25 comments on “Random Thought O’ the Day

  1. Heeeere we go again. Let’s not blame the people who commit heinous acts. Let’s villify the NRA.

    Typical reaction.

  2. Hey Dre,
    If the legal gun owners are the real problem, why is it the Liberal MSM never wants to tell us when guns used in a crime are illegal or not? It’s very seldom that they even mention the gun’s status and I for one would be very curious. Maybe they just don’t want you to know the truth. I asked one of our own local police officers and he told me that nearly every killing that he saw in the City of Flint in his twenty years on the force was by an illegal gun. Usually with the serial numbers filed off. Here’s a link to the locations of the 2008 Flint murders,(http://www.communitywalk.com/flint/michigan/flint_homicides_2008/map/247119) -must be a lot of legal gun owners on the North End.

  3. Hey Dre,
    If legal gun owners are the problem, then why doesn’t the Liberal MSM just tell us the status of every gun used in a crime? Answer; because it wouldn’t come out very good for them. I talked to one of our local police officers and he told me that in his twenty + years on the force nearly every killing was by an illegal gun. Usually with the serial numbers filed off. Here’s a llink to the locations (and names) of all the murders in Flint in 2008 (http://www.communitywalk.com/flint/michigan/flint_homicides_2008/map/247119) I guess there must be a disportionate amount of legal gun owners on the North End. Perhaps you could look up some of those murders and tell me how many of those murderers were legal gun owners and carrying an NRA card. My guess? Very few if any. The notion that legal gun owners, or Veterans, or militias are the real problem in American has no basis in fact. This is just more fear-mongering by Democrats who excuse every despot, criminal, and dictator around the world and then try to vilify Traditional Americans through the same unjust exampling and stereotyping that they accuse Republicans of.

  4. Yeah . . . heeeere we go again. The NRA is simply out of control. No lobby in this nation should be so powerful as to not come under scrutiny when need be. The cartoon says it all : want to destroy America – do nothing. The status quo will do the work for you.

    This debate almost always brings out the myth that NRA members don’t commit murders. I’d love to see some report by the officers who said that “in his twenty + years on the force nearly every killing was by an illegal gun”. I guess first agree on the definition of “nearly”, but even with the most widely accepted definition, I doubt that quote is even close to the truth.

    I’m all for the right to carry arms, but something has to be done about those states who allow the “willy-nilly” purchase of guns with absolutely no checks. IMHO, gun legislation will certainly bring about a better day. But alas, the NRA is not having it. Peace.

  5. Hey Freedom,
    You could simply check out the names and cases on the list of Flint crimes I supplied you. Scrolling over the arrows will give you the names. Also I’ve bought quite a few guns, all legally, and was subjected to a background check and several legal forms each and every time. Please read michigan law on purchasing a gun. http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/publications/firearms.pdf
    -be prepared, it’s 269 pages long. I hardly think that’s “willy-nilly”. Oh, and that’s not including the Federal forms.

    I for one, would love for our press to tell us each and every time whether or not the gun was legal, but for some strange reason-they won’t.

  6. Michigan may not hand out guns “willy nilly”, but states like Virginia do. Those are the states that I’m concerned with. I applaud Michigan for their efforts. I, as a law abiding citizen, have no problem with filling out the appropriate forms and waiting the appropriate time intervals.

    The NRA seems to have such a problem with this. It’s like “I’ve got an urgent need for protection and can’t wait to be checked out. I need more guns now! (key word being ‘more'” Why do law-abiding citizens who want to protect themselves have a problem with being scrutinized? I would be likely to agree that a lot, possibly most, guns used in felonies have been illegally obtained. Going after the criminals will only make them more crafty, more subject to getting around the law. I don’t suggest passing them by, but simply assuring that it is more difficult to obtain a gun than to obtain a candy bar.

    IMHO, the NRA and its lobbyists are holding the country hostage in a time that we need more gun control – not to restrict one’s right to own a gun, but to get a better handle on things. Peace.

