ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2014 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Friday, January 18, 2013

Guns are for fighting government

Americans haven't completely forgotten their rebel heritage:
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 65% of American Adults think the purpose of the Second Amendment is to make sure that people are able to protect themselves from tyranny. Only 17% disagree, while another 18% are not sure.
The problem is that  those who want a government monopoly on guns are constantly in everyone's face about it, so they leave the false impression that they are more numerous than they are.  Remember, the left is essentially rhetorical and feminine in its tactics, so to them, silence equals consent.  Don't ever keep your mouth shut when someone starts talking about "the need to do something" or making anti-Second Amendment cracks.

Remember Breitbart's advice.  Punch back twice as hard.  If they try to blame freedom advocates for Sandy Hook, blame them for Stalin.  If they compare the US firearms homicide rate to Europe, compare it to Latin America and ask them why they want to leave single black women living in the city unarmed and vulnerable to predators.

Never give them an inch, because they are looking to take a mile.

Labels:

326 Comments:

1 – 200 of 326 Newer› Newest»
Anonymous Heh January 18, 2013 2:42 PM  

65% of American Adults think the purpose of the Second Amendment is to make sure that people are able to protect themselves from tyranny...

And hey, whaddaya know, 66% of Americans think the government has too much power. No doubt this is a coincidence.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/july_2012/66_believe_u_s_has_too_much_government_power_too_little_freedom

Anonymous Brian January 18, 2013 2:46 PM  

Of Course this isn't an 'official' government-approved source, so it won't count

Blogger Conan the Cimmerian, King of Aquilonia January 18, 2013 2:46 PM  

But..but..but...Japan doesn't have guns.

Anonymous Starbuck January 18, 2013 2:46 PM  

So this battle over gun control will come to a head, I wonder if it will explode or just deflate..

Anonymous ODG January 18, 2013 2:47 PM  

"But even before the Newtown shootings, Americans rated the freedoms of speech and religion as more important the freedom of the press and the right to bear arms. "

And what do people think are going to guarantee those 1st Amendment freedoms?

Anonymous mjb January 18, 2013 2:49 PM  

The liberals are playing the emotional card on this. Even that card has no stats to back it up. I play their game for a bit, then remind them that this was intended to prevent tyranny in the US. The common response is that we're all too lazy, too fat, and don't have the ability to take on the military.

The fight is boring to me because they've lost creativity in this battle. They don't have anything that we haven't heard and can be easily dispelled with simple logic. And then we remember that this right shall not be infringed.

You can't reason with a bunch of feminist wimps who get their information from the latest HuffPo or whatever fagrag they now use for their misinformation. They are robots. Wimpy robots.

I agree. Kick them where it counts, and don't worry about leaving them to feel stupid. Maybe a few of them will come around. I'm not holding my breath.

Blogger A January 18, 2013 2:50 PM  

It baffles me that anyone living in the U.S. who lives even remotely near a large city that has a ghetto never think ghettos and gangs are what make up the statistics of gun violence. American whitey gun violence statistics compare with European whitey statistics, it is the brown and black populations that skew the data.

I always see people shut up once the elephant in the room is revealed. They have no way to defend against it except a pitiful accusation of racism, and every circle I've traveled in, when you hear someone say racist it is clear they've lost it emotionally and are no longer arguing. I am thankful to Vox for posting the graphs he had earlier on the gun crime statistics broken down by race. I think those posts should be linked under Voxiversity.

Anonymous onejohn512 January 18, 2013 2:50 PM  

!

Anonymous RINO January 18, 2013 2:56 PM  

I think we're missing the important question here: Why does Vox want more kids to die?

Anonymous Daniel January 18, 2013 3:05 PM  

In other news, Repubs propose to raise the debt limit.

Anonymous Tad January 18, 2013 3:07 PM  

@Vox Day

Recent survey shows 54% want stronger gun control laws. A 53% increase since April.

So, there's this to consider.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/18/us/poll-shows-school-shooting-sways-views-on-guns.html?_r=0

Anonymous raggededge January 18, 2013 3:09 PM  

@Tad

So in my state, the majority of people are in favor of banning abortion. You okay with that?

Anonymous Anonymous January 18, 2013 3:10 PM  

White America has roughly the same murder rate as belgium.

We need n---- control laws

Anonymous Tad January 18, 2013 3:12 PM  

@Raggadege

So in my state, the majority of people are in favor of banning abortion. You okay with that?

I support access to abortion.

Anonymous RINO January 18, 2013 3:14 PM  

I support access to abortion.

So you don't actually have a problem with dead kids? Then why the push for gun control?

Anonymous FrankBrady January 18, 2013 3:15 PM  

This post is absolutely on topic. We've got big trouble coming and it is coming by design.

When Barack Obama first announced his candidacy, I signed up to receive his newsletters. My motive was to get a glimpse of what they were about that might not be covered fully in the media. This morning I received an e-mail announcing the formation of a new mass movement. The goal is to form a mass movement that operates outside the political environment to create public support for the Obama agenda. This is straight out of Saul Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals", a classic neo-Marxist method of mobilizing the mass public. It is Barack Hussein Obama channeling Hugo Chavez to create a cult of personality and generate public hatred for the opposition among an increasingly radicalized underclass of the unemployed, the poor and the uneducated. Given this development, even Obama's economic policies make a twisted sort of sense. His goal is to expand the base of disaffected angry people, making them available for mobilization as well. This must be stopped, strangled in the womb.

The video may be found at https://my.barackobama.com/page/share/neworganization.

Blogger W.LindsayWheeler January 18, 2013 3:16 PM  

Almost every school shooter or mass killer were on psych meds or coming off of them.

The Columbine killers were Atheists.

From an email message sent to me:


Ft Hood - Registered Democrat- Muslim

Columbine - Too young to vote - both families were registered democrats and progressive liberals

VA Tech - Wrote hate mail to Pres Bush and to his staff. Registered Democrat

Colorado Theater - Registered Democrat, staff worker on the Obama campaign, occupy wall street participant, progressive liberal

Connecticut School Shooter - Registered Democrat, hated Christians

Common thread is that all of these shooters were progressive liberal democrats."

I would say all the mass shooters have been leftists. Where is the media on this? Has anybody noticed this? It is liberal society that produces these monsters, the ACLU protects their "rights" and schools produce them.

America is a sick society. It has been for awhile.


Blogger ajw308 January 18, 2013 3:16 PM  

When arguing with liberals, point out that Columbine happened during the Clinton gun ban. Ask the liberal how many lives a 10 round magazine rule will save (are the 2nd graders trained to rush the shooter during mag changes?). Ask them if 10 deaths are OK, but 11 aren't. Take the offense, rock them back on their heels and step on their toes.

Tad, The NYT isn't to be trusted and surveys can use weasel words/questions to achieve the results they want. I'd guess the recent surveys you reference ask vague questions like "Should children be safe in school?" and when answered with the affirmative, it's interpreted as a wish for more gun laws.

Ignore the polls, look at the flood of dollars, recent purchases show that Americans want more guns.

Anonymous RINO January 18, 2013 3:19 PM  

Almost every school shooter or mass killer were on psych meds or coming off of them.

What exactly is shocking about that? Crazy and depressed people usually take various steps before going on a shooting spree.

Anonymous mjb January 18, 2013 3:19 PM  

Tad likes a survey that makes him feel good about dead kids.

Anonymous Daniel January 18, 2013 3:20 PM  

I am weeping with laughter and hoping that my tears don't somehow dissolve Tad's intricate bioarchitecture of lipoproteins that have developed over the years to compensate for his total lack of backbone or brains.

Doggone, that was funny.

Anonymous Stilicho January 18, 2013 3:21 PM  

I am thankful to Vox for posting the graphs he had earlier on the gun crime statistics broken down by race. I think those posts should be linked under Voxiversity.

yep. Permanent link needed.

Anonymous Stilicho January 18, 2013 3:22 PM  

Wheeler: do you have links that support those assertions re: party and religious affiliation? I'd be interested in reading them.

Anonymous Jabari January 18, 2013 3:23 PM  

I support access to abortion.

That doesn't at all answer the question asked.

Let's try again:
So in my state, the majority of people are in favor of banning abortion. Are you ok with the majority getting their way and abortion being illegal in that state?

Anonymous Decidedly discouraged now January 18, 2013 3:32 PM  

Apparently the military hasn't either

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jan/17/west-point-center-cites-dangers-far-right-us/

You like liberty? You're a terrorist. This from West Point.

Anyone who thinks that most of those soldiers won't fire on citizens is overly optimistic. They'll get the order to fire, that's clear now. Most will follow that order, that's historically verified.

Anonymous . January 18, 2013 3:36 PM  

@ Decidedly discouraged now,

You may not be thinking about fighting the government, but the government is thinking about fighting you.

Anonymous stg58/Animal Mother January 18, 2013 3:36 PM  

I think we also just identified roughly the percentage of Americans who are gun owners.

Blogger The Great and Powerful Oz January 18, 2013 3:42 PM  

One of the facts that has gotten lost in modern society is about the famous ride of Paul Revere. How many people these days know why the British Army was marching?

In case you don't know, it was a surprise raid to disarm the colonists.

Anonymous Starbuck January 18, 2013 3:44 PM  

I support access to abortion. - Tad

Well... That certianly speaks a lot about you doesn't it?
I am thinking you do not believe in god either. A despicable atheist. (*SPIT*)

You disgust me beyond words.

Anonymous Mina January 18, 2013 3:47 PM  

FrankBrady January 18, 2013 3:15 PM: Seems innocent enough.

Don't they all, at the beginning?

Anonymous Question January 18, 2013 3:51 PM  

Decidedly discouraged now: You like liberty? You're a terrorist. This from West Point.

Oklahoma City bombing, Branch Davidians, and Ruby Ridge. Before 9/11 far-right extremists were responsible for most of the major news grabbing terrorist action of the 90s. Now right wing fanatics don't really compare to Islamic fanatics in terms of dedication and resolve but they can still be a threat.

Blogger Nate January 18, 2013 3:53 PM  

"Oklahoma City bombing, Branch Davidians, and Ruby Ridge. Before 9/11 far-right extremists were responsible for most of the major news grabbing terrorist action of the 90s."

WACO and Ruby Ridge were federal attacks on US citizens you blithering idiot. David Koresh was a licensed Class III weapons dealer. He was selling guns legally. The atf raid was over a 300 dollar tax stamp that they thought he hadn't paid... turns out he actually did.

There were no charges brought against anyone at Ruby Ridge. ok well... except for some of the federals that opened fire for no damned reason.

Piss off moron.

Blogger Nate January 18, 2013 3:54 PM  

And don't even try to blame OKC on right wing extremists. It was an iraqi terrorist attack.

Anonymous dh January 18, 2013 3:55 PM  

Wheeler--

Do you have a link to the source of the registration information?

I have read everything I have been able to find on Holms, and had not seen his voter registration information. He did have a serious problem with the Fed, (like Athe rizona shooter), so that would be an interesting mix of politics.

Anonymous Idle Spectator January 18, 2013 3:56 PM  

Hooded Islamics Walk London, Enforcing Alcohol Bans

I'm wondering at what point the British are going to have enough of this stupid bullshit? I'm not even British and I am pissed. This is why you need guns.

"If you don't like alcohol, you are really not going to like this..."

As I whip out my gun.

Reminds me of Muslim fighters in Mali, as they hide in the cities amongst normal residents. Firebomb the entire city. Trust me, they'll get the message. You'll only need to do it a couple of times. "Hmmmmm I smell pork cooking. That is unislamic!" they'll all scream with much throaty vigor.

Anonymous Mina January 18, 2013 3:57 PM  

Destroy Gun Control:

... "using the bayonet." In the 18th and 19th century, a charge with cold arms- the bayonet, lance, or sabre- could be carried home only against demoralized, poorly-trained, or cowardly troops. No commander in his right mind would order a rush, for example, against a steady line or square of Wellington's Redcoats. But we can imagine Marshal Suvorov looking at an equivocating, evading, double-talking mass and yelling with delight, "Cossack bait!" or "Give 'em the cold steel!"

In the political arena, we are of course talking about people in weak, indefensible, or intellectually dishonest positions: the Feinsteins, Kennedys, Rowans, and Clintons. In such a case, there is no need to be polite, respectful, or even circumspect; one can and should roll right over them.

The Political Equivalent of the Bayonet
------------------------------------------
When confronted with an unsteady, evading, dodging, equivocating, doubletalking, and hypocritical Feinstein, Kennedy, Rowan, Moseley-Braun, or Clinton, for example...

When 'shock value' is appropriate, e.g. when engaged in a debate, to shake the opponent (and get the audience's attention) with unpleasant facts, as opposed to an ad hominem attack"

http://www.stentorian.com/2ndamend/strategy.html

Anonymous dh January 18, 2013 3:59 PM  

There were no charges brought against anyone at Ruby Ridge. ok well... except for some of the federals that opened fire for no damned reason.
I think you are confused, Weaver did jail time.

Anonymous Question January 18, 2013 4:02 PM  

Nate: WACO and Ruby Ridge were federal attacks on US citizens you blithering idiot. David Koresh was a licensed Class III weapons dealer. He was selling guns legally. The atf raid was over a 300 dollar tax stamp that they thought he hadn't paid... turns out he actually did.

There were no charges brought against anyone at Ruby Ridge. ok well... except for some of the federals that opened fire for no damned reason.


That is what Timothy McVeigh thought too and the reason he blew up the OKC building on the anniversary of the Branch Davidian compound burning. Strike a blow for freedom by killing 19 little kids at day care along with a hundred other people.

Anonymous Unending Improvement January 18, 2013 4:02 PM  

Some of the arguments ya'll are pushing would backfire. Especially this one:

"Ask the liberal how many lives a 10 round magazine rule will save (are the 2nd graders trained to rush the shooter during mag changes?). Ask them if 10 deaths are OK, but 11 aren't. Take the offense, rock them back on their heels and step on their toes."

This would only embolden the "Ban them all instantly" subsection of gun control, and if the "Let's take this one step at a time" crowd gets their first initiative pushed through, they'll use that as a reason to add another restriction.

Then one day Americans will wake up with their dicks in their hands wondering "Why?".

Anonymous Outlaw X January 18, 2013 4:02 PM  

Vox, you suffer from Oppositional defiant disorder. You mentally ill blogger you. I heard Mike Adams laughing about it on AJ's show and thought, hey that is my friend, Vox.

Anonymous DrW January 18, 2013 4:03 PM  

There is a big difference between soldiers in the military and West Point officers...

Anonymous Outlaw X January 18, 2013 4:04 PM  

Nate, so do you.

Blogger ajw308 January 18, 2013 4:04 PM  

The US Air Forces top bomb damage assessment expert will point out proof that the structure of the Murrah had contact explosives on it after explaining how, if the fertilizer bomb had the detonator in the middle of a spherical (hard to achieve in barrels) configuration, it might have broken the windows.

McVeigh, who'd tell you that Science was his religion, was not allowed in the Michigan Militia because he supported the Clinton Health Care Plan.

Coulda been an Iraqi attack, but it served the current administration all to well. If it's going to be pinned on someone, athiest democrats seem to be tied with Iraqi operatives (the swarthy John Doe #2), but either way, it's kinda hard to pin in anyone clinging to their guns & bibles.

Anonymous Red January 18, 2013 4:07 PM  

The Oklahoma City bombing still fascinates me. It's clear that the bomber was couldn't get laid and decided to something violent to attract a mate. The really screwy thing with the case is this: The governmental and specifically our current attorney general Eric Holder had him under surveillance.

They then left him alone/lost track of him for 8 months while he tested and perfected his detonator. His neighbors repeatedly called the cops about him blowing things up with his test detonators but the cops didn't bother to investigate.

It seems that terrorism primarily succeeds though the incompetence/ or forbearance of our leaders. When you consider that everyone who failed to stop 911 and Oklahoma city were promoted for their failures and that their political and economic futures are enhanced by such attacks why wouldn't they do everything to encourage such attacks? Incentives matter.

Anonymous DCM January 18, 2013 4:13 PM  

"Oklahoma City bombing, Branch Davidians, and Ruby Ridge. Before 9/11 far-right extremists were responsible for most of the major news grabbing terrorist action of the 90s. Now right wing fanatics don't really compare to Islamic fanatics in terms of dedication and resolve but they can still be a threat."

Let's get the facts straight. The Branch Davidians were a religious group. Randy Weaver (Ruby Ridge) was a shade-tree gunsmith who believed that the apocalypse was imminent.

They were religious kooks, by most people's standards, but they weren't "far-right extremists" or "right wing fanatics." And it was the federal government that attacked them, not the other way around.

Timothy McVeigh claimed that the Oklahoma City bombing was was revenge for "what the U.S. government did at Waco [Branch Davidians] and Ruby Ridge."

Anonymous Mina January 18, 2013 4:15 PM  

"Some of the arguments ya'll are pushing would backfire."

Facts are facts, unpleasant though they be.

Inflaming the opposition has to be part of the strategy. Otherwise you're just a doormat.

Anonymous dh January 18, 2013 4:20 PM  

DCM--

I didn't know anything about the OKC bombing either, and I was challend on it by, I think Nate.

I did my own research, and worked on the details of the math a little, and also had some concerns. (A few things that were originally claimed here turned out to be a little inaccurate, distances/weights/etc). The gist of what was intimated was that the bomb blast that occured could not have been caused by the bomb that was built by the convicted bombers.

I couldn't come to a resolution on my own, but I did request the entire case file via FOIA to the DOJ.

Anonymous Question January 18, 2013 4:22 PM  

DCM: They were religious kooks, by most people's standards, but they weren't "far-right extremists" or "right wing fanatics."

If they weren't far-right extremists who are? I know most of you here want to imagine that your views are some how centrist and popular and not only held by a disenfranchised minority but they aren't. Timmothy McVeigh, David Koresh, and Randy Weaver are all right wing fanatics and any attempts to deny that are just examples of the "no true Scotsman" or "moving goalpost" fallicies VD is so fond of accusing others of.

Blogger Nate January 18, 2013 4:23 PM  

"I think you are confused, Weaver did jail time."

Yes. for failure to appear. All the gun charges were thrown out. All violence was ruled justifiable homocide in defense of life and property.

Blogger Conan the Cimmerian, King of Aquilonia January 18, 2013 4:24 PM  

Randy Weaver claims to be an atheist:

Randy Weaver was one of four children born to Clarence and Wilma Weaver, a farming couple from Villisca, Iowa. The Weavers were deeply religious and had difficulty finding a denomination that matched their views; hence, they often moved around among Evangelical, Presbyterian, and Baptist churches. Weaver earned decent grades in school and played baseball and football in high school. He professed his faith in Jesus Christ at age 11, however at a 2007 news conference for Edward and Elaine Brown he stated : "I ain't afraid of dying no more. I'm curious about the afterlife. And I'm an atheist."

Blogger Nate January 18, 2013 4:24 PM  

"That is what Timothy McVeigh thought too and the reason he blew up the OKC building on the anniversary of the Branch Davidian compound burning. Strike a blow for freedom by killing 19 little kids at day care along with a hundred other people."

How odd it must be to live in a world where a fertilizer bomb 100 feet away can blowup a building made to withstand military bombs.

Blogger Conan the Cimmerian, King of Aquilonia January 18, 2013 4:27 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Anonymous Cryan Ryan January 18, 2013 4:30 PM  

A question for Tad.

Which of the following is the dumbest?

a) a Christian fellow using scripture to debate an atheist who holds the Holy Bible in contempt.

b) an NRA member using NRA poll results to debate a leftist, NRA scorning, gun control advocate.

c) a gun control advocate using NYT poll results to try to debate a gun owning, NYT scorning, NRA member.




Anonymous Question January 18, 2013 4:32 PM  

Conan the Cimmerian, King of Aquilonia: Yes, someone claiming to be an atheist sure enough fits the the new true Scotsman fallacy.

If you had actually read the article he had posted a link to instead of just having a knee-jerk reaction you would of seen this

The report issued this week by the Combating Terrorism Center at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, N.Y., is titled “Challengers from the Sidelines: Understanding America’s Violent Far-Right.”

The center — part of the institution where men and women are molded into Army officers — posted the report Tuesday. It lumps limited government activists with three movements it identifies as “a racist/white supremacy movement, an anti-federalist movement and a fundamentalist movement.”

Anonymous Question January 18, 2013 4:34 PM  

Conan the Cimmerian, King of Aquilonia: This comment has been removed by the author.

Rofl I see that you did read it.

Anonymous Jake January 18, 2013 4:36 PM  

Even if you can call Weaver and Koresh right wingers what of it? What'd they do precisely that makes them evil terrorists? Fall into ill-repute with the federal government? Given the people who are on good terms with the feds I'd call that a mark of quality.

A little weird perhaps, but neither had done anything that justified any action by any authority, much less multi-million dollar military-style assaults by federal murder-teams.

McVeigh is hard to figure, but the guy just reeks of patsy/provocateur. If that was the case then what his ideology was (if he had any) is pretty irrelevant.

Blogger Conan the Cimmerian, King of Aquilonia January 18, 2013 4:37 PM  

Weaver is not a "religious kook" as atheist is not typicaly defined in that manner.

Anonymous Outlaw X January 18, 2013 4:38 PM  

Nate:"How odd it must be to live in a world where a fertilizer bomb 100 feet away can blowup a building made to withstand military bombs."

I was there several weeks after and never talked about it. It was the biggest bullshit story a physicist was ever told. That is all I will say, My best friends wife's relative was killed over it, he was the first doctor on the scene doing triage. He saw it all and they killed him.

Anonymous Question January 18, 2013 4:38 PM  

Cryan Ryan:A question for Tad.

Which of the following is the dumbest?

a) a Christian fellow using scripture to debate an atheist who holds the Holy Bible in contempt.

b) an NRA member using NRA poll results to debate a leftist, NRA scorning, gun control advocate.

c) a gun control advocate using NYT poll results to try to debate a gun owning, NYT scorning, NRA member.


Thats an easy answer given NYT's Nate Silvers utter demolishing of conservative presidential polling and models. I would of thought the right would of learned something about biased polls from that debacle.

Anonymous FrankBrady January 18, 2013 4:40 PM  

@Question, what in your view is the definition of a "right wing extremist"? What qualifies one to wear that label?

Does being placed in that category, however defined, make them legitimate targets for killing by the government.

Anonymous FrankBrady January 18, 2013 4:43 PM  

@Question.

Thats an easy answer given NYT's Nate Silvers utter demolishing of conservative presidential polling and models.

...and the connection is?

Anonymous Question January 18, 2013 4:43 PM  

Conan the Cimmerian, King of Aquilonia: Weaver is not a "religious kook" as atheist is not typicaly defined in that manner.

Are you talking to me or DCM? Because DCM was the one who called him a "religious kook" I just called him a right wing fanatic. Like my quote above stated anti-government sentiment, racism, and fundamentalism are related but not necessarily found in each individual hence the broad term "far-right".

Anonymous Stilicho January 18, 2013 4:45 PM  

@Question what was the difference between Silver's prediction based on his review/amalgamation of others' polls and the final RCP average?

Blogger Conan the Cimmerian, King of Aquilonia January 18, 2013 4:46 PM  

Not you Question.
Sorry for the confusion.

Simply stated, Weaver claims atheism.

Blogger W.LindsayWheeler January 18, 2013 4:48 PM  

@Stilcho, I have no links for that info. Some research ought to yield corroboration. Most of our shooters have been leftists.

The problem is not "Molon Labe" but it is money. Hussein Obama is doing a run around, to fund anti-gun groups with taxpayer money. Here is the link for that:

Tax dollars for gun control

This is how the Left wins and controls everything--they get government money and grants. It is all about money. It is very hard to conduct war without money.

Anonymous Outlaw X January 18, 2013 4:57 PM  

Bye the way Nate the police officer he was working with was killed as well, and tortured before they killed him. You can find his name (The Doctor) but you can't find how he was killed, I know exactly what they did.

Anonymous Tad January 18, 2013 5:03 PM  

@Jabari

So in my state, the majority of people are in favor of banning abortion. Are you ok with the majority getting their way and abortion being illegal in that state?

What do you mean by "OK"? If it happens and is done in a legitimate manner I accept it. But I wouldn't support it.

Anonymous Tad January 18, 2013 5:05 PM  

@Rino

I support access to abortion.

So you don't actually have a problem with dead kids? Then why the push for gun control?


I don't see the connection. A Kid isn't an embryo.

Anonymous stg58/Animal Mother January 18, 2013 5:07 PM  

Trentadue, I think was his name. Jesse.

Anonymous Tad January 18, 2013 5:07 PM  

@Starbuck


You disgust me beyond words.


I can only imagine your surprise when you discover I don't care what disgusts you.

Anonymous stats79 January 18, 2013 5:09 PM  

"I don't see the connection. A Kid isn't an embryo."

Oh, I see distinction, one is in the womb, and the other is not. As long as the "kid" is in the womb, we can dehumanize and kill. Works for me.

Anonymous Sojourner January 18, 2013 5:10 PM  

Realized I was too young at the time to know the details of Ruby Ridge and decided to look it up. What a sickening event. And people think the government can't come after them? Please. All that over stupid charges and government overstep.

