Anti Gunner Wears Glock For Thirty Days - Page 3
Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 104

Thread: Anti Gunner Wears Glock For Thirty Days

  1. I posted a comment this morning, but it's "awaiting moderation" which you can bet means, waiting to make sure your comment is in line with our view, so it will most likely be canned. Here's my comment...

    Great idea!!! Way to make your point! It's painfully obvious you have absolutely no plans of remaining impartial, but rather just use this "experiment" to further your anti-gun agenda. Since you just want to make a point, why not "accidentally" shoot one of the gun carriers you see in Starbucks next time you go? That'll show 'em the gun laws need to change! Heck, you may even get Starbucks to change their view as well. Man, think of all the birds you'll kill with that stone... You'll get to "off" a likely NRA member like so many Brady Camp folks have called for, you may change a law and prevent a battered woman from being able to protect herself from an abusive ex, you may get Starbucks to stop supporting right to carry, man the list goes on. And you can just say, golly gee, it was an accident! See, I told you guns were bad! Ah heck, who am I kidding? We all know you are no risk of having a negligent discharge, because I guarantee you didn't even buy any bullets for it. Keep up the great work!

  2.   
  3. #22
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Sepra Peratus/Arkansas
    Posts
    1,638
    This is what posted but is still awaiting moderation
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    All the women that I know had someone teach them which end of the gun to point at the target. With great power comes great responsibility. If a person wants or needs a self defence weapon they should have enough training to be able to protect themselves. Or what’s the point? Just because a person can doesn’t mean they should. If they’re too afraid to even have a sidearm then the chances that they would use one to protect themselves or their kids is very small.
    But if a person really needs one for protection from an abusive husband or rapist, isn’t it a good thing that getting one is easy. If it was hard to get one you could be dead before you could take possession of your protection. You were talking about your thoughts of mass deranged shooters killing people in a Starbucks, if you were there you could stop the killer long before the police showed up! The deranged mass killers do their dirty deed in Gun Free Zone because all the law abiding citizens are disarmed. There isn’t anyone with a gun to stop him!
    I know it'll never get posted. I don't fit their agenda.
    Last edited by gejoslin; 06-19-2013 at 06:53 PM. Reason: added lines
    ~Responsible people who understand that their personal protection is up to them, provide themselves with protection. Those that don't have only themselves to blame.~Proud NRA ~SAF~GoA Member~

  4. #23
    Many of the comments have so much fail I can't begin.

    But not surprising considering most are her Brady friends. (Hey write and article and tell all your fellow activists to validate it with comments, right?)

    Bob Bates, is probably the same one linked to the Brady Campaign.


    And I'm guessing "Shikha" (an uncommon name) is Shikha Hamilton another Brady member.
    http://www.leagle.com/decision-resul...WAR2-1986-2006

    Then there's Ted Zocco-Hochhalter
    zocco Search Results It Can Happen Here

    Joan Peterson
    Another Gun Blog: Guess I'm "Unnatural"
    You can have good intentions and not be right.

  5. #24
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    SE FL and SE OH
    Posts
    5,602
    Quote Originally Posted by mmn View Post
    I think her article serves a valid purpose - exposing how easy it is for any idiot in her state to get a gun and a concealed carry permit with no requirement other than a background check. And I'm positive there's many more like her that do it, carry it, don't get any training, and don't write about it. I for one wouldn't assume most people who buy guns and carry them concealed are at all responsible, intelligent, moral or possess any of the other qualities we like to think they have.

    Here in Florida all I had to do for a concealed carry permit was show I had some accepted training. In my case that was a DD214 showing an honorable discharge some 40+ years ago.

    Regards
    Michael
    First off, welcome fellow Floridian.
    Now comes the major question. Did you forget what you learned while in the military that got you to the point of getting a DD214? If you learned how to handle the guns then, have you forgotten all the safety rules now, 40 years later? Some of us have been taught how to handle guns safely enough that we can pass an NRA basic pistol class test without even cracking a book. Same thing has applied to my having a hazardous materials endorsement on our drivers licenses. When taught correctly, you don't unlearn the material. Dad also had retired 42 years ago but during his time in ( 1946 to 1971 ) he had had to stay qualified on the 1911. Even at age 83 he could still out shoot me with my own PT1911. And he didn't even like that gun at first. Not because of the make but because of the 3 dot sights. He was use to the typical mil-spec sights.
    NRA Certified Pistol Instructor
    NRA Certified RSO
    Normal is an illusion. What is normal to the spider is chaos to the fly.

  6. #25
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    SE FL and SE OH
    Posts
    5,602
    Quote Originally Posted by gejoslin View Post
    This is what posted but is still awaiting moderation

    I know it'll never get posted. I don't fit their agenda.
    http://lonelymachines.org/wp-content...cal_reload.jpg She is of the same ilk as DiFi.
    NRA Certified Pistol Instructor
    NRA Certified RSO
    Normal is an illusion. What is normal to the spider is chaos to the fly.