  7. Hey Freedom,
    As a NRA member, I have to admit, there are times when I disagree with some of their stands. Defending cop-killing bullets (armor piercing) would be one such issue. The important thing to remember about advocates, and I’m including all of them here, is they tend to use the “slippery slope ” argument to fire up their base. The NRA tells their members, “If we except any restriction, soon you won’t be able to protect your family or hunt.” It’s the same as the advocates for Affirmative Action that told blacks, “If they take away any AA, soon we’ll all be back in slavery.” It’s not rational, but the most funatical members are the ones willing to march, so they appeal to their fear. As a gun owner (several) and a hunter, I have no problem with back ground checks or filing the paperwork. I do question the mental health questions, however. If I were to have a mental illness (some would argue I already do -J.K.) I might not seek any help for fear of never being able to hunt again. Wouldn’t you want a gun owner to get help? Waiting periods do have their drawbacks, especially for women who can suddenly find themselves being theatened. You would be suprised at the very Liberal women’s advocates on my university campus that are in favor of women being issued guns, without waiting periods or background checks, in certain circumstances. I apologize for using here-say earlier (my reference to me police friend). I work with Andre and was addressing my comment to him. I figured if he questioned his statement I would let him ask him himself. I don’t usually use that kind of thing to make a point.

  8. “In certain instances” is a gray area. One would want an endangered woman to be able to arm suddenly, as in newly threatened by spouse/lover. Most cases say that it is justified. On the other hand, I worry that the threat is not real and the woman is just psycho (some are, you know). So, do you take a chance and bypass the restrictions or keep them in place?

    As for waiting periods, I think that I am more concerned about enforcing the law as goes “more guns” as opposed to obtaining “a” gun. If one has guns already, I don’t see why they can’t just abide with the time limitations.

    Having been a union member when I was in the work force, they never let up about the “slippery rope” concerning benefits (and I fed into it big time), and I see the NRA never lets up as well. On the other hand, I don’t always see that as a bad thing.

    I still say that the stranglehold that the NRA has on this nation needs to be, at the very least, loosened. And, back at the cartoon, not a bad plan for our enemies, NRA or not. Peace.

  9. What bothers me most about the NRA is that in the face of all these killings, they have not owned up to ANY of this. I’m not expecting them to accept the blame for this, but you would think they would be more of an advocate for safety precautions and less for simply getting as many guns as possible out there. Maybe they should change their name from the National Rifle Assocation to Not Responsible for Anyone.

  10. @ Kenya and anyone else with a mind open enough to believe they may be being lied to,
    I searched and searched for a source of statistic (not the NRA or gun advocates) that you would all except that would prove that neither the NRA nor legal gun owners are at fault for heinous crimes committed by criminals. Although I’m sure some will never believe the truth-here it is. This is from the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics, the most bi-partisan validated source I could find. You can link to it at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/press/fuopr.htm
    Prisoners who are doing time for gun-related crimes, (one would assume that includes murder), got their guns from the following souces according to th BJS.
    purchased from a retail store (legal means)-8.3%
    purchased at a pawn shop (debatable) -3.8%
    purchased at a flea market (depends on seller) -1.0%
    purchased at a gun show (legal) -0.7%
    obtained from family or friends (debatable) -39.6%
    got on street/illegal source (illegal) -39.2%
    Purchasing at a gun show and at a retail store (the most legal means) accounted for only 9%. Pawn shops and flea markets are not well regulated, they accounted for 4.8% and I would bet my lunch that a portion of those are illegal. The vast majority of the guns used in crimes were given to them by family and friends (who I’m willing to bet either knew better or should have) or were obtained by illegal sources already outlawed. They accounted for 78.8% of the guns used in crimes. Oddly enough, your media wants you to believe gun shows are the problem which accounts for only 0.7%.
    Want to truly stop the madness? Stop irresponsible lending and selling by individuals and crack down on illegal street selling. No amount of law will stop them and the NRA already preaches responsible gun ownership. Please put the onus where it belongs and stop pointing the finger at responsible gun owners.

  11. Newsflash: Ohio Militia Leader Calls for an “Armed Million Man March” on Washington.

    Let’s see how the NRA nutwings respond to this.

  12. Nice link J. Alex. I like how these people seem to think that “peaceful” and “organized” can be used to describe a march with weapons. LOL!