Anonymous Tad January 18, 2013 5:11 PM  

@Ryan

A question for Tad.

Which of the following is the dumbest?


I haven't seen the details of the poll that Vox Day cites, nor the details of the poll I cited. However, I rather doubt they are in any way mutually exclusive.

Anonymous Tad January 18, 2013 5:13 PM  

@stats

Oh, I see distinction, one is in the womb, and the other is not. As long as the "kid" is in the womb, we can dehumanize and kill. Works for me.

Works for me too...But only to a certain degree.

Anonymous Unending Improvement January 18, 2013 5:24 PM  

Given how badly Rasmussen fucked up the polling leading up to the election, there is plenty of reason to cast doubt on these results. OTOH, since they said 2/3 of Americans believe the 2nd Amendment is a safeguard against tyranny, I'm willing to say that holds true for at least 50% of the country.

Anonymous Cinco January 18, 2013 5:25 PM  

@Tad

Have you considered for a single moment that if the government can infringe on your "right to keep and bear arms," that they can also infringe on your "right to life and liberty?"

I don't know whether you will end up driving the train, or riding as a passenger; either way, you will be waiving goodbye to America.

Anonymous raggededge January 18, 2013 5:27 PM  


So in my state, the majority of people are in favor of banning abortion. Are you ok with the majority getting their way and abortion being illegal in that state?

What do you mean by "OK"? If it happens and is done in a legitimate manner I accept it. But I wouldn't support it.


Liar. Same principle should apply to gun ownership. Majority of people want fully automatic weapons, you should accept it.

Anonymous Tad January 18, 2013 5:29 PM  

By the way....From the poll that Vox Day cited we also learn:

--86% of American Adults believe a strict background check should be required for anyone looking to buy a gun.

--55% of American Adults think there should be a ban on the purchase of semi-automatic and assault-type weapons.

Anonymous Tad January 18, 2013 5:32 PM  

@Cinco

Have you considered for a single moment that if the government can infringe on your "right to keep and bear arms," that they can also infringe on your "right to life and liberty?"

I know that there are limits that are Constitutional that may be placed on our 1st amendment and 2nd amendment rights. You make it sound as though these right come with no limits at all. That's crazy talk.

"My life and Liberty"? Liberty to do what, Cinco? We have never had the liberty to do whatever we please.

Anonymous Shutup, Tad January 18, 2013 5:32 PM  

.

Anonymous Unending Improvement January 18, 2013 5:33 PM  

"--55% of American Adults think there should be a ban on the purchase of semi-automatic and assault-type weapons."

It's pretty interesting that they omitted that from the abstract, and a pretty bad sign for those of us who fervently believe in the 2nd Amendment.

Anonymous Tad January 18, 2013 5:33 PM  

@Raggededge

Liar. Same principle should apply to gun ownership. Majority of people want fully automatic weapons, you should accept it.

Yes, if via the political process automatic weapons were made legal I'd accept it. But I wouldn't support it. And I'd do what I can to repeal the law. You aren't making sense.

Anonymous 11B January 18, 2013 5:34 PM  

It baffles me that anyone living in the U.S. who lives even remotely near a large city that has a ghetto never think ghettos and gangs are what make up the statistics of gun violence. American whitey gun violence statistics compare with European whitey statistics, it is the brown and black populations that skew the data.

In 1991 during the Gulf War the media promoted the idea that blacks served in disproportionate numbers in combat, and thus paid a higher price in war. This was done as a way to berate the government to enact more policies seen as beneficial to the black community as payback for greedy America's desire to use poor minorities as cannon fodder in our wars.

However, images from that war and the current wars have become so prevalent that most people realize combat units are very white and elite units are in fact overwhelmingly white. In fact certain units that receive public fame, like the SEALs, are being pressured to diversify lest the public become too fond of their current composition.

Likewise, the media is trying to use the relatively high violent crime rate of America versus the low rates of Canada and the EU as a way to disarm the dreaded rednecks. However, by continually comparing us to those nations, it must come out, as it has already begun to do, that those nations have drastically different demographics. The fact that white America has a comparable violent crime rate to the effeminate EU and Canada is going to become more widely known in the coming months. This should have a positive impact on the pro 2A side of the debate.

And if that shifts the debate from the need to disarm rednecks to the need to disarm violent NAMs, the left might not be able to continue arguing since it would only serve to highlight the deficiencies of their pet group.

Anonymous Tad January 18, 2013 5:34 PM  

@Unending

It's pretty interesting that they omitted that from the abstract, and a pretty bad sign for those of us who fervently believe in the 2nd Amendment.

It's only a bad sign for those uneducated folks who think right come with no limits.

Anonymous Unending Improvement January 18, 2013 5:36 PM  

"It's only a bad sign for those uneducated folks who think right come with no limits."

So where did it say "with the exception of semi-automatics?"

Please tell me the USSC case that established that semi-automatic weapons are not protected under the 2nd Amendment.

And you would prefer guns being banned outright anyways, you just know an all at once push would never fly.

Anonymous Tad January 18, 2013 5:37 PM  

@11b

The fact that white America has a comparable violent crime rate to the effeminate EU and Canada is going to become more widely known in the coming months.

It would be interesting to track gun violence and socioeconomic status.

Anonymous Tad January 18, 2013 5:38 PM  

@Unending

Please tell me the USSC case that established that semi-automatic weapons are not protected under the 2nd Amendment.

I think we get the best argument for this in Scalia's "Heller" decision. That said, do you believe that all Americans have the right to keep and bear nuclear weapons?

Anonymous Salt January 18, 2013 5:39 PM  

Liar. Same principle should apply to gun ownership. Majority of people want fully automatic weapons, you should accept it.

Yes, if via the political process automatic weapons were made legal I'd accept it. But I wouldn't support it. And I'd do what I can to repeal the law. You aren't making sense.


Actually full auto should be legal, begin as the founders thought it best that the people be on par with the military. As it stands the people are at a disadvantage from the onset.

Anonymous Unending Improvement January 18, 2013 5:40 PM  

"I think we get the best argument for this in Scalia's "Heller" decision. That said, do you believe that all Americans have the right to keep and bear nuclear weapons?"

That said would you stop asking irrelevant questions? I already stated my position on nuclear weapons before.

Again, no "Semi-autos are not protected".

Anonymous Daniel January 18, 2013 5:40 PM  

Yes, if via the political process automatic weapons were made legal I'd accept it.

They were until the tommy-gun ban put automatic weapons solely in the hands of the mob. So basically, you are saying that you are for any law that exists via the political process, and if it is overturned via the political process, you change your mind and reject it. Whatever the law is, even if it changes to its opposite, you are good with whatever your political betters think.

Your personal opinion is effectively immaterial.

Newsflash, Tad. We already knew this.

Anonymous 11B January 18, 2013 5:40 PM  

By the way....From the poll that Vox Day cited we also learn:

--55% of American Adults think there should be a ban on the purchase of semi-automatic and assault-type weapons.


Tad,

Before I put too much credence into that portion of the poll, I would like to see how many Americans even know what an automatic, semi-automatic, or assault weapon are.

It's sort of like asking Americans if they support bombing Serbia over Kosovo when over half of those surveyed a) can't locate Serbia on a map, and b) have never heard of Kosovo prior to being asked about it by the pollster.

Anonymous R7 Rocket January 18, 2013 5:41 PM  

"Anyone who thinks that most of those soldiers won't fire on citizens is overly optimistic. They'll get the order to fire, that's clear now. Most will follow that order, that's historically verified."

They won't obey those orders, if they're not getting paid.

Anonymous Salt January 18, 2013 5:41 PM  

I think we get the best argument for this in Scalia's "Heller" decision. That said, do you believe that all Americans have the right to keep and bear nuclear weapons?

A nuke is not a weapon of the common soldier. Now a LAW or hand held Stinger is.

Anonymous Daniel January 18, 2013 5:43 PM  

do you believe that all Americans have the right to keep and bear nuclear weapons?

Yes. A thousand times yes. In fact, if I could have a mere three nukes, one for each branch of government (if necessary, of course. It isn't like I've got a hair trigger or anything) I would be willing to consider not fully opposing legislation that requires a 15-minute waiting period on guns that look like they are from a movie.

Anonymous Question January 18, 2013 5:44 PM  

Salt: Actually full auto should be legal, begin as the founders thought it best that the people be on par with the military. As it stands the people are at a disadvantage from the onset.

