Another reporter calls for the banning of weapons of those who didn't do the shooting
- Thread starter MoW
- Start date
I am ashamed on behalf of all responsible firearms owners for the poor conduct of members on the discussion boards mentioned in Ms. Price's article. I'm glad that this board doesn't tollerate foolishness like that.
My condolances and prayers to Ms. Price's loss.
Alex
Edited to add: John Longenecker's rebuttal to her article was excellent by the way. We need to see more articles like that rather than emotional rants that do nothing but inflame the issue.
My condolances and prayers to Ms. Price's loss.
Alex
Edited to add: John Longenecker's rebuttal to her article was excellent by the way. We need to see more articles like that rather than emotional rants that do nothing but inflame the issue.
azredhawk44
Moderator
This issue will never be resolved once and for all in our country, unfortunately. LibDemWackoFemiNazis love to attempt to control people by using emotional baggage rather than convince people by rational logic.
As long as LibDemWackoFemiNazis exist, attempts at gun control (and other forms of mass control) will exist.
As long as LibDemWackoFemiNazis exist, attempts at gun control (and other forms of mass control) will exist.
Marko Kloos
Inactive
Is this the forum where people routinely fail to comprehend the difference between "a few", "some", and "all" when it comes to Muslims and terrorism?
Hmmm. Seems like it all depends on whose ox gets gored, after all. After all, the same logic should be perfectly valid when others equate gun crime with gun owners. It's an unshakeable fact that 100% of gun crime is committed by gun owners.
It's not just LibDemWackoFemiNazis, I'm afraid. It seems like the only difference between them and the "pro-freedom" gun-loving conservative crowd is the name they give their boogeyman used as justification for setting the Bill of Rights on fire.
Hmmm. Seems like it all depends on whose ox gets gored, after all. After all, the same logic should be perfectly valid when others equate gun crime with gun owners. It's an unshakeable fact that 100% of gun crime is committed by gun owners.
It's not just LibDemWackoFemiNazis, I'm afraid. It seems like the only difference between them and the "pro-freedom" gun-loving conservative crowd is the name they give their boogeyman used as justification for setting the Bill of Rights on fire.
JuanCarlos
New member
Marko Kloos said:
That and which ammendments they're willing to burn. Two thumbs up on this one.
Marko, false logic. Most people do not believe that "all" Muslims are terrorists. They do believe that "some" MUslims are terrorists, however, and most thinkling people believe that virtually "all" Muslims, through their apathy, tacitly support terrorists. Inaction is as guilt-worthy as outright support.
Do we happen to have a sample of the "supposedly shameful" writings she endured? I would cast a jaundiced eye towards what she would consider "shameful", as anyone who allows emotion to overcome logic, even after five years, may have unusual ideas of what constitutes a particular term.
I am certain that her emotional response to disagreement escalated the tenor of the various writers, as well. I would hazard a guess that neither Board's responses were anywhere as nasty as those supposedly frequented by the liberal elite on MSN or other liberal elitists sites when the question of the Second Amendment is broached.
Two wrongs don't make a right, but she is a professional journalist, and should expect a vitriolic response to her own vitriol. Couch it in sorrow, it's still the same thing.
I, too, am sorry for her brother. She, as a purportedly thinking adult, knows that neither you nor I had anything to do with it. We certainly bear no guilt, nor should we be tarred with her brush.
Do we happen to have a sample of the "supposedly shameful" writings she endured? I would cast a jaundiced eye towards what she would consider "shameful", as anyone who allows emotion to overcome logic, even after five years, may have unusual ideas of what constitutes a particular term.
I am certain that her emotional response to disagreement escalated the tenor of the various writers, as well. I would hazard a guess that neither Board's responses were anywhere as nasty as those supposedly frequented by the liberal elite on MSN or other liberal elitists sites when the question of the Second Amendment is broached.
Two wrongs don't make a right, but she is a professional journalist, and should expect a vitriolic response to her own vitriol. Couch it in sorrow, it's still the same thing.
I, too, am sorry for her brother. She, as a purportedly thinking adult, knows that neither you nor I had anything to do with it. We certainly bear no guilt, nor should we be tarred with her brush.
pickpocket
New member
Interestingly enough, and with the run-ins I've had with people out her on the interwebernets, some of these thoughts might not be too far off:
And....my FAVORITE:
That one made me chuckle...and then put on some pants
Come on, now - we've ALL gotten into debates with one of these guys. We've all run into THAT guy.
Conjecture, or is this substantive? You can't throw a statement like that around unless you can prove you didn't just make it up.
And....my FAVORITE:
OHH the IRONY. I wonder if she even realizes that she wrote that.
Marko Kloos
Inactive
If that's so, then we as gun owners have to shoulder the same sort of responsibility for gun violence. If inaction is as guilt-worthy as outright support, we're all guilty. Where are the protest marches of gun owners every time some nut commits a mass murder with a firearm? Where are the full-page ads in the major newspapers denouncing these acts? Where are the publicized efforts of gun owners to weed out the "bad apples" in their midst?
Could it be that we as lawful gun owners shouldn't have to do all these things because we don't go around and kill people? Could it be that only the person doing evil witha gun is responsible for their action, and not the "collective"? Why should I apologize for something done by a nutcase with an AK and a grudge against his coworkers, just because I have just such an AK in the closet which harms nobody?
It works both ways, you know, and if you argue in that direction, your arguments are right out of the Brady playbook.
FirstFreedom
Moderator
Marko, you are correct, sir.... as per usual.
LMAO! And she's way off base anyhow - I go to bed promptly at 2:30 a.m.
LMAO!
And she's way off base anyhow - I go to bed promptly at 2:30 a.m.MeekAndMild
New member
Lots of BS here for some reason and not much of it seems to be on topic. Denunceation of others and positive self criticism are dialectic teaching technique used by and popularized by marxist/leninist/maoist thinkers of the first half of the 20th century. They have nothing to do with the RKBA, the shooting community nor the US Constitution. Neither does the jihad in which Islam is fighting to either absorb or eliminate all forms of dissent worldwide. (I'll stop here before I say something I shouldn't, ending with the question when was the last time any of you saw a Gardnerian, a Methodist or a Tibetan Buddhist cut off somebody's head and drag their body through the streets?)
Back O/T I'm sad that bad things happened to Jenny's family, sad that she chooses to blame people who were not responsible for it and sad that she can't see she herself caused the angry response. Perhaps if I knew her I could suggest therapy but I don't so I can't.
Back O/T I'm sad that bad things happened to Jenny's family, sad that she chooses to blame people who were not responsible for it and sad that she can't see she herself caused the angry response. Perhaps if I knew her I could suggest therapy but I don't so I can't.
While I don't ever recall any demands on the part of the citizenry asking for:
"If that's so, then we as gun owners have to shoulder the same sort of responsibility for gun violence. If inaction is as guilt-worthy as outright support, we're all guilty. Where are the protest marches of gun owners every time some nut commits a mass murder with a firearm? Where are the full-page ads in the major newspapers denouncing these acts? Where are the publicized efforts of gun owners to weed out the "bad apples" in their midst?"
Excellent use of hyperbole, but only as an example of that particular term. My point, without the sensationalism and useless ranting, is that you're initial premise was incorrect. As to the Cult of Mohammad, the silence of those who purportedly practice the same faith to condemn the actions of those who kill under it's banner is odd. The dancing in the streets shown world-wide in response to the multiple deaths caused by the terrorists would lead one to believe that the "average" practioner of the religion is in favor of the actions. In conversation with members of that faith, the very subject is met with hesitation and resistance. That, in and of itself, is far differnet from the actions of those who possess firearms.
Your comparison shows that you know the difference. The average gunowner would report illegal use of a firearm to the authorities, immediately. He/she would also defend the right to own weapons, but would condemn those who misuse them, as well. As far as your question as to "where are", that's pointless. Nobody asks the muslims to do that, either. We expect them to be citizens, with the responsibilities incumbent to that citizenship.
I think that the thrust of this story was that a writer felt that her emotions were offended by the response to a "professional" piece she had written. Her response was just as emotional, and wrong, as her piece was unprofessional.
"If that's so, then we as gun owners have to shoulder the same sort of responsibility for gun violence. If inaction is as guilt-worthy as outright support, we're all guilty. Where are the protest marches of gun owners every time some nut commits a mass murder with a firearm? Where are the full-page ads in the major newspapers denouncing these acts? Where are the publicized efforts of gun owners to weed out the "bad apples" in their midst?"
Excellent use of hyperbole, but only as an example of that particular term. My point, without the sensationalism and useless ranting, is that you're initial premise was incorrect. As to the Cult of Mohammad, the silence of those who purportedly practice the same faith to condemn the actions of those who kill under it's banner is odd. The dancing in the streets shown world-wide in response to the multiple deaths caused by the terrorists would lead one to believe that the "average" practioner of the religion is in favor of the actions. In conversation with members of that faith, the very subject is met with hesitation and resistance. That, in and of itself, is far differnet from the actions of those who possess firearms.
Your comparison shows that you know the difference. The average gunowner would report illegal use of a firearm to the authorities, immediately. He/she would also defend the right to own weapons, but would condemn those who misuse them, as well. As far as your question as to "where are", that's pointless. Nobody asks the muslims to do that, either. We expect them to be citizens, with the responsibilities incumbent to that citizenship.
I think that the thrust of this story was that a writer felt that her emotions were offended by the response to a "professional" piece she had written. Her response was just as emotional, and wrong, as her piece was unprofessional.
"Where are the protest marches of gun owners every time some nut commits a mass murder with a firearm?"
Marko, I believe it is because of journalists like Ms. Price that many gun owners are reticent about even letting other know they have a gun. If a thousand gun owners showed up to demonstrate against a criminal's use of a gun, the media would find some way to twist their words, actions or intent. Failing that, they'd just ignore the demonstration entirely.
Ms. Price had the good fortune to get her column printed in a major "newspaper" and therefore reached a lot of readers. Lots of other "reporters" write similar stuff every day, reaching millions of people who otherwise know (or care) very little about guns, self protection or the legal ramifications of self defense. Except in a very few cases, we don't know who has guns or who has been brainwashed against them, so expecting us to go public and make some sort of mass demonstration is like asking a soldier to raise his head to see if the enemy sniper is still there. You first!!
Marko, I believe it is because of journalists like Ms. Price that many gun owners are reticent about even letting other know they have a gun. If a thousand gun owners showed up to demonstrate against a criminal's use of a gun, the media would find some way to twist their words, actions or intent. Failing that, they'd just ignore the demonstration entirely.
Ms. Price had the good fortune to get her column printed in a major "newspaper" and therefore reached a lot of readers. Lots of other "reporters" write similar stuff every day, reaching millions of people who otherwise know (or care) very little about guns, self protection or the legal ramifications of self defense. Except in a very few cases, we don't know who has guns or who has been brainwashed against them, so expecting us to go public and make some sort of mass demonstration is like asking a soldier to raise his head to see if the enemy sniper is still there. You first!!
Marko Kloos
Inactive
So most of us don't speak up because we're afraid of the media and public opinion, yet we can assign guilt and responsibility to those Muslims who don't speak up because they're afraid of the extremists in their midst who decapitate fellow Muslims just as quickly as infidels for speaking up?
Looks like we have a great big double standard at work here.
Looks like we have a great big double standard at work here.
Marko Kloos said:
Marko Kloos said:
Marko Kloos said:
Anyone needing an example of the above statements can read this thread.
Sure it's a double standard, but we all do it in one way or another - and those who say they don't are ... being disingenuous, shall we say?
We all look out for #1. If that calls for looking at Muslims as potential terrorists, so be it. If it means we think all gun owners are just one bad day away from becoming a mass murderer, that's just the way the cookie crumbles. We've discussed free speech, RKBA and probably several other freedoms already, what about the freedom to think what we like? Ms. Price does. You do and so do I. Until the 'Thought Police' can read our minds it's the last truly free freedom we have. Most of us temper our opinions a bit before we put them into print. Otherwise there's be a whole lot more of us getting banned from these boards and perhaps getting visits from Big Brother.
