Gun Hub Forums banner

1 - 20 of 23 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,117 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
So, I'm trying to shock some sense into a formerly close friend who flipped to the other side after the Newtown cluster of spree-killings (it's time to STOP calling them school shootings like they're something special, which plays into the other side's hands, and just lump them in with all the other spree killings), and I need some advice on a draft email. Rules are, keep it intellectual and articulate... I need well-reasoned approaches that I can club a former law-student over the head with and have a good chance of them getting her to see that if she helps DiFi & Co. throw US under the bus today, SHE will be joining us under the tires tomorrow and all we'll have to say is "Told You So".

Here's what I have so far...
Do give Olson & Kopel, "All the Way Down The Slippery Slope: Gun Prohibition in England and Some Lessons for Civil Liberties in America," 22 Hamline Law Review 399-465 (1999) a read. For that matter, a whole page of law-review articles for my side can be found at Second Amendment Law Library: Law Journals, [strike: "though I don't know why I'm wasting my breath as your mind is made up"]--just remember, the people you're siding with today, after you've thrown us under the bus, they will put you under the wheels with us next... when she was Attorney General, Janet Reno once declared "registration is just a first step, confiscation is the ultimate goal" and NOBODY on your side has repudiated that nor has she retracted it (and that's precisely how [strike: "your idiots in"] Sacramento set the stage for the Roberti-Roos ban that keeps getting expanded every time they find something new to be scared of.). And [strike: "your galpal"] Feinstein has said as much herself, here: Dianne Feinstein caught in a lie - YouTube So I trust you can see why pro-banners' LONG history of broken promises and not letting the ink dry on one set of demands before starting another leads us to see anything "offered" as "negotiating in Bad Faith," ESPECIALLY in parallel with the history of Democrat politicians saying "give US what WE want now (tax hikes, amnesty for illegal aliens) and we'll give you something (spending cuts, entitlement reform, better border security) later" and then welshing on the deal as soon as they've gotten what they've wanted, or interpreting a "cut" as meaning "we're just not going to increase spending AS MUCH as we planned"... which is like someone who normally gains five pounds a month, going on a diet and calling a gain of three "losing weight."

An enlightening little piece out of New York: Gun Restrictions Have Always Bred Defiance, Black Markets - Reason.com How well did Prohibition of alcohol--which, I would remind you, required a Constitutional amendment to do, so by that precedent the 2A with its "Shall Not Be Infringed" is still Law of the Land until itself repealed or amended--work out in its goals? It didn't, and it only caused more harm by giving more power to organized crime. As a thought experiment--I'm not even agreeing to the Constitutionality of this, but just as a discussion, never mind that there would be only negligible compliance and the cost in time and manpower to do it would be far beyond practical, let's assume that you could wave a magic wand and get rid of every semiauto rifle in the country, which includes the M1 Garand Uncle Frank carried in WWII and the M1 Carbine he liberated Mauthausen concentration-camp with... Okay, now that gives a significant firepower advantage to the drug cartels immediately, and then their allies, and finally they will see another moneymaker in contraband and the country will be awash in iron from them and they probably WON'T stop at mere semis but go all the way to full-autos. It would have the unintended consequence of basically bringing Mexico's problems here... oh, by the way, since courts have ruled that police have no duty to protect the individual or any group, currently proposed legislation, if in effect, then would have basically left the Koreans trapped in the LA riots to whatever mercy the rioting mob besieging them may have been inclined to show... those AR-15s on those rooftops SAVED LIVES by being a force-multiplier, and such policy would have (and Roberti-Roos HAS) left them defenseless against any future such threat. What HAS happened before CAN and probably WILL happen again... it's just a matter of the trigger conditions being present.

By the way, the shooter at Sandy Hook was an undiagnosed schiozophrenic who had his family hiding him rather than getting him the care he NEEDED, because they're a Money/Socialite Family (dad is a VP at GE) and didn't want to be ostracized from their precious snob-circuit... and one of the people on Biden's task-force is a cop whose own son is a thwarted wannabe Spree Killer. [Citations included in email, which is on my other laptop.]

On top of which, the genie is out of the bottle: it's actually very simple to make an AR receiver, so there will be many who would just give up one and have ten more made before the confiscating agency's vehicle was even back on the street, and quite a few of those would be likely, once they had made the decision to cross the Rubicon, to go all the way to full-auto. Pair that with the fact that the AR is easily oe of the most common rifles in America and is thus protected under the Heller decision's "Common Use" test...