I want to be able to buy hand grenades at Wal-Mart. Or get a TOW missile mounted on top of my SUV. Would make getting through traffic easier.

Anonymous 11B January 18, 2013 5:46 PM  

It would be interesting to track gun violence and socioeconomic status.

Tad, I would like to see this for the white community. In America we have a large wealth gap among whites. Urban coastal whites are extremely wealthy and many rural whites live below the poverty line.

I am no expert on Europe, but I think that in places like Norway, Switzerland and Finland, the whites are all pretty close in socioeconomic status. There is not the extreme gap that exists here.

Yet, if the statistics are true, then white America, with its stratified wealth gap, has similar violent crime to more egalitarian places in Northern Europe. If this is true, it would only make our NAMs look even worse.

Anonymous R7 Rocket January 18, 2013 5:48 PM  

"It is all about money. It is very hard to conduct war without money."

I agree. And yet somehow the arrogant leftists think they can have a bankrupt fed govt win a second civil war.

Anonymous Noah B. January 18, 2013 5:48 PM  

"I think we get the best argument for this in Scalia's "Heller" decision."

The Heller decision did not overturn U.S. v. Miller, which held that individuals have the right to bear military weapons in no uncertain terms. The continued enforcement of the NFA is contrary to the court's decision in U.S. v. Miller.

Anonymous RedJack January 18, 2013 5:51 PM  

And back to nukes.

So let me say this.

There used to be privatly held cannons, warships, and armored trails (possibly some tanks, but they were kind of hard to come by). The justification was the 2nd amendment.

If I say "ok, the State can keep the nukes", would you support me having an Abrahms tank (with main gun)? After all, crew served, portable artillery were definitly in private hands after the signging of the Constitution. Even early crew severed machine guns.

Anonymous Jake January 18, 2013 5:51 PM  

Tad doesn't understand what a Right is. He's probably about to say "you don't have the right to yell fire in a theater" or some other non-sense tripe. That or quote some court case, as if a lawyer turned politician were the authority on what our rights are.

Life Liberty and Property Tad, where do you draw a legitimate "limit" on our these rights? How do you put a limit on "do not kill others" "do not tell others what to do" and "do not take other people's stuff". I KNOW it's done, but how do you justify it?

Anonymous Signe January 18, 2013 5:52 PM  

I agree. And yet somehow the arrogant leftists think they can have a bankrupt fed govt win a second civil war.

Sure, all you have to do is print more! Yay, problem solved!

The Left is firmly convinced that all you have to do is want something bad enough, and it will have to happen. Wishing upon a star optional.

Anonymous R7 Rocket January 18, 2013 5:53 PM  

"It would be interesting to track gun violence and socioeconomic status."

I suspect that Tad rejects evolution.

Anonymous RedJack January 18, 2013 5:53 PM  

Served.. God I hate the auto complete on my phone!!!!

Anonymous R7 Rocket January 18, 2013 5:54 PM  

"That said, do you believe that all Americans have the right to keep and bear nuclear weapons?"

Tad, can you carry a nuclear weapon on your back?

Anonymous Jake January 18, 2013 5:58 PM  

"I want to be able to buy hand grenades at Wal-Mart. Or get a TOW missile mounted on top of my SUV. Would make getting through traffic easier."

You confusion owning a weapon with using it to commit violence. You'd know more have people using TOW missles on traffic jams than you have people randomly shooting the driver ahead of them. Both are illegal and in a more civilized world would be liable to get you shot long before the police get there to arrest you.

And who'd want a TOW missile anyway? Most people can't afford to shoot a .50 BMG... the $/rd of a TOW missile would be a serious problem.

Anonymous Porky? January 18, 2013 6:00 PM  

"I think we get the best argument for this in Scalia's "Heller" decision."

Scalia cited "Miller" in that decision too. The public can own military weapons. Period.

Anonymous R7 Rocket January 18, 2013 6:01 PM  

"Sure, all you have to do is print more! Yay, problem solved!"

It turned out that the worthless Zimbabwe Dollar wasn't sufficient to keep Mugabe's police chiefs and generals loyal. He had to turn to China for real currency. Somehow, I don't think China has the cash to pay for dealing with an American civil war.

Anonymous Porky? January 18, 2013 6:14 PM  

Salt: "A nuke is not a weapon of the common soldier. Now a LAW or hand held Stinger is."

Wrong. Tactical nukes include nuke land mines and other small nuke ordnance.

And show me where the 2nd amendment stipulates "weapon of the common soldier".

Anonymous R7 Rocket January 18, 2013 6:24 PM  

"Wrong. Tactical nukes include nuke land mines and other small nuke ordnance. "

The Davy Crocket nuke was man portable. The problem? It was expensive and unreliable with a yield not much larger than a truck bomb. And truck bombs are much cheaper and easier to make.

Anonymous Salt January 18, 2013 6:27 PM  

And show me where the 2nd amendment stipulates "weapon of the common soldier".

IIRC, and this is from memory, it's inferred from writing about it. That a member of the Militia was to supply his own kit and weapon of the times.

Now it's possible someone might have their own navel equal vessel. Pretty rare though as to the population. Now days that would like having your own F-18. Feel free. Personally I couldn't afford one, or even pay for the gas just to get it to altitude.

I do see F-18s, grenades, Stingers, etc as being pretty common, each operable by a single person.


Anonymous Noah B. January 18, 2013 6:29 PM  

And George Soros does far more damage with Media Matters than he ever could with an F-18. Ditto for Ted Turner and CNN.

Anonymous Porky? January 18, 2013 6:32 PM  

IIRC, and this is from memory, it's inferred from writing about it. That a member of the Militia was to supply his own kit and weapon of the times.

Among the things that the British tried to take from our well regulated militia were heavy guns and cannon.

Anonymous Salt January 18, 2013 6:34 PM  

I think trying to count coo with arguing exotic weapons or weapons one could not easily use is fruitless. Better to watch Dances With Wolves and clean your ARs.

Anonymous Tad January 18, 2013 6:36 PM  

@Daniel

They were until the tommy-gun ban put automatic weapons solely in the hands of the mob. So basically, you are saying that you are for any law that exists via the political process, and if it is overturned via the political process, you change your mind and reject it. Whatever the law is, even if it changes to its opposite, you are good with whatever your political betters think.

You misunderstand.

If a law is passed and implemented via a legitimate political process, then I recognize it as the law of the land and as legitimate. However, that doesn't mean I support (agree with) it. That would be the case with laws allowing the possession of automatic weapons as well as laws that ban abortion, both of which i would not support and likely help to overturn.

Anonymous Mina January 18, 2013 6:39 PM  

Tad is quite happy to stay and keep visiting as long as he has someone to talk to.

Anonymous Tad January 18, 2013 6:42 PM  

@Mina

And you remain oddly obsessed with me. Very odd. And creepy.

Anonymous ENthePeasant January 18, 2013 6:43 PM  

Thanks VD. You're dead on.

Anonymous Raggededge January 18, 2013 6:51 PM  

@Tad:

You misunderstand

Oh no, I understand very clearly that you are a lying little weasel. The question was, if a majority of the people favor a ban on abortion, should be a law then be passed to ban abortion?

Anonymous Porky? January 18, 2013 6:51 PM  

The Davy Crocket nuke was man portable.

Quite true. Remember that in the Miller decision the court said that they "had no knowledge" of the particular shotgun being used by the military. Had they known how wrong they were they certainly wouldn't have upheld it's banning.

We can presume the same with a Davy Crockett.

Anonymous Anonymous January 18, 2013 6:54 PM  

@ Porky,

also one must remember that in the Miller case, the defense was not present, so the US attorney got up and lied to the Supreme Court with no one there to rebut it.

frenchy

Anonymous Razoraid January 18, 2013 6:55 PM  

And you remain oddly obsessed with me. Very odd. And creepy.

Oddly enough, I still make love to your pillow when you're not around.

Blogger Joe A. January 18, 2013 6:55 PM  

The second amendment was written to keep slaves in their place. Danny Glover told me so.

Anonymous Stilicho January 18, 2013 7:00 PM  

I can only imagine your surprise when you discover I don't care what disgusts you.

Yet here you are. Again. Now that is amusing.

Anonymous Tad January 18, 2013 7:01 PM  

@Raggedege

Oh no, I understand very clearly that you are a lying little weasel. The question was, if a majority of the people favor a ban on abortion, should be a law then be passed to ban abortion?

It's a matter of CAN a law be passed, not SHOULD a law be passed, if a poll shows a majority supporting the idea.

