|
Alphecca is a member of "the lunatic fringe of the US right" --Guardian (UK) 6/26/06 *******************
Email me at:
gunnut -at- alphecca -dot- com Check it out:
My Latest Blatherings...
Do We Need "Assault Weapons?" DC Congressional Seat Tied To Gun Rights Go Stats Installed Grass Roots & Gun Rights Ch-Ch-Ch-Changes. . . Gun Control Bills Advancing Bye-Bye SiteMeter Gun Rights in Texas KS Bill Would Overrule City Gun Laws Some Good News More on Alphecca and IE 7 More on Giuliani on Gun Control Bloomberg Pushes Pelosi on Gun Control NY: Now it's Bullet Control Trouble Reading Alphecca With IE7? Hit Job on Gun Rights Lawyer WaPo & Guns: A Good Question SCOTUS Review of DC Circuit Could Sidestep Central Issue George Will Warns Dems on Gun Control Meanwhile in Knife-Free Scotland. . . Dell Computer Support Howler of the Day Friday Bear Blogging Idiot of the Day on Gun Rights MO: Bill To Prevent Gun Confiscations Advances Proximity Laws Against Guns? No Slippery Slope? Stuck in Massachusetts Please Welcome... NY: Gov. Spitzer to Promote Hunting?
Care to comment?
Take your best shot:
Note: Comments close-down on posts after seven days.
Yes, I coined the term
"stupid-fucking-computer" Alphecca gets noticed! Check out these GLOWING REVIEWS I've just made up:
|
February 27, 2007They're Not After Our Guns?What is this? Is the whole cabal of columnists who write about hunting suddenly developing brain illnesses? Now, Pat Wray comes to Zumbo's defense and blames everything on the NRA:
Allow me to shine the spotlight on a few clues for the apparently clueless Wray: 1. California twice redefined the definition of "assault weapons" and forced their owners to turn them in -- effectively turning law abiding citizens into instant criminals. 2. NY did the same. So did N.J. So did Massachusetts. Now, one county in Maryland would like to do the same. 3. Whole countries took to banning firearms and made instant criminals of anyone who didn't turn theirs in. England comes to mind. Australia comes to mind. China recently did this. Oh, you say, but that's just other countries. What about here in the good ol' United States where we have a Bill of Rights to protect us? Even dismissing the District of Columbia and Chicago, where gun ownership has been prohibited for years, just a year ago San Francisco tried to outlaw handgun ownership. It was the NRA, among others, who went to court and put a stop to that. 4. We have at least one candidate running for president, Barack Obama, who is on record as saying that he would ban all semi-automatic firearms ownership -- and not just "assault weapons" either. 5. We have other candidates who support banning whole classes of firearms based on their cosmetic features. 6. A new bill was just introduced in the House to renew and strengthen a ban on whole classes of firearms (those "military style rifles") based on their cosmetic features. At the moment, that bill has a "grandfather" clause within it but once the ban on new sales is in place, it's likely that confiscation won't be far behind -- as we've seen in some of the states listed above. 7. The goal of groups such as the Brady Bunch and VPC is, in the end, the complete elimination of personal, civilian firearm possession. 8. The U.N. is working towards that goal, too. So I say to you, Pat Wray, if there are politicians and gun control groups and state legislators and countries and world organizations all out to ban many if not all firearms and the ownership of same, maybe we and the NRA are not "paranoid" but are instead pragmatic. There IS a slippery slope and there are lots of entities out there greasing the cant to speed things up. Comments
Thanks, Jeff, very well said! Posted by: Marianne at February 27, 2007 06:51 AMNot really anything I can add other than I really wish folks would quit trying to villify the NRA. It's an organization made up of members that make the decisions. I'm a member and I'm active in telling the NRA what I think about the issues. They are good about letting me know what's up and good about listening to what I have to say about it. I think a lot of people that at some point were members, didn't communicate their wishes, just got their card for a year and then walked. Now they like to bitch about how the NRA doesn't respect their wishes. Well...No wonder! Membership involves more than just having the card folks! The NRA has changed a lot in the last few years. More articles about self defense and more about conceal carry all the time in American Rifleman for example. It hasn't been all about "hunters rights" for some time. Posted by: Diamondback at February 27, 2007 08:04 AMThe NRA and it's members were among the very last to jump on the "Zumbo Shut Up" Bandwagon. It was grassroots gun owners who realized the hunting elite was not on board with the real purpose of the second amendment. Last time I looked, the 2nd Amendment did NOT say: "The harvesting of deer, elk, and upland birds being essential to the preservation of the Republic, the right of the people to keep and bear single shot hunting rifles shall not be infringed." Read the Federalist papers...hunting guns are a fringe benefit of the real purpose, which was to protect and defend the individual, his family, and the republic and maintain the Sovereignty of the people over their government in cases of abuse. Posted by: doug in colorado at February 27, 2007 11:07 AMPeople have the strangest ideas about the NRA. I've seen the NRA called "fascist", and "extremist" - by people who had no idea at all what the NRA's position on any topic was beyond a general idea that the NRA was "for guns". (The latter was especially funny from the person who said they were only for a little gun control, in the form of background checks on gun purchases. IE, the same instant check that the NRA had supported making law years ago. When it was pointed out to them that that was, in fact, the NRA position, no change in their view of the NRA was evident, nor was any further explanation of exactly what part of the NRA platform was "extremist" forthcoming. It appears to be just some sort of weird base assumption that cannot be affected by mere evidence.) Posted by: Sigivald at February 27, 2007 01:15 PMJeff, just a point of contention. MA hasn't ordered confiscation of "assault weapons" (yet). What MA *has* done is extend the federal ban in perpetuity. No new magazines > 10 rounds, no flash suppressors, no folding or telescoping stocks, etc. But (so far) we haven't had to turn 'em in. SO far. Posted by: Jay G at February 27, 2007 02:21 PMI'm guessing "greasing the cant" is just a particularly appropriate typo. And Jay G, remember to turn 'em in ammo first. Posted by: KCSteve at February 27, 2007 02:24 PMKC -- (and I'm saying this while smiling) -- I'll have you know that I used my thesaurus to find a word that meant a "slope" so I wouldn't be caught using the word "slope" twice in the same sentence. According to my computerized Random House Dictionary, the second [noun] definition of cant is: 1. a salient angle. So there! Posted by: Jeff Soyer at February 27, 2007 02:35 PMIt's tilted? I always wondered about that. Seriously, I hadn't heard your number four about Obama. Very glad to know it. Thanks. Posted by: straightarrow at February 27, 2007 03:25 PMHey, now there's a Thesaurus entry I didn't know already! So I learned something new today. (As well as re-learning things I already knew, like points 1-8. Thanks for the reiteration; I occasionally need to be reminded of things like this.) Posted by: karrde at February 27, 2007 04:38 PMAnd here I thought you mistyped 'cart'. Oh the shame! "They have hammered home the message that everyone is out to take our guns" Jeff, Pat Wray is a spokesman for the AHSA, a small but well funded anti-gun group that appeared just as the AWB was expiring. Posted by: Joe at February 27, 2007 07:43 PMJust keep your eyes on Maryland, folks. The new Governor would just as soon deny all firearms from its citizens. Both he, and his step-father, along with other relatives are known for this. At the moment, I have no idea what is about to happen with a pending bill in the legislature to reconstitute a more extensive "assault weapon ban" since community meeting(s) were very recently held. Yet, I don't hold much hope the Democrats in power will come to use common sense and gain wisdom. Posted by: Daniel at February 27, 2007 08:06 PM"The Liberals are always inflaming the Conservatives. They forget who has all the guns." Posted by: Wai at February 27, 2007 08:48 PMLet me see now . . . this thing has a trigger (firing mechanism), a barrel, a stock/grip and it fires projectiles . . . so it is called a "gun" which includes everything from a missile launcher to a BB gun, be it a pistol, revolver or rifle. It could be mounted on an airplane, tank, water vessel or inside your pocket. The gun banners only focus on "civilian" weapons. But it is perfectly OK for these same gun banners to sanction weapons of mass destruction! Why? They are either stupid civilians or idealogs who want your freedom on a silver platter! Americans - Beware of BOTH! Posted by: Bumper