...of which the race-baiting, freedom-hating Marxist, Bob Herbert, is a card-carrying member.
Doom on him and all like him.
Posted on 06/20/2009 7:38:14 AM PDT by reaganaut1
...
There is no Obama gun ban on the way. Gun control advocates are, frankly, disappointed [so far].
What’s important to grasp here is that this madness has nothing to do with hunting, which the politicians always claim to be defending, and everything to do with the use of firearms to resist policies and lawful government actions that some gun owners don’t like.
In a speech in February to the Conservative Political Action Conference, the executive vice president of the N.R.A., Wayne LaPierre, said: “Our founding fathers understood that the guys with the guns make the rules.”
A new book by Dennis Henigan, a vice president at the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, goes into detail on this point. In “Lethal Logic: Exploding the Myths That Paralyze American Gun Policy,” Mr. Henigan refers to a Harvard Law Journal article written by an N.R.A. lawyer titled, “The Second Amendment Ain’t About Hunting.” In the article, the lawyer makes it clear that for the N.R.A., the right to bear arms is “directed at maintaining an armed citizenry. ... to protect against the tyranny of our own government.”
There was a wave of right-wing craziness along those lines during the Clinton administration. Four federal agents were killed and 16 others wounded in 1993 during an attempt to serve a search warrant at the Branch Davidian compound near Waco, Tex., where a stockpile of illegal machine guns had been amassed. The subsequent siege ended disastrously with a raging fire in which scores of people were killed.
In the aftermath of Waco, the N.R.A. did its typically hysterical, fear-mongering thing. In a fund-raising letter in the spring of 1995, LaPierre wrote: “Jack-booted government thugs [have] more power to take away our Constitutional rights, break in our doors, "
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
...of which the race-baiting, freedom-hating Marxist, Bob Herbert, is a card-carrying member.
Doom on him and all like him.
Read the COMMENTS section after the article if you want to be scared out of your mind.
Most commenters resist further calls for gun control, but a majority call for control of Rush Limbaugh and Rupert Murdoch to silence conservatives who fill people with hate.
These are dangerous times, folks.
I know logic is hard for a liberal but I guess Herbert also misses irony as well. He writes about the “illegal” guns at the Branch Davidian compound and seems to not understand what the word illegal implies! Also, not sure they were a “right wing” group, living in a commune and having free sex with the woman folk is usually the domain of the left wing Utopians!
Those idiots can cry about David Koresh all they want - every single thing the guy promised his followers came true courtesy of the Clinton administration and Janet Reno.
Precisely. Just like how they always leave out the part about Jim Jones being a rabid Communist.
5.56mm
“Four federal agents were killed and 16 others wounded in 1993 during an attempt to serve a search warrant at the Branch Davidian compound near Waco, Tex., where a stockpile of illegal machine guns had been amassed. The subsequent siege ended disastrously with a raging fire in which scores of people were killed.”
That’s a lot of passive voice, even from the NYT. That last part is especially strained. The siege was subsequent (as night follows day, sorta natural); it ended disastrously (as if by natural disaster, fate, or a really badassed El Nino blew in); with a raging fire (let’s not even suggest it wasn’t spontaneous combustion) in which scores of people were killed (by whom? Old Man Fire?)
Let that be a lesson to us! Horrible, incomprehensible things happen like lightning bolts from the capricious gods, when people don’t submit to our wise and benevolent overlords.
Yes, Mr. Herbert, I do own guns to hunt. I also own them to protect myself from people like you: those who desire unearned shares of others' wealth and property and who use elected officials to seize them.
The Second Amendment is a vital part of a Constitution that liberals freely abrogate except for the parts they like, which increasingly, are very few.
Μολὼν λάβε.
Interstingly, NO.
The “test-firing” did not do wel, I heard.
Funny how the NRA and I see it exactly the same way, and for that they get a fair amount of my earnings every year. Three hundred million people are documented to have been killed by governments, including one hundred million during the last century, after governments really learned how to be efficient at it. I'm sure that was just an anomaly, and won't be repeated. The Iranian protesters have nothing to fear from the Achmedinajad government.
There was a wave of right-wing craziness along those lines during the Clinton administration. Four federal agents were killed and 16 others wounded in 1993 during an attempt to serve a search warrant at the Branch Davidian compound near Waco, Tex., where a stockpile of illegal machine guns had been amassed.
What were David Koresh's political leanings? Can you, the intellectually superior NYT editorial writers, cite even ONE item that made Mr. Koresh a "right winger", other than being religious and owning guns? I'll just wait right here.
The subsequent siege ended disastrously with a raging fire in which scores of people were killed.
And WHO was RESPONSIBLE for that fire, liberal fascist M@THERF@CKERS??? You'll never hear that from the NYT. It's gotten to the point that slapping around the ignorant liberal peckerwoods from the NYT isn't even sport any more. You could program a computer to write their editorials, since they're pretty much all the same regurgitated crap with no actual critical thought put into them.
