Posted on 03/07/2018 6:40:21 AM PST by rktman
I never figured it out.
I'd have called the fool a damned liar. As you said, if he had actually been afraid, he'd not have confronted you.
Pretty much what I intimated - I try to be a bit more polite when armed and arguing though....
“Gunsplaining?” Is that anything like “manspreading?”
Just for the record, I’m in favor of “gunspreading.”
How much do they pay some assclown to come up with new terms?
Too much, I’m sure.
“... Gun owners have come a long way. ... Skeet shooters now know if they fail to stand with other gun owners they, too, will end up disarmed. ... the dullest gun owner has had 20 years to ponder it ...” [wasteout, post 23]
Wish this were true. We ought not count on it.
During 24-1/2 years of active duty, I met many members of the officer corps who believed “sporting guns good - military guns bad”. As a shooter & collector of military small arms, and an amateur history student, I was almost alone in my views. Gun snobs abounded; many loved their shotguns and hunting rifles, but dismissed any notion that the (low-ranking) rabble needed to own firearms. I can only assume things are still that way.
Various civilians are worse yet.
We’ve a neighbor: high school history teacher, retired to our area (western SD) from Wisconsin. Grew up in rural Minnesota, hunting from the youngest age. Now age 77, he treasures his late father’s Browning Auto 5 shotgun, and his Ruger 22 auto pistol. Owned a number of other arms and regrets selling them off over the years; longtime member of the North/South Skirmish Ass’n, traveling hundreds of miles to matches in the east.
He boasts of being a socialist, just like his father (WWI combat veteran). No citizen should own a modern military firearm; all corporations are so reprehensible that they deserve to be taxed out of existence. Or so he opines, unasked.
I certainly hope your experience is far less frequent than mine.
Who is more of a crybully than an anti-gun nut?
Small edit.
Thoroughly fascinating.
Factual-sloppiness-as-virtue is not that new an idea: forum members may recall that last year, the Dean of Engineering Education at Purdue declared academic rigor to be morally suspect, because it was used to oppress women and people of “color.” She was not laughed out of her position; the Dean of Engineering promptly declared her support and approval for her colleague, whom she her self had hired, mere months earlier.
Can’t wait to see Adam Weinstein’s book. Among other things, I’m not sure what a Belton gun is. The author does seem characteristically flip about details, a common failing among Left/Progressives (even as they chide the rest of us for supposed “inaccuracies”).
Yet another argument from authority: “I’m a shooter and collector, 3rd generation. Do my bidding because my statements carry more weight.” Sounds just like Ralph Peters, who made a fool of himself last week.
Note the sly appeal to emotion: the late Eugene Stoner’s family is distressed when gun-rights advocates bandy his name about. Pure double-bind verbal acrobatics: anti-gun activists, school-shooting “victims,” and families of deceased engineers must be given greater validity because they are distraught. Feelings are everything, reality nothing.
True enough. I'll admit it makes me a lot more polite.
“...A semi-automatic M1 or M2 Carbine can hold up to 45 rounds of .30 caliber ammunition. A semi-auto 8-shot M1 Garand of World War II vintage fires 30.06 rounds – ideal for hunting dear. ...” [from Matt Philbin’s blog post to newsbusters.org]
newsbusters had better brush up its fact-checking and editing. After this blog post dissecting Adam Weinstein’s article, we can be sure the anti-gun contingent will become extra-picky. To say nothing about hunting deer in preference to dear (some anti-gun ad campaigns have already taken that smarmy route, suggesting that hunters would be better served pursuing illicit sexual liaisons, than going afield pursuing game. Issues of “What is true manliness?” were hinted at).
Waiting to discover where a 45-shot 30 Carbine magazine can be had - not to mention semi-only M2 Carbines. M1 Carbine prices are dear enough as is.
Prospective hunters are advised to leave any M1 Garand they might be fortunate enough to own at home while hunting. Those states that allow hunting deer with autoloading rifles limit magazine capacity to five shots or fewer. Yes, five-shot Garand clips can be purchased, but some jurisdictions will ban Garand use regardless: the plain fact is, originals were built to hold a full eight rounds. Conservation field officers have wiggle-room, but it isn’t smart to expect them to bend rules that far in your favor.
“... In the hands of a law abiding citizen, no weapon is a danger. ...” [South Dakota, post 18]
“In the hands of a law abiding citizen, no weapon is a danger, except to those who would attack him ...”[JimRed, post 50]
I would respectfully submit that South Dakota’s original phrasing describes reality more closely.
A weapon is a tool: no willpower nor moral agency in and of itself.
To paraphrase the late Robert A Heinlein, there are no dangerous weapons, only dangerous men.
And I’ll be bold enough to add this: in the hands of a dangerous man, anything is a weapon.
Semantics. To-may-toe...to-mah-to. It is a danger IF you attack the armed law-abiding citizen, though not of itself. An unarmed law-abiding citizen is less of a danger to his attacker than an armed one. It’s kind’a like arguing how many angels can dance on the head of a pin...as many as God wants!
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.