MY HEAVENS!!!!
Posted on 03/07/2018 6:40:21 AM PST by rktman
And now, from the same people who see a need for 60 different gender options on Facebook, a complaint about gun defenders splitting hairs over word choice.
“While debating the merits of various gun control proposals, Second Amendment enthusiasts often diminish, or outright dismiss their views if they use imprecise firearms terminology,” writes Adam Weinstein in The Washington Post.
Has this happened to you? If so, you’ve been gunsplained: harangued with the pedantry of the more-credible-than-thou firearms owner, admonished that your inferior knowledge of guns and their nomenclature puts an asterisk next to your opinion on gun control.
Think of it as the counterpart to asterisk attached to everyone who dares contradict the pronouncements of the Parkland kids without having been in a similar situation. Creates a nice balance, don’t you think? Anyway, we all know gun controllers' tactics are unimpeachable. “Gunsplaining, though, is always done in bad faith,” asserts Weinstein.
“It can feel infuriating,” Weinstein goes on, “being forced to sweat the finest taxonomic distinctions between our nation’s unlimited variety of lethal weapons.”
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
In the 90s the gun grabbers could still find duck hunters who they could put in front of a camera saying, “No one needs...”. Gun owners have come a long way. They can no longer find a cleavage pane monastic gun owners. Skeet shooters now know if they fail to stand with other gun owners they, too, will end up disarmed. Now that the dullest gun owner has had 20 years to ponder it we all know “FMCDH” is the ONLY answer to give gun grabbers no matter what firearms you chose to own.
Well, of course, if you believe the second amendment guarantees a right to go hunting. Or something.
Hunting bulls eyes at the range perhaps. ;-)
I’m still looking for the gun part that is “the thing in the back that goes up”.
Call the NRA for accessories like that. They just give them away when you purchase an AR-15 at your local NRA gun retail outlet. Face palm!
>
...few people can envision a practical use for these weapons...
>
...Until THEY too are rounded up for the box-cars, re-education camps or...
Unfort., we’ve make it so the STUPID no longer suffer themselves.
Actually, it does. The first clause (militias) does not limit the second clause....it merely clarifies why the second clause is of interest to the federal government.
I once took the time to look up the "Bills of Rights" of the independent nations that became the United States with the ratification of the Constitution.
IIRC, the Connecticut national RKBA went thusly...."every citizen has the right to arms for defense of himself (self defense), his own state (state militia), and the taking of game (hunting)."
I don't disagree. And still, the primary purpose is defense against tyranny.
Yeah - we’re bullies - reminds me of the time a local accosted me on a pier to tell me how terrifying it was to see a gun on my hip - after about 10 minutes of “discussion”, I told him if I was that damn scary, we wouldn’t be having the conversation - he didn’t know how to reply so I bid him good day and left.
IOW, once again, if the facts contradict the narrative, then the facts lie.
Well possibly “intimidaters” at the least. ;-)
Yep - don’t even have to say, “Boo!”, to get them to start twitching in terror....
Good luck with that
Panty waists
Is Matt Philbin having a hissy fit?
5.56mm
Without Private Citizens owning and using the Weapons of War in the late 1700’s, these Morons wouldn’t have a First Amendment Right of a Free Press to shield them as British Subjects.
If they keep pushing they’re going the get belt-fed bullying.
Well that’s just crazy. EVERYBODY knows you “can’t” own machine guns. /s
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.