..Or Are You Just Glad to See Me?
Sebastian the Lying Censor™ : Urban Rambo.
Unlike the fictional Rambo, who just wanted to be left alone to brood and, presumably, do lot of bicep curls–Sebastian the Lying Censor™ wants to walk point in his neighborhood.
An event like 9/11 often gives rise to lunatics like Charles Johnson and Michelle Malkin to spout racism against anyone who isn’t the right skin color or the right religion. Nevermind the fact the terrorism of 9/11 was committed by a very, very small subset (and fringe element) of a given religion. Similarly, Sebastian the Lying Censor™ experienced his own personal trial and has completely left the world of the sane.
so … have you given up on trying to make a case for gun control altogether, or do you intend to still publish something worthwhile when you’re not trowing mud at people in hopes of drawing attention away from your incompetence when it comes to building a sound case?
Comment by Michael Hawkins — October 21, 2007 @ 6:06 pm
MH: Come now. If gunloons couldn’t “trow” mud–they’d have nothing to write about.
Comment by Administrator — October 21, 2007 @ 7:09 pm
I’d also add, MH, this happens to be a very perceptive post. Many gunloons are driven to their gunloonery by fear–just as many bigots and racists. The fact is their fear is completely out of proportion to the risks they face.
Comment by Administrator — October 21, 2007 @ 7:11 pm
I’ve got plenty of things to write about without the need to “trow” mud.
The failure of gun control in California, changes in the British political mindset, illustration that there shouldn’t be “only ones”, an attempted school bombing in the US … all in this week, in addition to a justified and illustrated sneer at the Brady campaign.
.
No, we’re not the ones “trowing” mud …
Also, in regards to that second post, have you seen “the brave one” starring Jdie Foster?
Comment by Michael Hawkins — October 21, 2007 @ 7:39 pm
You seem to fail to note that I’m much handsomer than Rambo.
Then again, you also fail to note anything I’ve lied about or censored…so I guess making shit up out of the blue is the way you do things.
Anybody surprised? Me neither.
Comment by Sebastian-PGP — October 22, 2007 @ 3:41 pm
MH: No, I haven’t seen the Jodie Foster movie, yet. It seems like she’s kind of stuck in a rut with similar movies like Panic Room, though.
Comment by Administrator — October 22, 2007 @ 5:31 pm
Oh, I forgot..failures of gun control in CA? I take it you didn’t read the LATimes article on winners and losers in CA’s recent legislative session? The one that says:
Comment by Administrator — October 22, 2007 @ 5:34 pm
You seem to fail to note that I’m much handsomer than Rambo.
You might be taller; Stallone’s kind of short. Looks like some fine NRA training there with the handgun stuck halfway into a jeans pocket.
Comment by Administrator — October 22, 2007 @ 5:36 pm
It not about what laws have been passed in Ca (all of them), I’m talking about which ones work (none of them).
Comment by Michael Hawkins — October 23, 2007 @ 6:38 am
I’m talking about which ones work (none of them).
No proof, huh?
Comment by Administrator — October 23, 2007 @ 11:15 am
Quote:
“An event like 9/11 often gives rise to lunatics like Charles Johnson and Michelle Malkin to spout racism against anyone who isn’t the right skin color or the right religion. Nevermind the fact the terrorism of 9/11 was committed by a very, very small subset (and fringe element) of a given religion.”
So Jade what event turned you against gunowners & the NRA?
Comment by The Duck — October 23, 2007 @ 11:40 am
Duck: I really have nothing against gunowners; I believe quite a few of them are responsible and accountable folks. It’s just the gunloons who refuse to be accountable and believe they need .50cal weapons and believe the Constitution gives them a right to overthrow the nation that are out to lunch.
The NRA has always been a whacky group.
Comment by Administrator — October 23, 2007 @ 11:57 am
Nobody “needs” a .50, we just don’t want to have an established precedent of a specific caliber being banned for no valid reason. Seriously, how many airliners have crash after being hit by a .50 caliber bullet over US airspace/on US soil?
Comment by Michael Hawkins — October 23, 2007 @ 1:28 pm
MH: You do realize your comment is a logical fallacy, don’t you?
Comment by Administrator — October 23, 2007 @ 1:57 pm
Well the NRA is the oldest civil rights group in the country, & Jades says they are wacky, so is the ACLU, & the NNACP wacky?
Comment by The Duck — October 23, 2007 @ 2:00 pm
Ok name one crime, just one that someone used a 50BMG cal rifle to commit.
Why should 50’s be banned, in your opinion?
Comment by The Duck — October 23, 2007 @ 2:02 pm
Duck: The NRA is free to claim they’re the oldest civil rights group in the US, but saying it doesn’t make it so.
After all, not many civil rights groups are on record as threatening to overthrow the country or calling law enforcement “jack-booted thugs.”
.