Anonymous Tad January 18, 2013 7:02 PM  

@Razorald

Oddly enough, I still make love to your pillow when you're not around

You're sweet to think about me.

Anonymous zen0 January 18, 2013 7:15 PM  

Cartooning of Obama's use of children as human shields and the refusal of the Justice department to supply documents related to Fast and Furious.

the audacity of audacity

OpenID simplytimothy January 18, 2013 7:17 PM  

@mina In the political arena, we are of course talking about people in weak, indefensible, or intellectually dishonest positions: the Feinsteins, Kennedys, Rowans, and Clintons. In such a case, there is no need to be polite, respectful, or even circumspect; one can and should roll right over them.

While I agree, the focus on democrats is counter-productive as it allows the GOP members of Codevilla's Ruling Class a free pass. To this list we should add "Graham, McCain, Boehner, Cantor, The National Review, WSJ, Peggy Noonan...."

We have sullied ourselves with these GOP whores for too long.

Anonymous Noah B. January 18, 2013 7:26 PM  

Don't forget Chris Christie. The leftist media pukes are already lining up to establish him as "the likely GOP frontrunner." Just like they did with Romney.

Anonymous Question January 18, 2013 7:30 PM  

Jake: You confusion owning a weapon with using it to commit violence. You'd know more have people using TOW missles on traffic jams than you have people randomly shooting the driver ahead of them. Both are illegal and in a more civilized world would be liable to get you shot long before the police get there to arrest you.

Road rage is a common occurence. And I can just imagine how other drivers returning fire on the rager would turn out. It would be like Mad Max. Some of you are so out of touch with reality its scary.

Anonymous FrankBrady January 18, 2013 7:34 PM  

This is not about guns. It is not about electoral politics. People who do not understand this are going to get killed, quite possibly literally.

If you've not already read Saul Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals" and want to see the future, please download a copy. Here's a Cliff's Notes summary of Community Organizer Obama's operational handbook.

1. The goal is equality.
2. There are no rules.
3. There is no truth.
4. There is no evil.
4. The end justifies the means.

It was announced to day that Obama's campaign organization has morphed into "Organizing for America". This machine will utilize technology and propaganda to achieve its goals.

This is a very big deal.

Anonymous zen0 January 18, 2013 7:41 PM  

Never mind nukes, what about private drones? I can hardly wait until the muzzies figure out you could send a drone over the WhiteHouse and fire an Agent Orange bomb to turn the Rose Garden into a brown wasteland, (which seems to be their special agricultural talent).

Afterwards, they could demand a minature mosque (sort of like a garden gnome) be built on the wasteage to mollify their feelings.

Presidents could meet the press in a toxic wasteland with a cute little mosque in it.

Its a win/win.

Anonymous kh123 January 18, 2013 7:44 PM  

"Some of you are so out of touch..."

Ah, there's Q, after having ran away from Vox and Stickwick's questions several posts ago.

Anonymous Razoraid January 18, 2013 7:45 PM  

It was announced to day that Obama's campaign organization has morphed into "Organizing for America". This machine will utilize technology and propaganda to achieve its goals.


I'm waiting for Tad to tell me how I should feel about this...I can't engage in group-think without some good, solid opinions to base it off of.

Anonymous Thedick January 18, 2013 7:49 PM  

Since the ilk can't get the best of Tad, do you think Vox is staying away because he doesn't want to be seen as equally impotent?

Anonymous Question January 18, 2013 7:49 PM  

kh123: "Some of you are so out of touch..."

Ah, there's Q, after having ran away from Vox and Stickwick's questions several posts ago.


I get tired of reading this stuff after a while and the comment system is far from ideal in maintaining long discussions. But I'll answer whatever they were asking if you post them. In fact I'll phrase it in the form of a question What did VD and Stickwick ask that I did not answer? so that in the future I'll be able to accuse you of not respecting the rules of the blog if you don't respond.

Anonymous Shutup, Tad January 18, 2013 7:51 PM  

Scanning these gun battle threads is like going to the park and having to constantly make sure you step over dog shite.

Anonymous Shutup, Tad January 18, 2013 7:57 PM  

@ thedick

Since the ilk can't get the best of Tad, do you think Vox is staying away because he doesn't want to be seen as equally impotent?

You obviously have no idea what is going on. On the internet, you can slam an idiot all day long and they can still blather. If it was happening in reality, Tad would be a bloody toothless pulp sucking Hillbilly dick on an ill-fated canoe trip.

You're not a dick, you're just stupid.

Anonymous Gen. Kong January 18, 2013 7:59 PM  

@FrankBrady

Yes, we know. I expect most here are aware of Alinskyism (which is just Stalinism slightly updated). In a sense, D'Won and his army of Tads are the lesser enemy though. They carry their hammer and sickle more-or-less openly. It's all those nice folks running the Republican party, and their counterparts in the military, the church, etc. who are the gravest danger of all. They will sell us all out for much less than the proverbial 30 pieces of silver. The vast idiocracy out there hasn't the slightest clue. Even though dh is a despicable leftist, he's correct in pointing out that it's a bit laughable to read folks talking about armed revolution when they can't even pull their fat asses away from the television, or take their own flesh and blood out of the government indoctrination centers.

Anonymous Dr. J January 18, 2013 8:04 PM  

Here comes a thread derail.

What is the ilk consensus for a .300 win mag rifle. And what scope would go with it?

Anonymous Idle Spectator January 18, 2013 8:10 PM  

Since the ilk can't get the best of Tad, do you think Vox is staying away because he doesn't want to be seen as equally impotent?

Or he could just ban him... Tad is a "tar-baby." The more you fight it, the worse it gets. Look it up.

Never mind nukes, what about private drones? I can hardly wait until the muzzies figure out you could send a drone over the WhiteHouse and fire an Agent Orange bomb to turn the Rose Garden into a brown wasteland, (which seems to be their special agricultural talent).

Watching that Malian conflict is just pissing me off. They've taken half the country now and are threatening the capital of Bamako. The French finally retook Konna and Diabaly though. How much more of this are we going to take? The Muslims just threatened to attack France in retaliation. I hope that they do.

The French can be extremely ruthless when protecting France or its former francophone colonies (see also French Algeria).

Anonymous Anonymous January 18, 2013 8:13 PM  

to anyone looking for crime statistics in the U.S., here is a good place to start.

frenchy



Anonymous zen0 January 18, 2013 8:13 PM  

@ Gen. Kong

Even though dh is a despicable leftist, he's correct in pointing out that it's a bit laughable to read folks talking about armed revolution

To be fair, most people seem to be expressing a need for possible armed resistance, not revolution. dh is the revolutionist.

Anonymous Outlaw X January 18, 2013 8:20 PM  

Tad, I don' feel sorry for you, but you can't keep me from praying and loving you nor can you keep me from thinking about circles even if they outlaw them. I'll think round all damn day if I please.

Anonymous Thedick January 18, 2013 8:24 PM  

***f it was happening in reality, Tad would be a bloody toothless pulp sucking Hillbilly dick on an ill-fated canoe trip.***

Maybe, we don't know anything about Tads ability with fisticuffs, but in any case, it wouldn't mean you have better arguments.

Blogger Nate January 18, 2013 8:24 PM  

"Bye the way Nate the police officer he was working with was killed as well, and tortured before they killed him. You can find his name (The Doctor) but you can't find how he was killed, I know exactly what they did."

OKC is the primary example of just how stupid the American electorate is... and how complicit journalists are.

The governor of OKC is on live news talking about the bombs they recovered from inside the building while they are showing them being wheeled out on carts by the bomb squad... and the next day... there suddenly were no bombs inside..it was a truck of fertilizer.

Anonymous Thedick January 18, 2013 8:25 PM  

***Or he could just ban him...***

Unless he can demonstrate he's wrong, he can't also ban him without appearing weak.

Blogger Nate January 18, 2013 8:26 PM  

"What is the ilk consensus for a .300 win mag rifle. And what scope would go with it?"

Savage accutrigger... or CZ... or Winchester pre-64 model 70... unless money is no object... then Steyr.

Anonymous Asher January 18, 2013 8:27 PM  

@ Jake

I KNOW it's done, but how do you justify it?

Public safety and order. It's a perfectly reasonable justification. If you want widespread ownership of guns then write an amendment that doesn't involve an "individual right". If you say that individuals have a right to bear arms, period, then that means that they have a right to own nukes. If you say they have a right barring public safety then the government is just going to argue rational basis for confiscating guns.

But if the right is a collective one to overthrow tyrants then you bypass the question of public safety altogether. Frankly, I'm surprised that two thirds polled see this.

Anonymous Asher January 18, 2013 8:28 PM  

i've never had the chance to shoot with a steyr. The savage is good enough for the average shooter.

Anonymous Mina January 18, 2013 8:32 PM  

dh at least made a good argument and once he reached his conclusion it was obvious what he was up to. seems logical in retrospect.

there is nothing I can say about the troll other than Please: Stop Feeding It!!!

Anonymous patrick kelly January 18, 2013 8:34 PM  

"What is the ilk consensus for a .300 win mag rifle. And what scope would go with it?"

What are going to do with it? Unless you're trying to drop a Polar Bear or Elephant at 1000 yards, it's way overkill for just about anything else.

Some of the various 6.5mm (.264 caliber) wonder rounds will have less wind drift and elevation drop at 1000 yards and still deliver enough foot pounds to drop moderately sized game, with less stress on your shoulder and nervous system.

My opinion...

Anonymous patrick kelly January 18, 2013 8:36 PM  

I also think Savage with accutrigger are the best bang for the buck in just about any caliber fwiw.

Blogger Nate January 18, 2013 8:37 PM  

"Unless he can demonstrate he's wrong, he can't also ban him without appearing weak."

If being wrong got one banned... no one would ever be commenting here. We've all been wrong about something at one time or another.

One gets banned by breaking the rules... there are a couple of rules Tad ignores with impunity... so there are very good reasons to ban him. The fact that Vox doesn't indicates that Vox believes Tad's stupidity helps the cause.

Anonymous Idle Spectator January 18, 2013 8:37 PM  

Unless he can demonstrate he's wrong, he can't also ban him without appearing weak.

Only in your mind. That's already been done mutiple times (search the archives for when I did it). I doubt anyone would even remember Tad by the end of the week.

Anonymous patrick kelly January 18, 2013 8:38 PM  

Rule of thumb is spend as much on your scope as the rifle, but I think Redfield and Burris both offer good glass for the $$, then Leopold, after that your in rediculous I have more money than I know what to do with territory if you ask me.

Blogger Nate January 18, 2013 8:39 PM  

"what are going to do with it? Unless you're trying to drop a Polar Bear or Elephant at 1000 yards, it's way overkill for just about anything else."
?
Non-sense. Maybe he has no interest in actually chasing the deer? He would just as soon knock it on its ass in such a fashion that it never gets up.

Can't say I blame him. I do the same thing.

Blogger Nate January 18, 2013 8:41 PM  

Dr J

What's the budget on this 300 win mag? include optics in the price.. or at least tell us what you're putting on it if you already have something.

Anonymous 11B January 18, 2013 8:44 PM  

he's correct in pointing out that it's a bit laughable to read folks talking about armed revolution when they can't even pull their fat asses away from the television, or take their own flesh and blood out of the government indoctrination centers.

I hear right wingers bitch all the time about the media, hollywood, etc. being bastions of marxists out to do harm to America, yet how many still pay for subscription television and fork over bucks to go to the movies? They can't even refrain from buying the goods of their supposed enemy. Revolution talk is a f**king joke.

Anonymous Asher January 18, 2013 8:45 PM  

@ Tad

Simple question: under what criteria are a people justified in seceding or rebelling against a government?

Are those criteria universal and timeless or vary by time and space?

Anonymous stg58/Animal Mother January 18, 2013 8:45 PM  

.300 Win Mag...No one ever got fired for buying a Winchester Model 70, Weatherby Mk V or a Remington 700 chambered in that caliber. There are so many scope choices as well. I like the Hawke 4-12x with a 50mm adjustable objective. With an illuminated red/green reticle that scope is 130.00 on Amazon. If you have piles of cash to spend you can get a Nightforce or US Optics scope. With that big pile of cash you can also get a Desert Arms in .300 win mag.

Anonymous Idle Spectator January 18, 2013 8:49 PM  

Asher, you are doing this all wrong...

The key is to ask Tad if his name "tad" means his penis is small. Then ask if his Jewish parents decided to circumcise him, and that's why he is upset since it cut off too much.

Try it.

I got his kosher jew-goat so badly last time he had to switch screennames.

Anonymous 11B January 18, 2013 8:50 PM  

I think we get the best argument for this in Scalia's "Heller" decision

Since people are mentioning the Heller case, I hope they realize it only went their way by a 5-4 margin. Now Obama has 4 years and Hillary is probably in the on deck circle for another 4 to 8. What happens when one of the 5 in the majority retires?

The easiest path to restricting the 2nd Amendment is going to come when the left gets that magical 5th vote on the Supreme Court. A new case will appear and the Court will now decide the 2nd Amendment is not an individual right.

This is a much easier and plausible path to gun control than any executive order or attempt to change the laws through Congress. Yet no one seems to be concerned.

Blogger Nate January 18, 2013 8:56 PM  

".300 Win Mag...No one ever got fired for buying a Winchester Model 70, Weatherby Mk V or a Remington 700 chambered in that caliber. "

Don't listen to this guy. While I used to joke about Remington being an off-brand to piss off the fanboys... they used to make good weapons.

used too.

They suck now. The fit and finish on many of their weapons is literally worse that what you see on 150 dollar chinese knockoffs. Its pathetic.

Anonymous patrick kelly January 18, 2013 8:56 PM  

Here in Texas most deer hunting involves shooting a relatively small white tail at about 50 yds. At that range even a f'n lowly 55gr 5.56 delivers almost 1200 foot pounds, and a 150 gr win 270 has over 2400 foot pounds. If it don't drop from that, you didn't make a good shot.

Now if you're doing real tracking of larger game at several hundred yards distance, then yeah, maybe I'd be concerned about the deer running off.

however....

At 1000 yards the difference between .308 and .300 wmag is 1220 vs 1404 foot lbs. What kind of shot on what are you taking that 200 less flbs is going to be the difference between it dropping or not?

Plus you gotta' take all those shots sighting in the scope, and working up rounds or finding what commercial ammo works best for your barrel, and while I usually consider all that recreational fun, not so much with .300 win mag.

Then again Nate drinks Bourbon, so maybe I'm just not man enough for his style shooting either..heh.....

Anonymous zen0 January 18, 2013 9:00 PM  

Maybe, we don't know anything about Tads ability with fisticuffs, but in any case, it wouldn't mean you have better arguments.

Once again, over your head. Pretending to be obtuse and being obtuse are often related.

Anonymous patrick kelly January 18, 2013 9:01 PM  

Ok, so out to about 500 yards the .300 win mag has over 500lbs advantage over the .308, but sheesh, what are you shooting that needs over 2000 to bring it down?

I'm rambling, sorry, need another drink.....

Anonymous Dr. J January 18, 2013 9:02 PM  

Looking at a Tikka M695 stainless, Leupold VX-III 3-9x40. I'm a bit of a newbie wrt rifles. Mostly a handgun guy. Price range $1000-$2000 but mostly looking at a reliable rifle to improve my skills. Boston's gun bible got me interested in rounding out the arsenal.

Anonymous Tad January 18, 2013 9:03 PM  

@Shutup

On the internet, you can slam an idiot all day long and they can still blather. If it was happening in reality, Tad would be a bloody toothless pulp sucking Hillbilly dick on an ill-fated canoe trip.

This seems unlikely, since words have never been known to physically harm anyone.

Anonymous Tad January 18, 2013 9:07 PM  

@Outlaw

Tad, I don' feel sorry for you, but you can't keep me from praying and loving you

I appreciate it....You knock yourself out!

Blogger Nate January 18, 2013 9:08 PM  

"At 1000 yards the difference between .308 and .300 wmag is 1220 vs 1404 foot lbs. What kind of shot on what are you taking that 200 less flbs is going to be the difference between it dropping or not?"


This has to be an epic typo. At 1000 yards the .308 with a 150 grain bt is barely over 350 foot pounds.

There is a HUGE difference between the two... all along the flight path. I have .308s. I have 300 win mags. A deer hit right with a .308 at 100 yards or 50 yards... is still going to run. Where as the .300 at 100 yards literally throws them on the ground... they flop a little bit... and die right there on the spot.

That's awfully convenient. I know people shoot the .308 to 1000 yards... but the fact is its just not practical. For crying out loud you're talking about measuring bullet drop in FEET... not inches.

Anonymous Tad January 18, 2013 9:09 PM  

@the dick

Maybe, we don't know anything about Tads ability with fisticuffs, but in any case, it wouldn't mean you have better arguments.

Why in the world would anyone think of throwing fists over a discussion??? That's just weird.

