-01-05T19:17:36.586+01:002015-01-05T19:17:36.586+01:00MANY in the anti gun crowd.MANY in the anti gun crowd.Silvianoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-28518048944601836942015-01-05T17:09:45.343+01:002015-01-05T17:09:45.343+01:00Uh-huh, and if you're going to call the NRA an...Uh-huh, and if you're going to call the NRA an impediment to what the gun control movement wanted these last seven years, you can't also claim the lack of gun control progress as proof that "nobody wants to take your guns".TShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04667036856347626234noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-78784817636712398212015-01-05T14:17:47.072+01:002015-01-05T14:17:47.072+01:00Plenty on your side. And besides, that's what...Plenty on your side. And besides, that's what Chicago had done, for the most part, before being forced to change its ways, so if it is proof of concept for any gun law, it would be poof for a ban of all gun stores and a near total ban of citizen gun ownership, not proof of concept for your goals that you claim you would be satisfied with (but which you've admitted you would add to if they failed to work).SJnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-70604131664476377372015-01-05T13:44:47.700+01:002015-01-05T13:44:47.700+01:00Well, whether you call it a big difference or a su...Well, whether you call it a big difference or a subtle one, I liked it better this way.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09806175370305006933noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-4770437693977560862015-01-05T13:43:27.362+01:002015-01-05T13:43:27.362+01:00Yes, and that's what we blame on the NRA (and ...Yes, and that's what we blame on the NRA (and you gun fanatics). That's why we still have so many unnecessary deaths. That's why criminals and mentally ill people can still buy guns with ease. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09806175370305006933noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-65583853456385055882015-01-05T13:41:48.237+01:002015-01-05T13:41:48.237+01:00Who's talking about banning guns?Who's talking about banning guns?Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09806175370305006933noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-51331888548883955512015-01-04T20:18:36.243+01:002015-01-04T20:18:36.243+01:00Banning guns would be a fantasy nightmare. Some pe...Banning guns would be a fantasy nightmare. Some people can't comprehend the simple truth of what SJ says. Silvianoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-87555091214458672452015-01-04T17:42:48.995+01:002015-01-04T17:42:48.995+01:00Actually it is a big difference Mike..Your title s...Actually it is a big difference Mike..Your title suggest this crap came from the NRA while hers makes suggestions to the NRAAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-73979700166336131262015-01-03T18:36:05.395+01:002015-01-03T18:36:05.395+01:00You're not listening. I am not saying we were...You're not listening. I am not saying we were close to having gun confiscation, but you guys can only claim that it's an NRA boogi man if you had your way for the last decade or so. The fact is you lost just about everything at the national level.TShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04667036856347626234noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-12097260668851364682015-01-03T15:10:07.476+01:002015-01-03T15:10:07.476+01:00Just like the drug trade with South America proves...Just like the drug trade with South America proves that prohibition works...and just like the bootlegging of Liquor from Canada proved the same thing!SJnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-34341973495203458032015-01-03T13:48:13.153+01:002015-01-03T13:48:13.153+01:00You mean number 9.
Oops--yeah. Thanks.
And as u...<i>You mean number 9.</i><br /><br />Oops--yeah. Thanks.<br /><br /><i>And as usual you divert attention from the main point, which is the "insurrectionists, terrorists and hate groups."</i><br /><br />If that's the "point" away from which I "diverted attention," I did Rosenberg a <i>favor</i>--the less her idiocy is scrutinized, the less idiotic she looks.<br /><br />How are "insurrectionists, terrorists and hate groups" going to benefit any more from accurate rifles than any one else who shoots? Hell, given the price of these TrackingPoint rifles, which puts them out of reach of most non-governmental actors, one could quite plausibly make the argument that these guns will help out governments a good deal more than they will "insurrectionists" and the rest.<br />Kurt '45superman' Hofmannhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14091930034162667742noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-61254616303145166532015-01-03T13:05:01.636+01:002015-01-03T13:05:01.636+01:00"New Year’s Resolutions for the NRA"
Bi..."New Year’s Resolutions for the NRA"<br /><br />Bid difference.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09806175370305006933noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-5329579327356121782015-01-03T13:03:59.783+01:002015-01-03T13:03:59.783+01:00You mean number 9. And as usual you divert attenti...You mean number 9. And as usual you divert attention from the main point, which is the "insurrectionists, terrorists and hate groups."Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09806175370305006933noreply@blogger.com