Pro-gun common sense breaking out all over
At the HuffPo. No, not from a blogger there but from the commentators who are addressing Hemke’s usual litany of lies and misrepresentations about guns in America. Some snippets:
The reason gun owners resist these “common sense” proposals stem from two sources:
1.Common Sense – how do otherwise intelligent people not understand that the vast majority of criminals do not buy guns at a gun store or a gun show? They buy from people dealing guns illegally or they steal them. It’s pure ignorance. I go to gun shows. ALL the laws apply and the bulk of the people sitting behind the tables are gun store owners that move their stock to the show. You can purchase or trade from private individuals, but you can do that pretty much anywhere in the country.
…
Virulently anti-gun people are full of it. They want confiscation – they just can’t say it out loud. When you know what the end state is going to be all this jabbering about moderation rings completely hollow. It is our duty as gun owners to not cooperate in any form or fashion.
…
Gun violence, as well as other violent crimes, has decreased by over 30% since the mid-nineties, even though the rate of firearm ownership has dramatically increased, and 40 states passed shall-issue concealed carry laws in that same time period.
…
What I want to know is, in all those polls that say the majority of Americans are for “common sense” gun control, how come they never called me? Who and where did they call?? The Left coast? I could call 10,000 people and get a completely different result.
Uncle adds: Indeed. And how come they never cite these polls? And how come “common sense” is never defined? Remember, The Brady Campaign To Prevent Gun Ownership is about preventing gun ownership. Period. They supported the total and complete ban on guns in Washington DC. That’s all you need to know.
Seems there are more pro-gun responses than anti-gun responses.
Via Jeff.
November 30th, 2006 at 3:47 pm
They buy from people dealing guns illegally or they steal them.
The “steal them” part is the secret sauce in the Michael Bloomberg/Bill Haslam anti-gun movement. Of course the source for those that sell guns illegally is stolen guns.
The perfect Utopian/totalitarian fantasy. If criminals cannot steal guns they cannot have guns, hence a peaceful society.
Will machetes and crowbars be next? God help us from well meaning billionaire and millionaire politicians that want to make the world a safer place. They will be the death of us all.
November 30th, 2006 at 4:12 pm
The “well meaning billionaire and millionaire politicians” have hired guns protecting them. Their real agenda is to use those hired guns to take guns away form the rest of us…or else how would their “common sense” gun laws be enforced?
That agenda benefits two groups: Criminals, who want unarmed victims and politicians, who want disarmed peasants. The latter is, as Thomas Jefferson said, “the legalized version” of the former.
November 30th, 2006 at 4:57 pm
The “well meaning billionaire and millionaire politicians” have hired guns protecting them.
ROS. Rosie O’donnell Syndrome. Hollywood and New York are completely infected. There is no known cure at this time.
November 30th, 2006 at 5:28 pm
You don’t get much more pro-gun or conservative than me, and I’m in favor of common sense gun control. If a pollster were to ask me that question and word it that way and I only had two options- yes or no- then I would have to say “yes”.
Of course, since I have at least half a brain, “common sense” means that there would be VERY LITTLE gun control. The better question (but probably not the one they want the answer to) is whether or not I’m in favor of more gun control.
December 1st, 2006 at 8:15 am
If I were contacted by a pollster asking if I supported “common sense gun control,” I’d have to ask, “Who’s definition of common sense?” After all, my definition is going to differ from Sarah Brady’s definition. And it most certainly will differ from Mr. Hemke’s definition.
December 1st, 2006 at 9:07 am
Common sense gun laws to me:
1. Enforce what’s on the books.
2. Re-tool the ones not working properly (ie Lautenberg).
Anything more makes no sense. To me.
December 1st, 2006 at 9:57 am
Of course I’m for common-sense gun control – but I define that as hitting the target.
December 1st, 2006 at 9:15 pm
Common sense re: gun laws has been around for a long time:
“False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousand real advantages for
one imaginary or trifling inconvenience; that would take fire from men because
it burns, and water because one may drown in it; that it has no remedy for
evils, except destruction. The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are of such
a nature and disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to
commit crimes… Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the
assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an
unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.”
–Jefferson’s “Commonplace Book,” 1774-1776, quoting from “On Crimes and Punishment”
by criminologist Cesare Beccaria, 1764
December 2nd, 2006 at 1:42 am
Common sense is never defined because if it were , it would be a recitation that ends “….shall not be infringed.” That is why they dare not get in that debate.