I fear you’re missing the point WRT .50 cal firearms. They have no use for hunting or self-defense–they are strictly an offensive weapon. I daresay we haven’t seen any crimes committed with sarin gas–but most rational people understand allowing the general public to stockpile sarin gas is a very bad idea.
A list of .50 cal crimes
Comment by Administrator — October 23, 2007 @ 2:39 pm
They are target rifles,& it really does not matter, weather they have a use as self defense or hunting weapon. The 2nd Ammendment is not about hunting, & or for that matter self defense
Comment by The Duck — October 23, 2007 @ 2:53 pm
The 2nd Ammendment is a right & one that the NRA has defended since 1871.
The NRA has never threatened to overthrow the country.
Well the ACLU has used some pretty strong regarding law enforcement, in more than one case
Comment by The Duck — October 23, 2007 @ 2:56 pm
Jackass: The photog dude wanted me to stuff the Glock in the pocket for dramatic effect as he thought my IWB holster was boring to look at. If you look closely (which I know isn’t something you do very often to your own arguments…so I’m not surprised you missed this) there’s no magazine in the pistol. It’s empty. It’s a prop. Get over it.
The rest of your argument is based on what we “need”. Need has nothing to do with civil rights. Talk about logical fallacies.
Comment by Sebastian-PGP — October 23, 2007 @ 3:12 pm
sorry typing a bit fast earlier
Well the ACLU has used some pretty abusive words regarding law enforcement, in more than one case
Comment by The Duck — October 23, 2007 @ 3:29 pm
Duck: So many untruths in such a short comment. The 2A is indeed a right–just not your interpretation of it. Nor has the NRA “defended” the 2A since 1871. As we both know, the NRA began as a civilian marksmanship organization, primarily aimed at fostering shooting competitions. In fact, in the 1930s, the NRA supported licensing gun owners and supported bans on machine guns, sawed-off shotguns and other firearms. In reality, 2A revisionism (your interpretation) began in about 1960.
.
The NRA has never threatened to overthrow the country.
Really? Perhaps, you could explain this fundraising letter from the NRA:
.
Gee, the Govt. murdering law-abiding citizens, destroying the culture, comparing law enforcement to Nazis….
.
Well the ACLU has used some pretty strong regarding law enforcement, in more than one case
To be sure. But they usually address their outrage at specific individuals, not the entire law enforcement community.
Comment by Administrator — October 23, 2007 @ 3:33 pm
The photog dude wanted me to stuff the Glock in the pocket for dramatic effect as he thought my IWB holster was boring to look at
I see, Sebastian the Lying Censor™. So, you’re willing to violate gun safety for “dramatic effect?” Who knows what else you’d do–for “dramatic effect.”
.
so I’m not surprised you missed this) there’s no magazine in the pistol. It’s empty. It’s a prop.
Ooooh. Another firearm safety tenet trashed. Your very first NRA safety course should have reiterated that all firearms are to be treated as if they’re loaded–even if you’re 100% certain they aren’t.
.
Care to elucidate further on that fine NRA training that didn’t seem to take, Sebastian the Lying Censor™?
Comment by Administrator — October 23, 2007 @ 3:40 pm
Jadeschmuck The Liar Who Lies About The Fact That I Don’t Lie About Anything Nor Have I Censored Anything:
Again, I’m in a controlled scenario on my property with a weapon that I cleared and safed myself. How am I violating gun safety? The weapon is cleared and pointed in a safe direction. It’s no more dangerous than a hammer in your hand.
As for all weapons being treated as loaded even if you know they aren’t, how am I violating that rule? Again, the weapon isn’t pointed in a dangerous direction and my finger isn’t on the trigger. Besides, much like the 1st Amendment doesn’t protect your right to threaten the life of the president, there are caveats to most any rule, including that one. For instance, if your narrow, misguided understanding of that rule made any sense, you’d never be able to clean a firearm.
Comment by Sebastian-PGP — October 23, 2007 @ 9:45 pm
That list of .50 crimes is pretty pathetic; over half of them aren’t even about possession, the guns were seized from someone committing another crime.
.
Still, let’s see: it goes back yo 1989! that’s 18 years
50 caliber rifles have been NAMED in 22 crimes/felonies over the last eighteen years?
.
On another note: you’re on slippery ground when you say that they’re offensive weapons, and then follow up with the restriction of sawed off shotguns, are you even remotely familiar with the matter?
.
(the reason cited to restrict sawn off shotguns: they aren’t fit for military use)
Comment by Michael Hawkins — October 24, 2007 @ 3:40 am
So where in any of those comments did the NRA threaten to over throw the goverment?
Unless being active, contacting elected officals, voting, etc is over throwing the goverment.
As Jefferson said the 2nd Ammendment will not be important till they try to take it.
Comment by The Duck — October 24, 2007 @ 7:28 am