Anti gunner funnies

[Groundhog]

Being somewhat new to active participation in the gun world, I recently stumbled across an anti-gun sight that caught my attention. I really do like to hear all sides of a view point or argument and believe that it's a must in order to form your own ideas about things rather than just riding the coat tails of one side or the other. That said, I have yet to run across a well laid out, thoughtful anti-gun sight. I'm sure they exist but I just haven't seen one. I am early enough in my stage of thinking about gun ownership and rights that I would still be willing to listen to coherent arguments from the anti side. I have not found any yet though.

Anyway, I ran across the site http://www.gunguys.com/ and got a hoot or two from some of the stuff written there. I subscribed to their news letter sort of on accident but thought I'd keep it to see what the "opposition" was preaching. The latest stuff pretty much made some of the more radical posts here look tame. I provide you with the following entertainment:

The Gun Guys are a part of something called The Freedom States Alliance. They recently asked their readers to come up with ways to counter the NRA's "bullying" etc. and figure out a way to get America to be more pro gun control. They said the received "hundreds" of responses. I'd like to share a few of the more interesting ones with you.

How to Stop the Gun Lobby’s Radical Agenda:

I believe in the total ban of all guns no matter what kind they are.

Pretty reasonable and sane there wouldn't you agree?

As a social scientist, I think what’s needed is more and better data. One of the NRA arguments is that people need guns for “protection.” What’s the evidence that this ever works? If you have a gun on your person or in your car how are you safer in a dark parking lot late at night? How many intruders or muggers are scared off or shot by the self-sufficient gun-toting citizen? How many people are accidentally shot every year by guns kept by someone for “protection”? Data, data, data.

Oh, you mean like this? And reams more.

Rewrite the Second Amendment. It is time to discuss repeal or modification of the Second Amendment. It’s not the word of God.

This one should go over very well.

The NRA should be banned as a terrorist organization. They have contributed to more deaths in the United States than any other terrorist group.

It's so hard for me to pick a favorite out of these responses. They actually posted only 16 of the "hundreds" of responses they got and yep, these made the cut. I would truly love to see some of the unpublished ones. Their reasoning is truly unfathomable to me.

Anyway, I hope you get as big a kick out of them as I did. It makes me wonder how these folks are even thought of as a threat to gun rights.

 

[Duckman44!]

I posted on their site...

"Why would anyone want to stop the gun lobby? They are the only people who stand up for our constitutional rights. I should have the right to keep and bear arms just like you have the right to freedom of speech. My right has been stripped from me because I live in Illinois. How would you feel if the government told you you had to keep quiet about your anti-gun views? I do not write to argue or to start a fight. I am writing so you can see the issue from the other side. I have an arsenal of weapons at my disposal. If I wanted to I guess I could break the law and carry a handgun for self defense anyways. However, if I was caught the penalties would be great. I would never do this because I am a law abiding citizen and I actually care about what the laws say but what if I was crazy and I decided to shoot up a school and then kill myself? I wouldn't care about some silly law that says no one can carry a weapon. After all I know I'm not gonna be around for the aftermath. When you take away the right of people to defend themselves you leave that responsibility in the hands of law enforcement. Where were they at Columbine or Virginia Tech? If some students had been armed I would bet the outcome of both events would have been very different. Take this for what it's worth. It's just a view from the other side. Have a great day and may God bless you."

Drew

 

[Groundhog]

Drew,

Thanks for caring. I thought this thread was a total dud. I must, however, clarify a bit for you.

Just because I felt that some remarks were humorous does NOT mean:

1. I'm not willing to see the issue from the other side. I believe I even clearly pointed out in the first part that I WAS interested in their point of view.

2. That I am advocating breaking any laws.

3. Or, heavens to Betsy man, that I am Anti-gun!

Please re-read what I posted. I think you are taking it wrong. The main thing is that I thought some of their thoughts on how to stop the gun lobby simply defy reason and logic. The one post that talked about data pretty much makes them lose on the spot. The idea that they got "hundreds" of responses, posted only 16, and fully a quarter of them were so off the wall as to not be a viable strategy was, in my opinion, humorous.

I am not fighting either but I will point out areas where I feel someone has misunderstood what I was trying to say. You might want to clarify your first few sentences too because they did not make any sense at all to me, but your call there. Guess I should have used more smiley faces

 

[Duckman44!]

no no no...

I fully understood what you were posting! I agree with you! They have a right to their opinion. I posted what I put on their site. I wasn't replying to you. I just wanted you to see what I wrote them. Soryy about that. Just a misunderstanding.

 

[Groundhog]

Crap, sorry dude. didn't read your post title! DOH!!

 

[40SIG]

This is from an email the Brady Bunch is sending around: You gotta love that last paragraph about mirco stamping. And how would that have stopped the VT incident ?


What can we do about gun violence?

There are many things we can do to prevent gun violence. Here are three policy proposals:

1. We must comprehensively and effectively apply the Brady background check system, so no one who we want to prohibit from buying guns can legally buy one.
Effective background checks would have stopped the Virginia Tech killer from buying these guns.

2. We must reduce access to weaponry that is not for sport and not for self-defense.
Had Congress and the President not allowed the assault weapon ban to expire, the killer may not have been able to obtain the high capacity magazines he used in his assault.

3. We must give our police and federal law enforcement the tools and resources they need to fight gun crimes, including illegal gun trafficking and corrupt gun dealers.
New technologies, such as microstamping and other ballistic identification systems, might have allowed authorities to identify the Virginia Tech shooter earlier, before his second, most deadly, rampage.

 

[Groundhog]

Being kind of new to gun forums, I can't say I have heard of 'microstamping'. What are they talking about? I have to give that author a touch of credit though. At least he/she didn't go emotionally postal like some. There should be a word for that. Emostal? Whaddaya think?

 

[KMBRTAC45]

New technologies, such as microstamping and other ballistic identification systems, might have allowed authorities to identify the Virginia Tech shooter earlier, before his second, most deadly, rampage.

What a bunch of BS . With 2 hours between attacks there is NO way in HE** they would have been able to find out who the shooter was before the second attack happened.

 

[44 AMP]

Microstamping

Is another pie in the sky solution put forward by people who have very little idea how the real world works.

It has been proposed as a law in CA.

As usually described, it involves a "microstamp" , a very tiny id # either on the firing pin (so that it gets transfered to each fired case), or as a serial# on each bullet. One proposal went so far as to require a ser# on each bullet and cartridge case as part of the manufacturing process.

Obviously the intent is to have some kind of registry so that any bullet or case recovered from a crime scene can be traced to the firearm, and thus to the legal owner.

The real world drawbacks to this kind of idea are numerous, and include the fact that 1) ammo makers would have to completely replace their equipment (neither cheap nor easy), 2) parts wear, so replacement (of a firing pin) would invalidate their id system, 3) any kind of registration can only trace something back to the last registration point, so for example, if a gun was stolen, it could only be traced back to it's legal owner, and not the current posessor. And also there is the small fact that there are many millons of guns (in fact all of them) made before microstamping, so there tracking system is no help there.

In order for this idea to be even remotely effective, you would have to remove ALL guns from private ownership, ALL ammunition from public ownership, all gun parts (firing pins, etc), all bullet molds, etc. etc, etc. Then, start over, with microstamped items.

Considering that anyone with a few machine tools, a little bit of knowledge, and a little bit of desire could completely circumvent the proposed system, and the fact that it would cost trememdous amounts of taxpayer $ for no benefit, it is a boondogle of the highest order.

There was a rather apt response from some people in the ammo industry when a CA legislator proposed making microstamping the law. It went something like this..."Fine. Go Ahead. We will stop selling our product to the State of California." The proposal has, so far, not gone any further.

 

[Groundhog]

Ah, I see. In that case it makes total sense that an Anti would use that as a well thought out argument.

 

[BillCA]

Another argument against the microstamping of ammunition was that ammunition would necessarily have to have some kind of bar-code on the box indicating the series numbers inside the box. This would give rise to intentional misdirection possibilities that could not be traced or tracked unless a new requirement existed to shrink-wrap the ammo and prohibit its sale without wrapping.

Imagine you have two boxes of 9mm ammo, nicely microstamped and recorded at the factory (no doubt on expensive equipment). Box-A carries 20 to 50 rounds of ammo stamped 12345; Box-B has ammo stamped 98765. So far so good.

At some point, customers looking at the ammo (or shop employees) open the boxes and while no one looking (or innocently by mistake) replace the trays into the wrong box.

You enter the store and purchase BOX-A and the sale is recorded with s/n 12345 from the box's barcode. You go shoot 'em up at the range that afternoon, discarding the brass & box. A thug purchase BOX-B and s/n 98765, from the box's bar-code is recorded on the sale. Later, he does a drive-by at a movie house to whack a rival gangbanger. Empty cases are left behind along with bullets in the victim(s).

Since the ammo trays were swapped in the boxes, police recover casings & bullets marked 12345 that belonged to BOX-A. Records lead to the gun shop and their sales records lead to... YOU.

Ammo makers objected to the requirement that ammo produced not only include a code, but that the code must be unique to the ammo produced by box or by cartridge. That means no duplication of numbers by any other ammo-maker. Last I looked, it was undefined what would happen if this was violated (e.g. Duplicate ID's on Federal and PMC ammo for example).

The firing pin follies are even worse. Despite being shown that a few minutes with crocus cloth, sandpaper or a file can remove the stampings, the brainless dolts continue to push this stupidity.

Add to it that most crime guns are stolen guns or strawman purchases. Crime scene evidence shows that YOUR .40 Glock was the murder weapon, but it was reported stolen in June of 2005. How does that help the PD solve a case?