Did anyone ever see one of those illegal machine guns from Waco?
You, Mr. Swampsniper, make an excellent point, one of the ones that I was going to make. The NRA hired a failure analysis company to look at the guns to determine whether or not they had been illegally converted. "Senator" Schumer stopped it cold, and had the guns locked away. To my knowledge, it has never been established that even ONE of the guns was illegally converted. But, as you know, once it passes into the liberal mythosphere, it's fact forever after.
A search warrant which they did not even have with them. Nor did they ever try to "serve" it. It's a very strange warrant service that involves driving up in unmarked Pickup trucks pulling covered cattle trailers, which then disgorge a horde of black suited masked men. One which requires shooting the dogs of those to be served, before contact with the named person(s) is even attempted.
They try to serve a warrent like that in my neighborhood, they'll be met with the same, but more effective, response. (My neighbors are trained by Uncle, and wear digital camo to work)
I guess you could use it wrap up some fish guts. Or you could line your birdcage with it, but them your bird would get constipated from refusing to shit on it.
In reading the comments, so far I haven't seen a single one in opposition to the column, though one poster DID agree that the 2nd Amendment was important to protect us against the "North Korean Hoards" so anyone wanting to own a gun should have to be in a "militia," and if they refused, would become a criminal. Sounds remarkably like the comment attributed to H. Himmler regarding gun ownership in the Third Reich... "If you want to own a gun, join the 'SA'"
I was going to post a comment of my own, starting with:
the use of firearms to resist policies and lawful government actions that some gun owners don’t like.
I'd like to remind Mr. Herbert that in the 1930s and 1940s, German law specified the confiscation of the property of Jews, and the liquidation (i.e. the death, for those who weren't used in slave labor) of Jews in German occupied territories. This was perfectly legal. It was the law. Throughout the middle of the last century, somewhere between 50 and 100 million people were killed through the legal, government policies instituted by Joseph Stalin in the Soviet Union (a fact denied and hidden, to this day, by Walter Durante and the very newspaper for which Mr. Herbert works.) The policies that caused death by starvation by the tens of millions were perfectly legal. They were the law set down by "the government."
The killing fields of Cambodia where upwards of 2 million were killed? Legal. The enslavement and murder of homosexuals in Cuba? Legal. The internment of Japanese and Americans of Japanese decent during WWII? Legal. The suspension of Habeus Corpus during the Civil War? Legal. The use of poison gas by Saddam Hussien against his own people? Perfectly legal! The liquidation of the Warsaw Ghetto by the NAZI army during WWII? Perfectly legal, though it took a while, since there was armed resistance. There are some who say that that resistance actually aided the Allied war effort, due to the resources of the Wermacht and SS it tied up. They fought against one of the most successful war machines ever created. But they were doomed to eventual failure.
When the government turns against its own people, any acts they commit are perfectly legal.
As bad as the column is, the comments are even worse. Though it explains why the NYT runs the stories and editorials they do... They know their audience. A rather frightening collection of authoritarian left wing moonbats, some of whom feel they would be doing us and the world a favor if we were just shut up and put away somewhere.
Mark
So I guess Mr. Herbert figures the founders were also right-wing lunatics, for they were devout believers in the right to keep and bear arms as the means to overthrow a tyrannical state. Funny he forgot to mention that in his article.
This is not to disparage your point, which is that many people will believe this propaganda rather than the truth. There is no outrage in the NYT for dead conservative babies.
That is a universal truth which we must never forget.
The author, and those who posted comments, are also conveniently ignoring the level of hatred and anger what was leveled at the former POTUS. The vast majority of "outrage" I see is aimed at perfectly legitimate policy disagreements. I guess these people are just so invested in their personal messiah that any criticism of him or his policies is heresy. Compared to the level of hatred aimed at President Bush and his administration, what is going on today is nothing.
Mark
The NYT has a long history of never letting the facts get in the way of the story the editorial board is trying to tell.
There's no doubt that the entire BATF raid was designed to be a tool used by the administration to increase the power and funding of the agency. A successful raid against a chuch and small community could be made to look like a great victory, especially if they controlled the media. Well, they did control the media, but it turned out to be quite a disaster for everone involved, and it required the deaths of many people in order for the government to spin things the way they wanted it.
You are absolutely correct. From interviews of local law enforcement that I had read, had the BATF raid been about actual, legitimate law enforcement activities, Koresh could have been arrested while out in town. Why was the media invited to the raid? Why, when it became obvious that the raid was NOT going to be a surprise, did the BATF open fire on the church? Where were the front doors to the church, which could give evidence to who opened fire first.
There are a lot of questions that have never been answered.
Mark
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.