Two men enter, one man leaves. Except I won't acknowledge either of these morons as a man--not in the sense of a whole one.Who's the Fudd with the biggest "but"?
Willard Rabert?
I have been a hunter for over 50 years. Yet, I have never owned a pistol and have no intentions of owning one or an assault rifle. On the Internet, I found 361,000 automatic weapons for sale. Why are so many needed?Or this weed (sorry, link requires a password, so I only have the KABA summary):
I'm a strong Second Amendment rights person. I stand against fire arms registration and government control and confiscation of our guns. But I strongly feel that the firearm manufacturers of our country are making a big mistake in producing the AR-15 sporting rifles.Hobbies. Yeah, that's what people are willing to fight for.
[Via The Bitter Clinger and KABA Newslinks]
David said, "Hobbies. Yeah, that's what people are willing to fight for."
ReplyDeleteI disagree. People like this are usually not willing to fight for anything.
Am I truly that inept at conveying irony and sarcasm?
ReplyDeleteThey are dieing out as the "AR-15 sporting rifles" begin to dominate. I see the adverts for them all the time on the Outdoor channel. I think it is great that the AR-15 is becoming so popular.
ReplyDeleteMay I submit my own entry? These guys are novices, and I think I have a greater depth of knowledge with which to form inane, embarrassing arguments.
ReplyDeleteI say Willard has the lead for Fudd of the Year 2009.
ReplyDeleteSimply on the grounds of his viewing of so called *automatic weapons*, which have been heavily regulated, if not outlawed outright since 1934.
While the San Marco's editorial is limb. He uses the term *sporting rifle*, and admits that the *AR* does not stand for *assault weapon*.
As of the wee hours this morning, Jim Darnell's "pragmatic" article about the inadvisability of sporting ARs was available without a password. I think I know why he decided to change that:
ReplyDeleteStatement on Darnell column
A column which appeared in the Thursday edition of the San Marcos Daily Record has caused some confusion, according to author Jim Darnell.
Darnell released the following statement Friday.
“Regarding the views expressed in the San Marcos Daily Record outdoors column of Nov. 12, 2009 and the opinion of outdoor journalist Jim Darnell, who is the president of God's Great Outdoors TV: God's Great Outdoors TV is totally unrelated to God's Great Outdoors Radio and host Gerry Caillouet and all of God's Great Outdoors radio sponsors. Please do not contact God's Great Outdoors radio or Gerry Caillouet in relation to the outdoors column of Jim Darnell.”
I think he foresaw the Zumbo-like backlash just in time to avert--or at least minimize--the damage to his career.
Found the complete Jim Darnell article at AR15.com.
ReplyDeleteFirst they came for the communists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a communist;
ReplyDeleteThen they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak out for me.
Martin Niemöller (1892-1984)
As Boston T. Party put it, you get the feeling that if the government banned hunting and ordered them to hand over their turnbolts and fancy over-under shotguns, these Fudd HOBBYISTS would happily move on to radio-controlled model helicopters.
ReplyDeleteAnd the way these schlubs always start out their "common-sense" attacks on RKBA by trying to establish some kind of "sportsman" cred puts me in mind of a bigot prefacing some ignorant comment with, "Some of my best friends are black..."
They are trying to divide and conquer the gun owning public by creating a division between the hunter/sportsmen and the "others" who own guns for the serious purpose of self defense - guns that are meant to -gasp- possibly be used against another human being!
ReplyDeleteIn the process, they are implicity trying to 'buy off' the sportsmen, eliminating their objections by insuniating that they will be left with their hobby shotguns and rifles, while totally ignoring and trampling on the right to own the defensive aspects of hand guns, denigrating and trivializing the status of a firearm to nothing more than a piece of sporting equipment.
It's a classic divide and flank manuever. Once firearms have been trivialized to merely hobby status, then in the words of one famous gun grabber, we will be told to "find another hobby".
In the end, neither group will have guns, not the people who need them for defense, nor the sports men.
Add the word "rifles" to that, Luke, and we got us a bumper sticker!
ReplyDelete