I know what I think about gun owners, gun grabbers, Federal Police, Muslims and a whole lot of other groups, good and bad. A fair number of others who post here probably share my views but feel there's no reason to draw unwanted and unwelcome attention, so we stuff it.
I've marched in counter-demonstration to anti-gun marches. I've been spit on by "peaceful" attendees of the MMM. I think you know just how much good it did the pro-gun movement. No network cameraman caught me wiping my face; no police officer arrested the spitter (though several witnessed it) and no newspaper praised my honor and patience for not hitting the SOB with the sign I was carrying. Instead, the story was about the 'thousands' of peacefully marching moms and the handful of counter demonstrators who tried unsuccessfully to disrupt the march.
Double standard? You bet! I have mine, you have yours and we all get bitten by other people's.
We all look out for #1. If that calls for looking at Muslims as potential terrorists, so be it. If it means we think all gun owners are just one bad day away from becoming a mass murderer, that's just the way the cookie crumbles. We've discussed free speech, RKBA and probably several other freedoms already, what about the freedom to think what we like? Ms. Price does. You do and so do I. Until the 'Thought Police' can read our minds it's the last truly free freedom we have. Most of us temper our opinions a bit before we put them into print. Otherwise there's be a whole lot more of us getting banned from these boards and perhaps getting visits from Big Brother.
I know what I think about gun owners, gun grabbers, Federal Police, Muslims and a whole lot of other groups, good and bad. A fair number of others who post here probably share my views but feel there's no reason to draw unwanted and unwelcome attention, so we stuff it.
I've marched in counter-demonstration to anti-gun marches. I've been spit on by "peaceful" attendees of the MMM. I think you know just how much good it did the pro-gun movement. No network cameraman caught me wiping my face; no police officer arrested the spitter (though several witnessed it) and no newspaper praised my honor and patience for not hitting the SOB with the sign I was carrying. Instead, the story was about the 'thousands' of peacefully marching moms and the handful of counter demonstrators who tried unsuccessfully to disrupt the march.
Double standard? You bet! I have mine, you have yours and we all get bitten by other people's.
I know that you didn't read that escape clause in my post. Double standard? Oh yeah, who can't see that?
I'm supposing that drivers who don't drive drunk, but who also don't meet your inflated standards of full-page ads, and mass marches are also guilty? It was you who made up the hysteria, not us.
I'll stand by my words. They don't require mass protests, full-page ads, and "weeding out", as though that was a bad thing. You are quite aware that your own statements do you little justice. It was you who set the parameters, not me, sir.
This post wouldn't have mentioned Muslims had you not decided that this was where you wanted to go.
I'm supposing that drivers who don't drive drunk, but who also don't meet your inflated standards of full-page ads, and mass marches are also guilty? It was you who made up the hysteria, not us.
I'll stand by my words. They don't require mass protests, full-page ads, and "weeding out", as though that was a bad thing. You are quite aware that your own statements do you little justice. It was you who set the parameters, not me, sir.
This post wouldn't have mentioned Muslims had you not decided that this was where you wanted to go.
MeekAndMild
New member
Quod licet Iovi, non licet bovi. Or is that Quod licet Moderati?
Most of the shooting victims I have seen were citizens and the shooters were uniformed police officers. Most of the citizens I've seen shot by other citizens were shot by citizens carrying stolen weapons. Not to say that in your world things can't happen differently. http://www.memes.org.uk/lectures/mms.html
Last edited:
FirstFreedom
Moderator
and although people should have been more civil to her, she should have known that there would be a vigorous backlash for her advocating violence and death as she did. It has been proven unequiocally by the social science in impeccable, multiple-regression-analyzed, peer-reviewed studies that more guns = less violent crime, so for her to advocate a gun ban as she does is tantamount to advocating violence. Most of us on these forums cannot in good conscience condone more violence, so we tend to get a little testy when people advocate it.