For the utility of semiauto rifles, Mas Ayoob has an article worth reading at Massad Ayoob » Blog Archive » WHY GOOD PEOPLE NEED SEMIAUTOMATIC FIREARMS AND

I am sorry, but I must withdraw that range invitation--if you honestly believe the average citizen should not have things and are truly honest with yourself, then you will recognize that it is hypocritical to reap the benefit of things one doesn't believe people should have..
Thoughts? Additional data? Elaboration? This isn't the "Dear Jane, goodbye, have a nice life" letter yet, but if she can't be brought back to her senses (as recently as October, she was telling me that she agreed with me about the importance of the citizen rifle in home and homeland defense, which to me means best-case she's been swept up in the SFO-area hysteria) that may well be the next note she reads from me.

For the record, I am cross-posting this on a couple other forums as well. Thanks, guys!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,500 Posts
Six young women needed a gun, JUST ONCE in their lives, and they were FORBIDDEN BY LAW from having one. They are dead as are 20 children they could not protect.
Geoff
Who figures enough said.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,432 Posts
Where you lost it was with the word "Reason".

The Progressives don't understand reason or logic. They deal in "feelings".
However they feel about something is how it IS.

If you disagree with how they feel, you're wrong.
If wrong, and you refuse to admit it, you're being deliberately bad.
If bad, you're evil.
If evil, whatever is necessary to stop your evil is acceptable.

This is how you ultimately wind up with show trials or just pistol shots in the head in some basement administered by a commissar.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,882 Posts
Diamondback,

Trying to have a reasoned discussion with a FAR LEFT LIB and/or a "gun hater" is as difficult as teaching a hog to sing opera. - It annoys the pig & is frustrating to "the teacher".

yours, sw
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,117 Posts
Discussion Starter #5 (Edited)
Or, an idea for an alternate tack... given that all I own is a 1911 and a 10/22 (the actual Garand and Carbine that Uncle Frank used are lost to the sands of time, but it is important to me that someday I will own a set that he could not tell from his own) and that she CLAIMS to specifically support handgun ownership and carry for self-defense, maybe see if my old instructor and I could set up an appointment next time she's in the area, bring a whole pile of iron and just when she gets to the point of having fun spring the "Oh by the way, everything you've handled today is on Feinstein and McCarthy's ban lists by name or feature..."

What the heck IS their hard-on for the M1 Carbine and the Thompson anyway? Even the original short barrel length on the latter, never mind the 5.5" extension required for Title I versions, today would require you to literally rebuild yourself--not just in wardrobe but in how you carry yourself) around it far beyond any other weapon... As I said over on Mas's blog, why would anybody choose that when for the same weight they can get more ammo and better concealment and deployment out of three loaded Glocks? (We'll leave MY unique case out of this... I can at least HIT with a Thompson, while with a Glock I can't hit the broad side of a barn from inside. LOL Hence my preference for big heavy stable .45s...)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,627 Posts
I really try to impress upon gun haters the language of the Constitution.

Where else in that document does the phrase "the People" mean anything other than the citizens of the United States?

The 10th Amendment:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

I ain't a constitutional scholar, but I can read.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,200 Posts
Another argument, made by a caller to the Rush Limbaugh show the other day:

If the intent of the Founders to allow Freedom of Speech covers modern technologies like Television, Movies, Telephones and the Internet, Twitter, Internet boards and so on, doesn't the intent in allowing ownership of firearms cover modern technologies too?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,543 Posts
Ignoring the truism that a Brown Bess was an assault rifle in 1776......

The fastest rising crime in America is home invasion, this is generally done by teams, and armed teams at that. Two offenders seems to be common in my area at this time. That isn't always true, we have an incresing gang presence.

While many criminals flee at armed resistance what happens when they don't? We have no civilian stats, so we have to go with those from law enforcement. NYPD officers, over several years, have needed from 3.5 to 4.7 rounds/shots for one officer to incapacitate one felonious aggressor. If that aggessor is armed with a firearm and shooting, the stats go up to 6 and a fraction to 8 and a fraction for one officer to incapacitate one aggressor. And, in some cases, much higher round counts have existed. Remember these are averages.

Obviously, the good person is in a statistical pickle with 2 bad guys and a 10 round magazine. I'm not real sure about others, but my jammies don't have magazine pouches.

BTW, there's a really good piece at www.policeone.com/active-shooter/articles/2058168-active-shooters-in-schools-the-enemy-is-denial/
describes commentary by Dave Grossman on how to prevent school shootings.

While the handgun is probablly the most common self defense tool, the military replaced most handguns in WWII with the M1 carbine. It was much easier for most people to place shots accurately and that's what stops aggressors. The AR pattern rifles are easily adaptable to people of small stature and women, have little recoil and, per FBI tests, when using the proper ammunition; missed shots are much less likely to penetrate walls and injure the innocent than most pistol ammunition.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,117 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Mr. Moore, I saw Wyllie's, Eways's and Avery's columns but couldn't find one by Grossman--don't know if it might be members-only content, and I'm approaching the "amputate like a gangrenous limb" phase due to her decision to take retaliatory action against a site I've been a member of for many years in some kind of Glenn Close in Fatal Attraction "I will NOT be ignored!" fit of pique in reply to my asking for a week to cool things off.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,543 Posts
OK, sorry about that chief. Advanced search found it and I installed the corrrect link in the above post.. Dated May 5, 2010. Imagine how many lives would have been saved-or will be post Newtown- had people paid attention and acted instead of posturing.

