Comments on: Weekend flame bait

By: tgirsch

tgirsch — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 02:32:12 +0000

But you don’t have to register.

By: Stormy Dragon

Stormy Dragon — Sat, 26 Jan 2008 20:36:42 +0000

I know that Say Uncle. That’s part of why I think it’s a rhetorical trap. The proposed law seems to have been made by taking a voter id law and replacing ‘voter’ with ‘gun owner’, whether it made sense or not.

By: SayUncle

SayUncle — Sat, 26 Jan 2008 14:14:41 +0000

but we do require photo ID for a gun.

By: Stormy Dragon

Stormy Dragon — Sat, 26 Jan 2008 02:54:34 +0000

To quote Admiral Akbar, “IT’S A TRAP!”

I bet tomorrow there’s going to be a post to the effect, ‘If it’s not okay to require photo-ID to buy a gun, why is it okay to require one to vote?’

By: Alcibiades McZombie

Alcibiades McZombie — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 22:36:06 +0000

Gun registration in an anti-gun state is like putting a compulsive gambler in charge of petty cash.

I might be willing to allow for an optional federal license of some sort (similar to C&R, but less restrictive). The benefit would be that the holder does not have to comply with most state or local firearms laws (mwa ha ha ha).

By: Dan

Dan — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 21:13:34 +0000

Short but hits all the standard marks, like using ‘fair and reasonable’ somewhere in the line. Of course, it lacks complete originality.

By: Robb Allen

Robb Allen — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 21:08:37 +0000

That man is going to give Uranium a run for its money on the density thing.

By: anon

anon — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 20:44:04 +0000

Duly flamed! Let’s see if he deletes comments.

By: Linoge

Linoge — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 20:42:04 +0000

Right, because law-abiding Jews… er… firearm-owners have absolutely nothing to fear about registering themselves on some governmentally-controlled roster. Nothing at all.

Of course, we still have the whole logical disconect of “Oh, sure, criminals will follow this law!” to contend with as well…