  7. #26
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    An Alternate Reality, I Assure You...
    Posts
    5,115
    I tried making some informative and intelligently insulting comments to some of the dumber replies but the moderator quickly removed my posts... that's too funny!
    Quote Originally Posted by Deanimator View Post
    [*]Don't be afraid to use sarcasm, mockery and humiliation. They don't respect you. There's no need to pretend you respect them.
    Operation Veterans Relief: http://www.opvr.org/home.html

  8. #27
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    SE FL and SE OH
    Posts
    5,602
    Quote Originally Posted by gunnerbob View Post
    I tried making some informative and intelligently insulting comments to some of the dumber replies but the moderator quickly removed my posts... that's too funny!
    Trouble maker!.................
    NRA Certified Pistol Instructor
    NRA Certified RSO
    Normal is an illusion. What is normal to the spider is chaos to the fly.

  9. Quote Originally Posted by symbols View Post
    I'd be more inclined to follow this if she posed with her new pistol in a bikini.
    No you don't: I've seen her pics from the thread on Arfcom. :(


    Quote Originally Posted by mmn View Post
    I think her article serves a valid purpose - exposing how easy it is for any idiot in her state to get a gun and a concealed carry permit with no requirement other than a background check. And I'm positive there's many more like her that do it, carry it, don't get any training, and don't write about it. I for one wouldn't assume most people who buy guns and carry them concealed are at all responsible, intelligent, moral or possess any of the other qualities we like to think they have.

    Here in Florida all I had to do for a concealed carry permit was show I had some accepted training. In my case that was a DD214 showing an honorable discharge some 40+ years ago.

    Regards
    Michael
    If you don't believe in the 2nd amendment, why are you on a gun board? Sounds you would be far more at home where the author hangs out at i.e. The Brady Bunch.

    BTW, if someone states that your post is "drivel", it's not a compliment. (And it was drivel, BTW - no offense).

  10. #29
    ezkl2230 Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by BluesStringer View Post
    There's no mention in the blog post whether "Tony" was the gun shop owner or not, but whether he was or wasn't, it wasn't his responsibility (or even within his authority) to demand she quantify her knowledge of firearms before making her purchase.



    I could agree that a nice thing to do would have been to offer her advice there on the spot, or where to get training if he didn't have time to help her right then, but had he offered, she would've turned him down because her whole point was to meet the minimum requirements to carry for the next 30 days. Seems rather harsh to blame a cop on the beat for not doing what she would not have accepted even if he had.



    I have little doubt that "Tony" would've happily done the same thing had the manipulative, phony, anti-gun activist before him simply asked. She had no more interest in asking the counter-help for instruction than she did the cop though. Her whole point was to avoid any instruction that would make her more qualified than the bumbling, murderous, trigger-happy fools she perceives all of us to be.



    It can get worse than that, actually. Several years ago I was hired for an armed guard position for a new account with a contract company. They were hiring, orientating and training the whole 16-person crew at the same time. So we get to the range to qualify (using 10 whole rounds!!!), and this one lady not only could not rack the slide on the Glock 22, she literally blew two holes in the rafters of the range, and they still passed her! There were two former sheriffs deputies qualifying that day, and several of us, myself included, had years of both concealed carry and other armed security experience, so imagine my surprise when, on the first shift I pulled at the new account, I was introduced to this lady as the graveyard shift supervisor! Seems she had a semester or three of criminal justice in college, plus a couple of other umm....circumstances....that moved her to the head of the line, so there it was, we were being supervised by someone who would've had to ask one of her subordinates to load her weapon if they weren't passed from shift to shift already loaded.



    That's a very convoluted theory of what the 2nd Amendment says. It harkens back to the days before Heller where gun-grabbers tried to limit individuals' access to guns because they weren't part of the militia (the ol' "collective right vs. individual right" meme). Heller settled that issue once and for all - it is unquestionably an individual right. The militia part is simply an introductory preface to the meat of the matter, "...the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." The preface gave the reason why the individual right was necessary, because individuals would muster in furtherance of militia activity with their own weapons in tow. Once mustered, it was up to militia hierarchy to determine training standards, having nothing whatsoever to do with how well trained each individual armed citizen was when they were at home or otherwise away from militia duty.

    Yours is the first analysis of 2A meaning(s) I've ever heard that concludes that it, "...also says that the person who takes advantage of that right must be well disciplined in the use of those firearms." I contend that is grossly erroneous compared to any legal analysis available today. I would contend further that "well regulated" and "well disciplined" have separate and distinct meanings for each phrase, and that "well trained in firearms" is not necessarily synonymous with either.

    Blues
    My so-called "analysis" of the Second Amendment is no such thing. It is merely an observation that the Second Amendment requires discipline which, in turn, requires training. Merely owning a firearm is not enough; the owner must train himself to be proficient if they wish to abide by the spirit of the amendment, just as training and discipline is required of the citizen militia in order for it to be effective.

  11. Quote Originally Posted by S&W645 View Post
    First off, welcome fellow Floridian.
    Now comes the major question. Did you forget what you learned while in the military that got you to the point of getting a DD214? If you learned how to handle the guns then, have you forgotten all the safety rules now, 40 years later?
    I suspect your question is rhetorical, and it's not really relevant to the subject of the thread. So at the risk of being "moderated" I'll answer any way.

    No.

    Regards
    Michael

Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast