Posted on 11/27/2006 12:06:02 PM PST by neverdem
As a card-carrying member of the Democratic Party of Lane County, I enjoyed Michael Moore's "A liberal pledge" (Register-Guard, Nov. 22). He had some good tongue-in-cheek thoughts on how disheartened conservatives can rest assured that the new government will not harm them. However, I take exception to Moore's flippant comments regarding our Second Amendment right:
"We will not take away your hunting guns. If you need an automatic weapon or a handgun to kill a bird or a deer, then you really aren't much of a hunter and you should, perhaps, take up another sport. In the meantime, we will arm the deer to make it a fairer fight."
I agree with Moore quite often, but he sometimes makes us look silly to outsiders. He apparently doesn't realize that you are a superstar marksman hunting god or a stalking savant if you can kill a bird or a deer with a handgun.
Without tons of practice, I can hardly hit a target 20 feet away with a handgun. However, I could shoot my 30.06 once a year and hit the same target 100 percent of the time.
Other than alienating virtually every rural Democrat, there is no practical reason to ban handguns. We cannot take handguns out of the hands of law-abiding citizens when criminals would still buy them illegally or steal them.
Besides, handguns are a tool for a specific job. For instance, they are smaller than rifles and shotguns. I'd be happy to walk into Market of Choice with a shotgun over my shoulder, but that tends to freak people out. Discrete, concealed handguns are a little more inconspicuous and safer; there's no point of advertising that you carry.
Furthermore, handguns are often the best tool for home defense. A lot of people find handguns easier to handle; comfort with a firearm is 90 percent of the battle. At 6-1 and 205 pounds, I prefer my 12-gauge, but many women prefer smaller, longer-barreled handguns.
When I do my farm chores, I prefer my handgun on my hip as opposed to a bulky rifle or shotgun on my shoulder. I don't want to be running back to the house for the rifle while an animal suffers or a dog-at-large threatens livestock.
Most importantly, gun ownership, including handguns, is the biggest deterrent to a totalitarian government or military coup. If the neoconservatives use the next terrorist attack to set aside more of our rights, we'll eventually run out of them. I'll be thankful that our "well regulated [neighborhood citizen] militia" has a "right to bear arms" that is not "infringed." Those are quotes from the Constitution. I wish gun banners and neocons would read it and love it.
Several years ago when I successfully moved to strike the gun control plank from the Democratic Party of Lane County's platform, no rural Democrats vocalized support. That wasn't surprising, because no rural Democrats were present. We certainly have been rectifying that, as our recent gains have illustrated.
Nonetheless, I recently saw the gun banners' threat to rural Dems first hand, when my union Democrat mother-in-law and my Democrat farmer father-in-law were contemplating a vote for Republican Jim Talent for Missouri senator, solely because of Democrat Claire McCaskill's alleged views on gun control. Thankfully my wife talked them down.
My wife practices in some of the most dangerous areas of law (child custody, divorce and termination of parental rights), and our lives have been threatened more than once. I can watch out for those people; it's the ones who don't vocalize their intentions that worry me.
You are welcome to rely on the government to cover 100 percent of your life, but I plan on exercising a little personal responsibility.
Going after handguns has no chance of success anyway. You would have trouble taking my handgun away, and would have zero percent chance of taking any of my neighbors' handguns. If you want to do something about handgun violence, fund crime prevention and Eddie Eagle gun safety programs at our schools, and vote Democratic (as fiscal responsibility increases, the economy improves and crime decreases).
I respect Moore's opinion, and I don't find him to be a traitor or unpatriotic for it. But it is my quest to not alienate my neighbors from our party. It's sometimes tough being a Democrat outside of Eugene. However, I consistently and proudly tell my neighbors that they are wrong about Lane County Democrats being "spooky south Eugene dirty hippy wack jobs" (their words, not mine, cleaned up a bit for viewing by children) who are out to take their guns and make them drive Volvos. And then they share their venison with us. Yum.
For now, I think I'm going to feed my hog, shoot my grandfather's World War II-era semi-automatic .22 pistol, drive my SUV to town, and then have a glass of pinot noir to celebrate the Kansas City Chiefs' win over the Broncos as I read the new Mother Earth News.
C. Michael Arnold (mike@ arnoldlawfirm.com) is a city prosecutor, a Creswell School Board member, a Democrat, a farmer, a civil litigator and a member of the National Rifle Association.
That's a good example of why I'm not comfortable with folks who use their first initial instead of their given first name. They are not happy with their given name, and I can't follow their logic.
Enough said. End of story.
Democrats?... (Eddie Murphy laugh)...
That's where I stopped reading too. No credibility in a statemetn like that.
I'm against gun contol, too, mainly because it's healthy for a government to be a little afraid of its citizenry :)
What ?
I wonder how many gun grabbing laws the neocons have proposed? Say, as opposed to Democrats?
I think Democrats suffer from cognitive dissonance. They insist on voting for Democrat politicians even in the face of those politicians opposition to policies the voter doesn't agree with. This guy proves that point perfectly.
those politicians opposition to
should read "those politicians support of"
The 2nd Amendment has absolutely NOTHING to do with hunting. Of course, I am preaching to the choir here.
I have a hard time believing this guy is NRA.
Logic? The guy agrees with Michael Moore most of the time. Logic is not being used in that household.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." -Manuel II Paleologus
I have a hard time believing he is a farmer.
It's not the militia that has the "right to bear arms". It is "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed". The militia part of the amendment is a justification for it, not a limitation on the people's right.
If the author wants to Dowdize amendments by leaving out key words, try this on for size:
Amendment 1:See, by ellipsing out one word I can change the meaning of an amendment.
Congress shall make ... law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Anyone who respects the Moore character's opinion on any subject of any variety is ipso facto intellectually negligible, and the Second Amendment is about neither hunting nor self-defense. Rather than establishing his intellectual attainments, the writer reveals himself to his detriment.
If Michael Moore wants my gun, he can come and take it from my cold dead hand.
I don't know...seems to me like he knows how to spread a load of fertilizer...
Civil litigator...
City Prosecutor...
Farmer...
Surname - Arnold
His pro-gun comments aside, this fellow strikes me as more than a bit naive. Naive enough, perhaps, to buy the Old Haney Place. I wonder if there's an old Hoyt-Clagwell tractor in his barn.
Anyone that is stupid emough to believe anything a Democrat says and votes for them for that reason deserves anything that the Democrat does to them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.