Anonymous Tad January 18, 2013 9:15 PM  

@Asher

Simple question: under what criteria are a people justified in seceding or rebelling against a government?

There is no constitutional path to secession.

Blogger Nate January 18, 2013 9:16 PM  

"Looking at a Tikka M695 stainless, Leupold VX-III 3-9x40. I'm a bit of a newbie wrt rifles. Mostly a handgun guy. Price range $1000-$2000 but mostly looking at a reliable rifle to improve my skills. Boston's gun bible got me interested in rounding out the arsenal."

Ok... first... I would be very careful about the Tikka. Fact is they are known to have issues with the safety. There were recalls because the trigger could be adjusted down... and there was a flaw in the mechanism where just clicking the safety off would cause the trigger to break and the weapon to fire.

For that money... I would get a CZ550... and with that goal in mind I would be looking at a .270... or even a varmint rifle in 17hmr or .22mag. Cheap to shoot. Fun to shoot. throw a good nikon scope on it.

Anonymous Anonymous January 18, 2013 9:18 PM  

"Why in the world would anyone think of throwing fists over a discussion??? That's just weird."

Not so much, bro. Some people are just more aggressive, like how some people are more sexual.

-Northwesterner

Anonymous Asher January 18, 2013 9:19 PM  

@ Tad

There is no constitutional path to secession.

Not what I asked you dishonest, little weasel. Answer the fucking question

Anonymous Idle Spectator January 18, 2013 9:19 PM  

Tad, it's ok. How small is it?


We're all friends here...

Anonymous Noah B. January 18, 2013 9:20 PM  

With any rifle round that starts off going supersonic, the distance at which the bullet velocity drops to the speed of sound tends to be about the maximum range at which any kind of consistent accuracy can be obtained.

1000 yards is pushing a .308 beyond its practical limit. At that range the bullet is unstable and has probably departed substantially from its original trajectory. However, the .300 Win Mag with the right bullet is still supersonic at that range. None of them have much energy left, though. For something that far out, if you're interesting in doing more than punching through paper, you really need a 50 BMG or maybe something exotic like a .338 or .416 Barrett.

Blogger Nate January 18, 2013 9:21 PM  

"There is no constitutional path to secession."


Tad... is the Union in the constitution described as "perpetual" or "permanent" anywhere in the document?

Anonymous Razoraid January 18, 2013 9:22 PM  

Chortle

Anonymous Asher January 18, 2013 9:22 PM  

@ Tad

Were the colonists justified in seceding from the Crown?

Simple yes or no question.

Anonymous Asher January 18, 2013 9:24 PM  

@ Tad

You know damn well that the underlying question is "what makes a government legitimate". That is the first question of government, and you are dodging it. Under what conditions would a people consider a government legitimate? Answer the question you dishonest little weasel.

Is there one universal standard or does it vary by time and place.

Anonymous patrick kelly January 18, 2013 9:25 PM  

Yikes, it was a crazy typo (was reading fps while writting flbs), but still only a little over 200 lbs difference.

.308 180gn Federal Trophy Bonded Tip 595 flbs at 100 yds (According to Federal, 24" barrel)
.300 Win Mag, same bullet, 788 flbs.

But back to the more common, oh, 100yd range for the same rounds, yeah, 700lbs difference, but I'm a bit skeptical about any deer in NA not dropping from 2000 flbs delivered to the shoulder through the chest cavity (which the lowly .308 does). Not saying it's not possible, I'm just skeptical you're comparing the same quality shot placement in each case.

And I've heard white tail deer drop with good shot placement and much lower powered rounds than .308.

But admitedly, this is about 1/2 theory for me. I've done lots of long range target shooting, never hunted deer, so I'm depending on stories my friends who have tell me.

Besides I'd rather discuss shooting or drinking with Nate than feed trolls tonight.

Blogger Nate January 18, 2013 9:25 PM  

DrJ

For that money you could also get a Steyr SSG04... that will turn some heads at the range.

Blogger Nate January 18, 2013 9:28 PM  

"But back to the more common, oh, 100yd range for the same rounds, yeah, 700lbs difference, but I'm a bit skeptical about any deer in NA not dropping from 2000 flbs delivered to the shoulder through the chest cavity (which the lowly .308 does)."

Perhaps you have those little west virginia type white tails up there. I know down here on the coast the deer are tiny compared to what we shot in TN.

Anonymous The other skeptic January 18, 2013 9:28 PM  


OKC is the primary example of just how stupid the American electorate is... and how complicit journalists are.

The governor of OKC is on live news talking about the bombs they recovered from inside the building while they are showing them being wheeled out on carts by the bomb squad... and the next day... there suddenly were no bombs inside..it was a truck of fertilizer.


It seems that the story has changed radically after both recent shootings as well.

Let's hope the courts decide that the DoJ has to respond to the FOIA request, although they could still heavily redact it.

Anonymous Tad January 18, 2013 9:29 PM  

@11b

Regarding Heller, from Scalia's decision:

Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. From Blackstone through the 19th-century cases, commentators and courts routinely explained that the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.... Although we do not undertake an exhaustive historical analysis today of the full scope of the Second Amendment , nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.

Blogger Nate January 18, 2013 9:31 PM  

.308 180gn Federal Trophy Bonded Tip 595 flbs at 100 yds (According to Federal, 24" barrel)
.300 Win Mag, same bullet, 788 flbs.


Why would you shoot the same bullet? I know I prefer the heavier bullets in the .300 win mag. 220 grain HPBT baby! BOOM!!!

Anonymous Dr. J January 18, 2013 9:32 PM  

Thanks for the advice Nate. I'm acquiring catch as catch can. Those calibers are on the list, and a few others are in the safe, but this 300WM became available at $1000 with scope and bipod.

Anonymous Tad January 18, 2013 9:33 PM  

@Asher

what makes a government legitimate"

The consent of the people

Blogger Nate January 18, 2013 9:33 PM  

DrJ... after about 20 rounds through the .300 win mag... you may well be thinking it would've been worth it to save your pennies and get a 17hmr.

Anonymous Asher January 18, 2013 9:34 PM  

@ Tad

The consent of the people

A) What defines "the people"
B) How do you discern "consent"

Anonymous patrick kelly January 18, 2013 9:34 PM  

Noah B. and Nate

It has occurred to me that because the Federal Data I'm looking at is with a 24" barrel and loads that may not be considered ideal for hunting, results will vary. So, if you're using a shorter barrel with a hunting round, I can see where the .300 win mag likely has a practical advantage in regards to a one shot drop under similar circumstances.

There are some .308 and even .260 rem loads that are still supersonic ( > 1100fps) at 1000 yds according to Federal. These are of course their premium, target loads, with relatively high bullet B.C, which apparently can make a big difference.

I think I'll leave the hunting to others and stick with chasing that perfect group all in the x ring at 1000 yds on a windy day. I do like to eat venison tho'.....

Anonymous Kickass January 18, 2013 9:36 PM  

Got the flu shot again this week and got the flu. Tad, you give me giggles. Thanks.

>>>>>puking>>>

Anonymous Tad January 18, 2013 9:36 PM  

@Asher

A. Citizens
B. Good question...

Anonymous Tad January 18, 2013 9:36 PM  

@Kickass

Got the flu shot again this week and got the flu. Tad, you give me giggles. Thanks.

Get well soon.

Anonymous patrick kelly January 18, 2013 9:37 PM  

"300WM became available at $1000 with scope and bipod. "

That does sound hard to pass up. If you were just seeing what ilk thought of the round, I think you have your answer, heh....

Anonymous Shutup, Tad January 18, 2013 9:38 PM  

@ Asher

Answer the question you dishonest little weasel.

New to the party? Everybody already knows that.Try this:

Shutup,Tad.

Anonymous Idle Spectator January 18, 2013 9:40 PM  

Tad, did the phrase "never give them an inch" attract you to this post?

It's sad really. Him carrying around so much pain inside.

Blogger Nate January 18, 2013 9:40 PM  

DRJ

If you're going to hunt with it.. get a 308 or a .270. if not... get a Savage in .22mag or .17hmr. both are so much fun to shoot that calvinists would call it sin... and ammo is cheap.

Anonymous Dr. J January 18, 2013 9:41 PM  

That does sound hard to pass up. If you were just seeing what ilk thought of the round, I think you have your answer, heh....

Yep - definitely food for thought. Thanks everyone for your input.

1 – 200 of 326 Newer› Newest»

Post a Comment

NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS. Anonymous comments will be deleted.

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts