Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Gun Control After September 11
FOXNEWS ^ | Friday, November 2, 2001 | Glenn Harlan Reynolds

Posted on 11/02/2001 9:09:31 PM PST by Scalia Rules

Edited on 04/22/2004 12:31:31 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

"I think all women oughta carry a cell phone and a three-fifty-seven. Loaded." So declares a woman interviewed by The New Republic's Michelle Cottle.

That statement seems to sum up the post-Sept. 11 attitude toward gun control. Things were already tough for the gun-control movement. Convinced that Al Gore's strong anti-gun stance had cost the Democratic Party the 2000 election, the Democratic Leadership Council had already called for a softer line on gun control. Bill Clinton and former White House spokesman Joe Lockhart had pronounced Gore's stance a mistake. Meanwhile, product-liability suits brought against gun manufacturers were failing miserably in courts from New York to California.


(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...


TOPICS: Extended News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-129 next last

1 posted on 11/02/2001 9:09:32 PM PST by Scalia Rules
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Scalia Rules
"I think all women oughta carry a cell phone and a three-fifty-seven. Loaded." So declares a woman interviewed by The New Republic's Michelle Cottle

Tsk, tsk. I suggest a Colt .45. If she's gonna shoot 'em, might as well send his ass across the street.

2 posted on 11/02/2001 9:21:43 PM PST by Rightwing Canuck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rightwing Canuck
.45's are B.S.

"One shot stopping power" is B.S. To paraphrase Twain, the safest place to be when one's pointed at you is directly in front of it.

9mm is the way to go. Even the US Army thinks so.

3 posted on 11/02/2001 9:27:56 PM PST by Scalia Rules
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: *bang_list
Bang
4 posted on 11/02/2001 9:28:16 PM PST by AStack75
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Scalia Rules; *bang_list
Bumped to the bang_list for easy searching on Second Amendment topics.

Click here to search the bang_list.

5 posted on 11/02/2001 9:28:55 PM PST by Fixit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Scalia Rules
Professor Reynolds has an excellent and entertaining weblog, that should be a regular visit by enlightened Freepers.
6 posted on 11/02/2001 9:29:45 PM PST by NonZeroSum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fixit
Thanks. I might have had mistaken it for a pornography site instead.
7 posted on 11/02/2001 9:30:33 PM PST by Scalia Rules
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Scalia Rules
Hehe ok, I was just kidding :) When I read that line I remember the time I asked my dad what would happen if someone was shot point-blank with a .45, and he said his ass would be across the street. He hardly ever says something like that so it stuck with me.

I actually know very little about firearms, though I most definately support the right to own them. I'm more of a sword man myself.

8 posted on 11/02/2001 9:31:31 PM PST by Rightwing Canuck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: NonZeroSum
Prof. Reynolds is THE Man on the Second Amendment. I am a lawyer myself (actually, I get sworn in to the Illinois bar next Thursday) , but I don't hold it against Reynolds that he's a Yale Law alum.
9 posted on 11/02/2001 9:33:16 PM PST by Scalia Rules
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Scalia Rules
Convinced that Al Gore's strong anti-gun stance had cost the Democratic Party the 2000 election...

They're right to be convinced. Forty-seven percent of the people that voted in November 2000 were gun owners, and I doubt very many of them chose Gore.

10 posted on 11/02/2001 9:33:21 PM PST by Timesink
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rightwing Canuck
Never bring a sword to a gunfight....spokeshave
11 posted on 11/02/2001 9:35:22 PM PST by spokeshave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: spokeshave
Never bring a sword to a gunfight....

What if it's really shiny?

;)

12 posted on 11/02/2001 9:36:51 PM PST by Rightwing Canuck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Rightwing Canuck
Swords certainly have a more noble lineage. In the days of yore, an apprentice warrior would train for years, ever seeking to develop a relationship with his steel. But then firearms came along, and any farm boy with a good eye and steady finger could drop you from 100 yards out.

I am a firearms enthusiast, myself, but I think I'd concede that the decline of the sword, and the attendant advent of firearms did have a decivilizing effect on society.

13 posted on 11/02/2001 9:38:38 PM PST by Scalia Rules
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Scalia Rules
I agree. The knightly ideal took a nose dive once the cold steel of the sword was taken out of the picture.
14 posted on 11/02/2001 9:41:40 PM PST by Rightwing Canuck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: spokeshave
LOL! I like swords, to, but chances are you're not gonna have a sword handy to defend yourself if you get mugged.

It is here that things seem to have changed the most. Americans have learned that being harmless does not guarantee that they will not be harmed: in fact, it seems that terrorists (like ordinary criminals) actually prefer victims who cannot strike back.


People are only figuring this out, now?

Anyway, the writer of the article brings up a lot of good points. I also liked the part about how the gun control crowd hate American manliness. In other words, they want people to be sheep. Victims. They're victims, themselves, and can't stand it when others show the strength of character that they themselves don't possess. Seeing that strength in others shames them. And rather than trying to better themselves, they seek to tear down others to their level.
15 posted on 11/02/2001 9:46:54 PM PST by Green Knight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Scalia Rules
, according to Michael Barone, "It will now be very hard–I would say impossible–for any intellectually honest judge to rule that the Second Amendment means nothing."

Its always been a dishonest arguement.

16 posted on 11/02/2001 9:47:41 PM PST by GeronL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Scalia Rules
indeed, though it is little publicized, much of the gun-control movement’s financial and institutional support comes from non-evangelical Protestant denominations

No doubt members of the National Council of Churches.... if I only had the cash to create a real church!

17 posted on 11/02/2001 9:51:22 PM PST by GeronL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Scalia Rules
I just took my 14 year old son to the NRA range tonight to shoot his new Ruger 22. Celebrate freedom!
18 posted on 11/02/2001 9:55:47 PM PST by JeepInMazar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Scalia Rules
Twain was talking about the infamous "pepperbox" pistol, the black powder cap and ball pistol that had multiple barrels sticking out front, because they often exploded. Had nothing to do with the caliber.

The venerable .45 round is a MUCH better defensive round over the 9mm. True, our military went to the 9mm, but sadly it was not due to any military trials against the .45 whatsoever! In fact, the 9mm was around when we first chose the Colt .45 1911. Nothing in a pistol cartridge for a semi-auto at that time tested as well against live or dead flesh as the .45 round.

Why did we go to 9mm? Because we have women in the military now to consider I recon. Perhaps they felt the .45 was too much gun? Why do the FBI HRT carry the Springfield 1911 in .45? Why do our Special Forces carry H&Ks USPs in .45? There are plenty of great firearms out there in 9mm... -Must be their need for killing quickly.

I have nothing against the 9mm, and have owned several. But if I'm going into a fight, it's with a .45, and that's if I can't carry a rifle.

19 posted on 11/02/2001 9:57:09 PM PST by Dogbert41
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Scalia Rules
The doggies went for the 9mm because they can't shoot worth diddly, and 15 rounds increases the chances of hitting Something, rather than 7 rounds and the RECOIL!, Heavens to Murgatroyd!

Note, if you will, that when cops have the chance to choose and are not hamstrung by PC minded town councils, they prefer John Browning's best. Even the fibbies have gone back to the .45 as a carry piece.

I can personally attest that I watched a Spook, (the Agency kind) put a 30-some round magazine from a 9mm Swedish K into a goober, and wound up caving the guy's head in with the pistol grip and a ballbat swing.

The "spray and pray" method is only good in Hollyweird. Remember, they also invented the sideways 'gansta' hold, which is the best way to tell who is going to win a gunfight.

20 posted on 11/02/2001 9:57:46 PM PST by jonascord
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-129 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson