A little advertising discretion might go a long way in quieting fears that are manipulated by gun control advocates. [More]I might well ask what your agenda is, Roberts, making an asinine recommendation like that. Do you really think presenting a kinder, gentler face will make your enemies not hate you?
The agenda is domination and tyranny, something I don't see you addressing, in all your prattling on about "beautiful lines" and "beautiful animals."
Good grief.
[Via Zachary G]
"Nevertheless, the defense of gun rights has little to gain from TV programs depicting the fun of killing Bambi’s mother."
ReplyDeleteroberts doesn't seem to be aware of the "fudd" distinction. i thought this was a strange article, too. animals are property. they don't have rights. animals display emotion, sure, and can connect with humans on that level. but of what consequence is it?
if your politics are to be driven by your emotional circuitry alone, then why not just turn in all your guns right now? they're pretty loud, you know. might make your eyes water.
the "fudd" distinction, i meant, being such as those who do not actually care about the defense of gun rights. just to be explicit.
ReplyDeleteI love animals, they're delicious!!
ReplyDeleteSadly, I do think Roberts has a point. If all guns were painted pink, there might be less restrictions today. When an anti sees a black gun, they soil themselves.
Sorry, the point is lost. Bloomberg had a fit over colored guns. Do a search for "Furious Mike." I've read stuff by antis condemning pink rifles. It just gives them another area to attack us on.
ReplyDeleteThere is no concession you can make that will not just be helping them secure their position for the next assault.
I usually have a receptive mind to Roberts writings, but he's really gone off the reservation with this one. Truly bizarre and not what I would consider characteristic of him.
ReplyDeleteThe sentimental pap about animals makes me shake my head. Maybe he's been hi-jacked by Firehard...
"No! No! No...you don't understand...these aren't weapons at all! They're just Spor-ting guns..."
ReplyDeleteThe words above were uttered in 1995 during the debate to ban all handguns in Great Britain.
Always like hearing from these "were-men". The only thing missing from Roberts' whine was a new recipe for quiche, and a recommendation for a light beer to drink while rubbing your girlfriends feet. Is there something in suits that make your balls fall off? Oh, and a little discretion might go a long way to getting you on a long train ride to a snowy concentration camp.
ReplyDeleteThat is the oddest explanation of the 1911 Sullivan Act I have ever read.
ReplyDeleteSee http://wapedia.mobi/en/Sullivan_Act or other sources.
"Sponsor "Big Tim" Sullivan reputedly desired the law so that his criminal cohorts could go about their activities unimpeded by citizens defending themselves with concealed handguns. - "Court Shows Courage on Guns," by Mike Hudson at http://www.niagarafallsreporter.com/column357.html"
In other words, Sullivan siezed control over who in his district could carry weapons, specifically disarming those who worked for his political opponents, who were then left defenseless from Sullivan's gooons, er, political operatives, ensuring Sullivan's political power.
Effective political terror in action. The Germans learned well from both us and the English.
Even better yet, see the Jew For the Preservation of Firearms Ownership article "Wouldn't It Be Nice? Part Three: A Time For Choices" by L. Neil Smith, which discusses the Sullivan Act and a Bill of Rights Culture at:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.jpfo.org/smith/smith-wouldntitbenicept3.htm
Roberts seems to be trying to get into the minds of the anti-gunners to help us understand their positions.
ReplyDeleteEwww. Like we need help.
My granddaughter and I just watched the new Disney TV movie "Princess Protection Program," a comedy with a message aimed at girls 5 and up. A general stages a coup on a neighboring island and the princess about to be crowned queen is rescued by the PPP. Neither the soldiers nor the American security specialist had guns. The bad guys take over by literally grabbing people.
It's a fantasy for impressionable young girls, sure, but...
Remember when the bad-guy federal agents' handguns were digitally replaced by walkie-talkies in "E.T."? "Too scary," even though the feds WERE willing to shoot someone to keep the extraterrestrial from escaping?
Our kids are being taught that bad guys are harmless buffoons, but their parents are responsible for the imminent death of our PLANET.
Roberts, I'm sure, was being ironic. He MUST know that even a pink water pistol is a terrorist destructive device these days.
I hope.
Ugly guns are designed to be functional and dependable. That's why we have to be PROUD to make, sell and own them.