    More to the point of this annoying gun debate, each time a gun crime is reported on, talking heads and lobbyists express far more concern for their gun ownership rights than they do for the victim’s right to life. In the rare case where they actually show concern over loss of life, it is usually within a certain context that substantiates the importance of having guns; i.e. there is frequently a “but” involved – as in “but if only he had been armed, he would be alive today”. It’s a not so subtle, blame the victim mentality.

    This “but” always reminds me of when people say, “I’m not racist, BUT (followed by racist statement.) Do these people really think that they don’t come across as racist when they say such things?

    Does the NRA really think it sounds sympathetic when it offers condolences?

    That’s the problem I have with the NRA. This insincerity is a credibility problem whether they know it or not.

  13. Its clear that – outside of thehc – you people don’t know a thing about what the NRA stands for. Either that or you don’t understand the FREAKING CONSTITUTION!

    I hope all you anti-gun noise makers are never in a situation where having a firearm would save your lives…especially when the person inflicting harm on you is someone who owns an illegal gun himself.

  14. Newsflash: Ohio Militia Leader Calls for an “Armed Million Man March” on Washington.

    Let’s see how the NRA nutwings respond to this.”

    A (presumably) far-right wing militia? Please, very few people take these people seriously, & they are a fraction of a fraction of legal gun-owners. Providing an example like this is akin to the right pointing out all the absolutely ridiculous antics that PETA gets tied up in, then throwing their sh|t in your face because you too like animals.

    -n

  15. @ Everyone,
    Hmmmm, no response to my link.

    Anyway, I thought that you all might like to know why some one would own more than one gun-so I’ll tell you why I have mine.

    (gun1)- 1100 remington semi-auto 12 gauge- this is my primary deer hunting gun. It has a scope mounted on the barrel which I never take off because it would be too hard to re-sight every year. (try shooting 6 or 10 slugs in a row) It has another inter-changable barrel which I use to bird hunt or rabbit hunt. It only shoots 2 3/4″ shells and can’t shoot accurately beyond 120 yards. Shotguns are the only guns that are legal for firearm deer hunting in lower Michigan. You can use muzzleloaders, but are limited to one shot.

    (gun2)- Model 87 Remington pump shotgun- This is my turkey hunting gun. It shoots 3″ magnum shells and has a mounted dovetail sight that would be useless for hitting fast flying birds like gun1 can. The 3′ shells allow me far better range and coupled with a ex-full turkey choke reduces greatly the likelyhood of a wounded bird.

    (gun3) In-line B.K. muzzleloader 54 caliber. Michigan has a separate deer muzzleloading season. Neither of my other two guns are legal for this season.

    (gun4) 30-06 Remington rifle This is actually my friend David’s gun, but he lends it to me when I take hunting trips either up-north or out to Colorado. The hill country of both only offers far shots-some of them in the hundreds of yards. That’s way too far for any of my other guns. Once again, the proper weapon reduces the likelyhood of a wounded animal and increases the odds of a clean, fast kill.

    (gun5) Handgun- I don’t own a handgun, however, because I take a stand against evil, (such as sheltering my sister-in-law and her children from an abusive and violent father) I have thought about getting one (before he gets out of prison and fulfills his promise to kill me and his ex-wife) I admit, I don’t like handguns. Mostly because of the bravado and lack of respect some people show with one. Unfortunately, sometimes it’s the only way to protect yourself on the street.

    There. Hopefully that will help some of you better understand a culture that your not normally exposed to. It’s not like the press would have you believe-we’re not all a bunch of nuts gathering guns for some impending war. Most of us just want to hunt and protect our self and our family. Nothing more.

  16. Hey party people,

    To clear up any misinterpretations you might have about this particular post, my feelings are closer to Kenya’s…for the most part. Generally speaking, I don’t think the NRA is as indifferent about the impact guns have on public safety as Kenya seems to suggest. But I DO believe the organization is so hell bent on promoting a certain agenda, even if doing so sacrifices certain public safety in deference to the unrestricted rights of gun owners.