I just figured out the gangerenous limb stuff. Don't know that anything Dr. Grossman says may help. Maybe if you refer to him as "Doctor", it will be more convincing than "Lt. Col", what with him being a warmongering Neanderthal and all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,117 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
So, at this point I'm looking at three options short of total amputation.

>Option 1: Range trip, Bait & Switch. Get her hooked, get her to agree how each iron can be useful, THEN spring the trap about "IF legislation you supported were passed everything you've handled today would be banned."

>Option 2: Variation on the above. BIG pile of fun toys for my old instructor and myself, little pile of Old West-era designs and other PC "gelding guns" for her. Explanation: "This is all YOU thought Mere Proles should have, so YOU don't GET to play with the fun toys." Repeat a few times, then finally "relent". "But I still don't understand... if YOU don't think we should have it, why do YOU want it?"

>Option 3: A note riffing on this basic outline...
Look, I thought we had an understanding about not touching each others third-rails--I stay away from discussing the gruesome and horrific barbarity you call Partial-Birth Abortion, you stay away from arguing gun-bans. I'd propose one single "Best Shot" effort to give you a more complete view of things with the data from my side including multiple noted firearms experts, then after that if you still aren't sold we just never discuss either of those subjects again. IF we can come back... the renege on not touching hot-button issues hurt, the last note you sent me* just plain cheesed me off--threats, coercion, intimidation and lashing out at those around another are the actions of a tyrant towards those they believe under their thumb, NOT of friends and equals, but IF we can come back from this and go back to the way things were I'm willing to try if you are... though it will take time to figure out how to work around the fact that you've demonstrated by your lashing out at my friends that I can't trust you. DO NOT confuse this for a "rollover and play dead," you do anything like that again and I cut you off for good. AND you have to apologize to me AND to my friends if you want to do this.
*I had floated this on a veteran's forum for a particular USAF aircraft where I'm a "legacy member"--those guys are my oldest and closest friends, even older than the crew from our old Am Back days--and she stalked me over there, then maliciously and falsely reported the forum to its host for Terms of Service violations, sending me a note about "I reported your board for adult content, and also put bug in Patrick's [site-host admin she knows personally] ear about nepotism... I need to impress upon you that you DO have a bit of a reason to be paranoid--NEVER EVER cross me, because it will suck for you." Pretty clear threat there, and the only reason I haven't really thrown down a "WE'RE DONE" is that there are a few users on the site we co-admin who I actually care about, and I'm only sticking around and giving things one last try for their sake until I can find them somewhere new away from this narcissistic sociopath. (But isn't that description ALL Progressives and Radical Leftists?)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,549 Posts
Who is James Yeager?
He is CEO of some company called Tactical Response I do not know how large it is?The other night he made a video while lets say he was emotionally charged stating"if this goes another inch I will start killing/dhooting people" only a close quote.Homeland Security has pulled his CCW(within 24hrs).The Feds are watching and reading everything ATTM methinks taking the pulse of the nation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,500 Posts
What law gives "Homeland Security" the right to pull a CCW which is usually issued by a State?
Geoff
Who has recently become a full 2nd supporter, after the NY debacle and the publishing of Honored Slave locations.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,117 Posts
Discussion Starter #19
"Don't you know, Comrade, all who dare defy Glorious Leader are terrorists, whether proven otherwise or not?"

*snort*

Personally, I think any good Yeager MAY have done through the whole rest of the video was more than undone by the final few sentences, and other than the extreme frustration of both sides I'm really not sure why it got tacked onto my simple request for strategy advice instead of being in its own thread, hint hint...

Mods, could you please split?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
Be Diplomatic

The art of diplomacy has often been described as being able to tell someone to go to hell in such a way as they look forward to the trip. Strip anything out of your message that might be considered demeaning or insulting. You may or may not win her over, but there is no sense at getting her resentful to the point of taking action against the cause. She sounds like a smart person and therefore needs to know that most of what she hears on the news are distorted lies. Give examples. Make sure she knows the true statistics, e.g. only about 4% of homicides are perpetrated with long guns and AR-15's are a small subset of that number, less than 1% of crimes are committed with guns purchased legally but outside the requirements of a background check, CCW holders as a group have a better criminal record than the police, etc. And as my daughter pointed out to me, the theater shooter in CO passed by 4 theaters on his way to shoot up the 5th. Why? Maybe because the first 4 did not prohibit concealed weapons.
 
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
Top