One-Time-Use Magazines

Status
Not open for further replies.
I can think of well over a dozen that come to mind right off the bat. None of them are polite nor appropriate to mention here.

It's astounding, and the sad fact is, there are many out there that will believe the garbage she spews. I wish these people would at the very least read up and research what they are trying to get rid of, at least then I could give them a modecum amount of respect for at least are somewhat knowledgable on the subject that they're so passionate about.
 
Before we laugh too much about these stupid politicians we need to think a bit.

When I was a young infantryman in Vietnam, during a heavy rain, an old Sargent told me to think of it this way, "No matter how wet you are, there is always some place wetter".

The same theory applies here. No matter how dumb one is, there is always someone dumber.

Somebody voted for these people.
 
Somebody voted for these people.
Click to expand...
Yep. And a lot of somebodys didn't show up to vote against these people, which has the same net effect.

The situation right now is like closing the barn door after the horse has fled, joined the circus, gotten its own TV show, crashed and burned, and had a VH1 documentary made. Those who sympathize with gun control have been steadily packing seats in state and national legislatures since 2006, while gun owners have been sitting on their hands.

We can hue and cry all we want about DeGette's ignorance and arrogance, but there was a time we could have prevented all of this.
 
Tom Servo, you are correct, but please recall that prior to both the 2008 and 2012 election cycles the mods here were saying that politicians knew better than to try any of this.

IIRC, you yourself routinely pointed out both the poor finances of the Brady campaign, and the Clintonian admonishment to avoid gun control.

Such attitudes may well have caused some of the complacency you now lament.
 
IIRC, you yourself routinely pointed out both the poor finances of the Brady campaign, and the Clintonian admonishment to avoid gun control.
Click to expand...
Ah, but both of those are facts. The Brady Campaign's finances are still meager, and Bill Clinton has warned lawmakers to avoid sweeping gun-control measures.

Politicians appeared to be heeding that advice, but Sandy Hook blew that out of the water. The scale of the atrocity is unprecedented, and it gave them the emotional leverage to push this stuff through. That part was utterly unpredictable.

That said, several election cycles of voter nonparticipation left them with legislatures that are more receptive than anyone expected.
 
I also remember that single issue voters were virtually castigated, here and on many other gun boards. I also remember that we were also saying that elections have consequences. Remembering that no one thought the Republican party would self-destruct. We also didn't have a Sandy Hook following on the heels of the election.

And on and on...

Oh, and where are all those gunnies that voted for Obama? They aren't nearly so vociferous as they were....

There's plenty of blame to throw around. Do we really want to play that game?
 
I find it interesting that there's almost zero comment on the clear message that she wants every bullet to go away ASAP. Am I the only one grasping this admission that directly contradicts the "you're over-reacting, we don't want to actually take anything away!" assertions of these people?
 
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard" H. L. Mencken

Unfortunately, old Henry may have been right...
 
Oh, and where are all those gunnies that voted for Obama? They aren't nearly so vociferous as they were....
Click to expand...

I voted for Obama twice. Would have preferred Clinton but that wasn't an option.
I was also someone who took single issue voters to task, still do.
 
Brady finances can be meager, when Bloomberg is willing to toss $12M into ad campaigns for gun control.

Between Bloomberg and Soros, the antis have much better financing than Brady coffers would indicate; they also have free backing from most media outlets.

As far as blame games go, Al, that is not my intent. Tom Servo is a friend of mine outside the forum. I am simply pointing out to him that complaining about voter apathy, while telling those potential voters not to worry, might approach the ironic.
 
wogpotter, "I find it interesting that there's almost zero comment on the clear message that she wants every bullet to go away ASAP. Am I the only one grasping this admission that directly contradicts the "you're over-reacting, we don't want to actually take anything away!" assertions of these people?"

Great post! I heard it LOUD AND CLEAR when I first read it. I would have been stunned a few months ago. Still, they clearly don't want to take it away from us. They only want us to use up what ammunition we have so they can prevent us from getting any more, rendering our weapons useless.
 
I also remember that single issue voters were virtually castigated, here and on many other gun boards. I also remember that we were also saying that elections have consequences. Remembering that no one thought the Republican party would self-destruct. We also didn't have a Sandy Hook following on the heels of the election.

And on and on...

Oh, and where are all those gunnies that voted for Obama? They aren't nearly so vociferous as they were....

There's plenty of blame to throw around. Do we really want to play that game?
Click to expand...

With the current situation there should no longer be doubts or confusion as to which politicians and party is more anti-gun and those more pro-2A. In the past folks could say will yeah, I am voting for so-and-so for this other issue because there is no chance AWB will come up for a serious vote.

Until we change the nature of our society and gun-free zones we will continue to have shootings such as Sandy Hook, so none of us should think this is the last game changing event. There will be more to come eventually. Who you vote for or don't vote for makes a difference on gun laws. Folks are free to vote for who they want on whatever combination of issues, but going forward there will be no cover pretending gun laws are off the table and they can vote for a anti-gun politician and it is OK.

If you vote for an anti-gun party/politician then man up and admit you are part of the problem when it comes to more restrictions on guns. I know several gun owners who pooh-poohed the idea their favorite politician would ever have to vote on gun legislation so why bring that up in the campaign discussion, right.

Well, now we know gun laws will always be a critical issue, just waiting for the next gun-grabber opportunity to come along which as Al states was totally unpredictable. I agree the type and timing of such an event is unpredictable, but given the past history I think it is nearly guaranteed it will happen again in another gun-free zone somewhere, sometime in the next several years. There are plenty of whacked people out there to do it.
 
Great post! I heard it LOUD AND CLEAR when I first read it. I would have been stunned a few months ago. Still, they clearly don't want to take it away from us. They only want us to use up what ammunition we have so they can prevent us from getting any more, rendering our weapons useless.
Click to expand...
The trick is to learn to read between the lines of many of the anti's "reasonable" intentions IMO. Like this:

"I don't want your guns, I've never wanted them."
True, he just neglects to mention he doesn't want you to have them either.

"I'm not out to take your guns!"
Again, true. However he is going to have a few unmentioned minions do it for him, he just neglects to mention that.

"Your legitimate sporting purposes rifles for hunting are not under any threat!"

True: but only as long as you dont hear the silent (this time round I'm going for a different group this time, but I'll be back next time for you) whisper.

You have to read "doublespeak" as I call it then the whole thing is clear.
 
My comment on the Rep DeGette's FB page:

"This is precisely why Second Amendment proponent's mistrust of anti-gun zealots is NOT misplaced. Common sense, indeed. Yet, merely misunderstanding the mechanics of how firearms actually work is but the tip of the iceberg in how mistaken the antigun extremists are vis a vis this important right. Those voting for this boondoggle can expect a political, legislative, and judicial backlash, the likes of which have not been seen since prohibition. The saddest fact is that measures which could ACTUALLY save lives were pushed aside for this horrible misguided effort."
Click to expand...
I don't expect it will remain there for long.
 
I am a single issue voter. My issue is personal responsibility is required to have liberty survive.

There is a connection to government solutions to your personal problems and gun control. There is a connection to gun control and democrats.
 
This is purely political now and to continue the debate would have to dig into topics we don't do.

I think we all get the point. Can you be a single topic voter? Well, there are a lot of single topic tests out there for each party - makes it hard. I don't think we want to go into those.

Thus, thanks for the conversation and closed.

GEM
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top