    The particular strip I used wasn’t necessarily analogous to my positions; but the tongue-and-cheek shot I made at the NRA was…

  17. Keep in mind Andre, that groups such as the NRA (as well as PETA, & countless others from both sides of the party-line) typically only pander to their more extreme members, as those are the people who will go out on the streets & march, knock on doors, etc. I’d bet that most NRA members don’t buy into the “Obama iz gonna take our gunz” BS that comes up everytime a dem is in the Whitehouse, just as most of PETA’s members are such because they love/respect animals, not because PETA goes out of it’s way to ask the Pet Shop Boys to rename their 20+ year old group the Rescue Shelter Boys (true story, btw).
    -n

  18. @thehc – It’s not illegal that you borrow a friend’s gun with which to hunt? At any rate, interesting info, but, I believe the question is not “why one would own more than one gun” (at least for me), but rather why is it that “another one” needs to be obtained with such urgency. I’m already familiar with the culture of multiple-gun ownership. My co-workers in upstate PA were all big deer hunters and all owned more than one gun. With all of the guns that you own, why is it that the guns that “we” (who are gridlocked in the city and don’t hunt) need to carry in the city seem so offensive to you? I guess those are the ones that you and other NRA members wouldn’t mind implementing stricter laws against. If I walked down the street in my town with a Remington 30-06, I’d be shot by the police before being allowed to explain my reason for carrying it. In the city, a handgun is carryable without warranting panic from the rest of the public eye.

    @nic As Kenya said, there’s always a “but”. You defend and explain the lobbyists’ modus operandi (including PETA), but, then, comes the but – lobbyists like PETA are so much more extreme than the NRA. I’m no big fan of PETA, but, still, you just can’t leave it without the “but”.

    Again – Columbine Massacre’s 10th anniversary – how appropriate.

    When you have a moment, check out the history, bio, and infamous words of one Harlan Carter, former NRA head. He would have us all dead by the hand of convicted felons and the mentally deranged rather than have Americans be subjected to a screening process for the purchase of guns. He has been misquoted and his words are ofttimes taken out of context, but the translation, the undiluted meaning of his words echo the same sentiment. He also relates the story of a “young boy” with a Derringer in his coat pocket and contends that there is nothing wrong with that picture.

    ” . . . a foolproof plan to kill thousands of Americans . . . sit back and do nothing”. Peace.

  19. You defend and explain the lobbyists’ modus operandi (including PETA), but, then, comes the but – lobbyists like PETA are so much more extreme than the NRA.

    Nah, I was merely pointing out that groups on both sides of the political aisle cater to the more active (which usually = the more extreme) members of each of their respective groups. As for the groups, personally I’d join both if they each rid themselves of the ridiculous shenanigans (read above), & I’ll have you know that I kick my dog @ every chance I get, & don’t own a single firearm. If you misread my previous post as me stating that the NRA pwns PETA, left vs right, rah rah rah, rest assured that I think they’re both led by sheer douchery. But (That’s the first but, btw), as was the original intent of my post, the leaders, nor the messages sent to the more extreme members, do not necessarily represent the vast majority of the group.

    -n

  20. Hey Freedom,
    Some good, well thought-out questions. I answer as best I can.

    “It’s not illegal that you borrow a friend’s gun with which to hunt?”
    No, not a long gun. A hand gun would be a different situation. However, I should also point out that lending it to me would make him culpable if I should use it in an illegal manner. So it’s a risk to him as it should be.

    “With all of the guns that you own, why is it that the guns that “we” (who are gridlocked in the city and don’t hunt) need to carry in the city seem so offensive to you?”
    Not at all, you totally misunderstand me. I would encourage (and even have!) law-abiding citizens within the inner cities to carry weapons responsibly. My beef is with illegal weapons carried by irresponsible people. It’s kind of hypocritical to demand back ground checks and forms and training for legal people but ask nothing of illegal people.

    “If I walked down the street in my town with a Remington 30-06, I’d be shot by the police before being allowed to explain my reason for carrying it.”
    Even where I live (very rural), I would put myself in grave danger if I walked into a store carrying my weapon. Down the street, it would depend on the street. Down my dirt road, it would be O.K., down main street in Linden, Michigan I would not make it far.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s