HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » benEzra » Journal
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next »


Profile Information

Gender: Male
Hometown: Eastern North Carolina
Home country: United States
Current location: Eastern NC
Member since: Wed Dec 1, 2004, 04:09 PM
Number of posts: 12,148

Journal Archives

Given that you blithely suggested a proposal that wouldn't even fly in Europe...

without so much as a "in my ideal end state" caveat, then yes, I figured you were one of those that didn't fully understand the scope of what you were advocating.

It is my experience that the majority of gun control advocates and journalists think that "semiautomatic" describes niche weapons that constitute the minority of guns sold and fire faster than "typical" civilian guns, rather than one-shot-at-a-time weapons that constitute 75% of the civilian market.

That's as ridiculous as claiming that beer should be treated like cocaine.

"Semiautomatic" is how the overwhelming majority of civilian guns work. It means a gun that fires once and only once when the trigger is pulled.

An office stapler is semiauto; a sewing machine is automatic. Methinks you are either conflating the two, or else don't realize that you're advocating banning and confiscating most of the civilian guns in U.S. homes.

A "bullet button" is a magazine release button, and this video is satire.

It is also an excellent demonstration of Poe's law, in that it is nearly indistinguishable from actual scaremongering by the corporate media.

Actually, NC's requirements appear *stricter* than Virginia's, and we got trashed anyway.

NC requires a Federal background check, state background check, mental health records check, FBI and state fingerprint check, an 8 hour class on firearms law (more than Virginia requires; a hunter's safety class will do in VA, IIRC), and demonstrated competence with a handgun on a shooting range at realistic self-defense distances, live fire. Our gun laws are also stricter than Virginia's in general. What more would you want?

About the only thing we don't do is NYC-style means testing to limit carry licensure to the likes of Donald Trump, Charles Schumer, and the publisher of the New York Times.

This isn't about safety; this is about jerking people around that you don't like. And there are a whole lot of Dems and indies who just got our (concealed) carry privileges in Virginia suspended. The upshot will be to require those of us visiting or passing through Virginia to open carry in order to stay legal, which is stupid (because I'm not personally a fan of open carry, and it's ridiculous to be forced to open carry because of childish political stunts like this).

So, how many lives per year would be saved by outlawing rifle handgrips that stick out?

Answer: zero.

But it's not about saving lives, it's about social signaling and sticking it to the "other", which is why outlawing rifle handgrips and whatnot has been Priority #1 of the gun prohibition lobby for more than a quarter-century now. Ignorance and fear, like I said.

For perspective, people have been murdered in Baltimore alone this year than have been murdered using *all* rifles in every city, town, village, and home in the entire United States.

Yeah, just like those 'terrorists' at the ACLU, and Mother Jones...

who have pointed out that the Bush watchlists are full of innocent people, and have no accountability and no due process.

"We can't have terrorist watch lists that affect people's rights without due process -- the right of innocent people to challenge their inclusion through an adversarial proceeding and get off the lists. But no such system has been created. A September 2009 report by the Inspector General of the Department of Homeland Security found that the process for clearing innocent travelers from the list is a complete mess. The consequences of being mistakenly added to a terror watch list can be more severe than simply missing a plane. Law enforcement routinely run names against the watchlists for matters as mundane as traffic stops, and innocent individuals may be harassed even if they donít attempt to fly." ---American Civil Liberties Union

More from the ACLU:

Mother Jones: Nine years on the no-fly list because an agent checked the wrong box

Washington Post: Senator Kennedy Flagged by No-Fly List

San Francisco Chronicle: No-fly blacklist snares political activists

Geez, 'terrorists' everywhere.

Marshals: Innocent People Placed On 'Watch List' To Meet Quota

Infants on the Terrorist Watch List

How YOU could end up on the no-fly list

Various blacklist absurdities

SecMo, do you think 'terrorists' (as you define them) should be allowed to work in medical facilities? Schools? Drive gasoline tankers? Pilot aircraft or ships? Participate in unions? Work for the Federal government? Adopt children? If you think someone is a 'terrorist' simply because their name is on a list of people to check out...

As I've pointed out before, "No Fly, No Buy" is a 2005 Bush admin proposal, and a favorite cause of Muslim-despisers like Peter King.

I think a key component of any UBC

would be felony prison time and lifetime debarment from government service for any official who uses or assists in using UBC to compile a registry of lawful owners. I'd also like to see a cessation of all attempts to restrict rifle aesthetics/ergonomics or mandate silly magazine capacity restrictions, given that all rifles combined kill fewer people than bicycles. Those things might help restore some of the trust that has been broken, stomped, and ground in the dirt by Bloomberg's sockpuppets over the past few years.

Is the ACLU a terrorist organization too?


Is Mother Jones a terrorist magazine?


And those pesky terrorists at the Washington Post:


This guy would approve:


Which is a good reason why the blacklist bullcrap should be stripped out of the bill so it doesn't poison-pill it.

You raise one of the biggest points against the "fear Syrian refugees" argument, and that is that the French attackers could have legally traveled here without raising any eyebrows, so they wouldn't have needed to pose as Syrians.

Yes, things change over time. They have gotten *SAFER*.

And the watchlists have been filled with more and more completely innocent victims of the bloated and unaccountable process (1.5 million people, now?), and have been publicly exposed as same.

And what you're saying is that Alberto Gonzales, Dianne Feinstein, Peter King, Dick Cheney, and their cheerleaders at the New York Times are "Good Dems" on the issue of revoking civil liberties based on secret watchlists, whereas critics of the watchlists such as Mother Jones, the American Civil Liberties Union (which opposes using the Bush watchlists to revoke civil liberties, and has filed numerous lawsuits to help innocent victims of the watchlisting process), etc. aren't.

Answer me this: What aspects of the Bush Administration's war on civil liberties post-9/11 did the New York Times *not* support? Weren't they one of the biggest boosters of the Patriot Act?
Go to Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next »