Guy! at February 28, 2007 06:25 AMWell said Jeff, the only thing stopping US gun ownership going the same way as Britain's is the pressure exerted by your voters. If politicians think that banning guns will get them votes, they'll do it. Thinking of "cant", the Irish used to pronounce pound (£) as "punt" so that it rhymed with bank manager.... Yes, Britain used to have an elitist NRA, which eagerly fed semi auto rifles and then pistols to the fascist govt, the main movers in the Tory party for confiscating semi auto rifles the full bore pistols all claimed to be game shooters and that what they were doing was for the good of shooting. Posted by: keith at February 28, 2007 01:29 PMThe text of my email to Pat Wray: I have read several of your remarks defending Zumbo and castigating his critics. I saw you bemoan the fact that we missed a chance to "turn him around", and then blame the NRA for the destruction of his career. First let me say, I do not belong to the NRA, they betrayed me too many times and I cancelled my membership. However, the NRA didn't hurt Zumbo, they didn't even get on board until they decided it was safe, so no. This was not a Pavlovian reflex of NRA dogs. Shame on you for spreading that misinformation. I will assume you didn't know better at the time of writing, else I must assume you a liar. Now, you know better. You have had time to see that charge you leveled was not true. I don't care if you exonerate the NRA or not, but personal honor would require you expose and correct your mistake. Marines don't lie. As to the destruction of Zumbo's career, Zumbo did it himself. For years Second Amendments advocates have fought for the rights of all gun owners, mostly without the help of "hunters". I don't know where we hunters got the idea we were especially endowed and above the melee regarding our rights under the constitution, but if we want proof it isn't true, let the fight be lost by the gun rights advocates who don't hunt. Soon after, none of us will enjoy any but the most dearly bought "privileges" and have no rights at all. I identified myself as a hunter above, and that is no longer exactly accurate. I started hunting when I was nine. I hunted for a lot of years. I no longer eat wild game and in the last few years have gotten to where I couldn't drag a deer home to save my life. So I don't hunt any more. Hunting to kill only, is just killing. I don't trophy hunt either, never have. I owe my grandfather for my outlook. He was half Cherokee and Chickasaw and had very definite ideas about respecting the animals we hunt. To waste a life disrespected the dead animal and ourselves. My personal outlook, I don't push it on others, but you can see I am not opposed to hunting or hunters. Even though I don't hunt anymore, I stilll shoot. I wanted you to know where I stand. I believe as do you that Zumbo had a right to express his opinion. He doesn't have a right to expect others to respect it or him after exposing himself for the elitist and arrogant person he is. He especially doesn't have the right to support from those whose rights he would deny, nor does he have a right to keep a career requiring their support. I seem to have more respect for Zumbo than those that would forgive him. I refuse to believe he is so stupid that after 42 years in the business he was still ignorant. I still believe he thought he could get away with throwing me under the bus and gain popularity in his crowd for it, plus be acceptable enough to the gun grabbers that he would be their last target. Unless he can prove to me that he really is stupid, I am not prepared to believe he was just ignorant and now sees the light. The only light he sees is his career going up in flames. He is trying to piss it out. Ok, but I ain't helping him. Posted by: straightarrow at February 28, 2007 04:05 PMthe comment input form disappears. Your comments are welcome. You don't need to enter a URL and you don't need a "valid" email address, either. Note though that MT Blacklist is installed to flag suspiciously spam-like strings. Unfortunately, because of the bastard spammers, the strings "google.com" and "yahoo.com" (even in your email address) are currently banned as well. So are strings such as "cialis" (a common spam) which rules out words such as "socialism". Try putting a hyphan in a word like that. By Golly, you're reading an archived post. Click Here to head to the main page and read current stuff...Into science fiction? Check out my group blog novel, Colony: Alchibah. See the reader's guide there for first-timer tips. |