damnum absque injuria

November 27, 2008

Paranoid Gun Owners

Filed under:   by Xrlq @ 9:46 pm

Hillary Clinton Tamara Dietrich of the Newport News Daily Press pokes fun at gun owners who think Barack Obama is not a friend of gun owners.

A black man gets elected president and half the country dives for the panic room, buying up guns and squirreling away supplies like fatalists awaiting the End of Days. That’s an exaggeration, of course. Barack Obama is biracial, not black.

Lovely of Ms. Dietrich to bring up race in an article on guns, or for that matter, any other topic except … um … race. I know plenty of gun owners who fear new restrictions on their right to own or carry guns. I also know plenty of gunophobes who think guns are icky, can’t imagine why an sane person would want to own one, and would be delighted to see government take everyone else’s guns away. I do not know a single individual, however, who is in favor of having his guns taken away from a white guy, but opposed to having them taken away from a black guy. Do you? Does Dietrich? If not, what the hell point is there in bringing race up?

Further, even if race were a legitimate topic of discussion in this context, the notion that Obama’s white mother precludes him from being “black” is evidence that the infamous “one drop rule” never really went away, it just came full circle. In the days of Jim Crow, one drop of black blood meant you were black. Now, per Ms. Dietrich, one drop of white blood apparently means you can’t be. Query how many American blacks meet Ms. Dietrich’s definition of “black.” It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to know why the average African-American has a lighter complexion than the average African-African. But I digress.

“Hee hee heeeee …” chortles “HG Robinson” in the very first post to reporter Peter Dujardin’s story last week on the local run on weaponry. “Clearly President Obama is looking to ban handguns and close loopholes in the law first chance he can. … You gun nuts better stock up now.”

First, Obama hasn’t said he wants to ban handguns.

His former colleague John Lott begs to differ on that, but just for grits and shins, let’s go Lambert on the guy and assume he’s lying. For all you or I know, maybe Obama never really did say he wanted to ban handguns. He did, however, write that he did, nodded when asked if he did, voted against the law stripping his home town and a few suburbs of their “right” to perosecute homeowners who use otherwise lawfully owned handguns in otherwise lawful self defense, refused to sign the Heller brief supporting a common-senes reading of the Second Amendment (or even the wishy-washy brief offered by the Bush Administration) and appointed Eric Holder, who had signed a different Heller brief advocating the “collective” (read: no) rights interpretation, a view too extreme even for the four dissenting Justices in that case. So pardon me when I refuse to take an ounce of solace from the fact that Obama supposedly never came out and said “I hereby want to ban handguns.” To the extent that actions speak louder than words, he screamed it.

And second, my own theory is that HG is a so-called gun nut, himself or herself, just priming the pump.

And mine is “nanny nanny boo boo, everything you say bounces off me and sticks to you.” Seriously, what the hell kind of argument was that supposed to be? Whether HG himself is or isn’t a “gun nut” is irrelevant to whether or not his statement is factually accurate.

I have similar suspicions about a poster who signs off as “Tyrone” (really? Not Denzel or Tyrell or Sambo?) and taunts that he will “break into your house and rape you” and “Nobody should have guns but us thugs!”

Sure enough, some dupe bites.

Either that, or one obvious Moby responds to another, and the real dupe is the author of this article and any reader who believes her:

“Bring it on Tyrone,” growls a “mr white,” “and you will be one DEAD African!!!!!”

“Mr white,” eh? Would that be this Mr. White? Obviously this is a staged argument between mobies, or possibly between a single Moby and himself, but sure enough, some dupe bites.

“People are concerned that they might not have the right to buy them later,” York County gun shop manager Bill Winfree said in Friday’s paper. “It’s an unknown, but they don’t want to get caught without it.”

His customers’ rationale is Obama’s position on guns, which Winfree defines as “he doesn’t want us to own any.”

Pardon my French, but au contraire. Obama has said he supports the Second Amendment

He also said he supports handgun bans, as long as they are disingenuously described as “gun-safety” laws.

(which specifies a “well-regulated” militia, by the way)

Which means what, exactly, by-the-way? And far from “specifying” what a well-regulated militia is, it merely mentions that one is necessary.

as well as “common sense” gun laws.

Well, then. Either he won’t try to take away our guns, or he will, but if he does, he promises to invoke “common sense” first. I feel better now.

He says he doesn’t approve of taking shotguns, rifles or handguns from law-abiding citizens.

Pardon my French, but vous êtes une idiote if you actually believe that.

He likely will, however, oppose military-style assault weapons and concealed weapons. I don’t happen to agree with his position on concealed weapons, but I’m not about to rush out and buy a Bushmaster because of it.

Let’s see. You have a guy who hails from a city that prohibits handgun ownership outright, lives in a city that until recently prohibited not only handgun ownership but possession of rifles or shotguns in any manner that could conceivably enable the homeowner to defend himself, and who has spoken out vociferously in favor of both cities’ “right” to pass such laws, while declining to drop so much as a hint that these laws are bad policy. From this we’re supposed to deduce that left to his own devices, Obama will ban ugly guns that look as though they were suited toward military use, and will also try to make it illegal for any American to use any weapon to protect himself outside the home, but won’t try to ban anything else. And we’re supposed to be OK with a law prohibiting us from protecting ourselves outside the home because what the hey, we weren’t supposed to leave home anyway.

No, it smells like something else is fueling the buying frenzy that happy gun shop owners say is bigger than Y2K. Bigger than 9/11. Bigger than Christmas.

And it smells a lot like oh-my-god-there’s-a-black-man-in-the-White-House.

Right, ‘cuz no one ever had a problem with a white guy who committed himself in writing to “the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns,” or who inspired his own state’s top gun lobbyist to say that “in all my years in the Capitol I have never met a legislator who harbors more contempt for the law-abiding firearm owner than does Barack Obama.” Nope, couldn’t have anything to do with that, so let’s play the race card instead.

Simplistic? Pot calling the kettle.

Simplistic is beside the point. Try “completely and totally off-base.”

A reader named “CAT” posits the same — perhaps subconscious — motive:

“You folks fear that with a black (muslim, terrorist, socialist, whatever) guy in the White House, somehow, crime will increase and, more specifically, black criminals will become more emboldened.”

Now there’s a way to find evidence to support one’s position; ignore the facts, and find some other unnamed commenter who spews the same baseless crap that you do, and cite him/her/it as some kind of authority. There’s not a shred of evidence that any of the recent run on gun stores is inspired by Obama’s race, his chummy relationship with domestic terrorist (let alone equally baseless claims that he is one himself), his generally socialist outlook (not all socialists want to take away your guns), or “whatever” (whatever the hell that is supposed to refer to anyway).

So the wagons circle on slander and innuendo,

Help me out here. Is accusing Obama of wanting to ban handguns just because he said he doesn’t believe that people should be able to own guns and wrote that he supports banning the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns a slander, an innuendo, or both?

and gun shops across the country report record sales. One shop owner in Georgia, the AP says, even put up an “Obama sale” sign — then took it down after complaints that it looked more like incitement than enticement.

Either that, or because it was too little and too late. I much prefer the gun stores that ran pre- election signs above the garbage can reading “Voting for Obama? Save time. Deposit your guns here.”

For, don’t forget — Obama isn’t just a “black guy.” He’s a secret Muslim. An Arab. A pal of terrorists.

He isn’t a Muslim or an Arab, and is (or at least was) a pal of at least one non-Muslim, non-Arab terrorist, but WTF has any of this to do with his long history of antipathy toward gun owners?

So readers brim with helpful advice to buy “one gun a month … in Virginia, it’s the law!”

Well, FWIW it is the law. Virginia’s gun laws are pretty good overall, but their “gun of the month club” law could use some work. The good news is that if you hold a CHP the law doesn’t apply to you. In that case, don’t limit yourself to one a month; walk into your favorite gun store and walk out with as many guns as you can afford / convince your wife/husband/etc. to let you buy.

FYIs on a “decent sale on ammo” and mail-in rebates for gun purchases. Boasts about an elephant gun and threats to shoot whatever part of burglars “the Rottis don’t eat.”

Ah, yes, overheated rhetoric that never existed until a black guy (albeit one not black enough for Ms. Dietrich’s taste) came on the scene. All that “cold, dead hands” rhetoric you thought you remembered from years past? Never happened. In fact, there wasn’t even an NRA until about two years ago, in response to Obama’s candidacy. Prior to that, no black guy had a chance of becoming President, so why would anyone care about protecting their gun rights?

Good God, can just anybody get a job writing for a newspaper these days?

UPDATE: Welcome, Instapundit readers, Uncly-Wuncs, Snowflakes, Huns, the Coldly Furious and Boomstickers. Tam Non-Dietrich offers a nice rejoinder of her own:

And nobody’s stocking up for a war, Ms. Dietrich, it’s more of a “get ‘em while you can” thing. For instance, if a candidate with a track record of voting to ban bad hairstyles had just been elected, wouldn’t you be in line at Sally’s, filling the cart with mousse right now?

Heh.

36 Responses to “Paranoid Gun Owners”

  1. SayUncle > Paranoia Says:

    [...] Is it that or the bitterness and clinginess? [...]

  2. Tribal Says:

    Is it bad that I live in Williamsburg, grew up for several years in Newport News, and have never heard of the <i>Daily Press</i>? My parents always just read the Richmond Times-Dispatch, Norfolk Virginian-Pilot, or sometimes the Washington Post.

    Everything’s apparently about race now. I’ve been told that "socialist" is apparently now code for "black" (which raises the question of whether the NNDP regards Obama as half-socialist).

    The good news, from what I’ve seen, is that there’s starting to be a backlash. Objectively, it’s a good thing for America that we finally will have a black man occupying the highest office in the country. It’s a step forward and should help to further dilute whatever racism is still out there. Part of this, though, is that the whole "it’s because he’s black!" defense also goes by the wayside. It’s gotten to the point where there’s enough resentment against the presumption of racism that some are beginning to mock the accusation. That’s also a good thing.

  3. Bart Says:

    I’m probably way off here – I usually am on these predictions – but I don’t know…

    I forsee an exponential increase in the racial divide in America as a direct result of this man moving into the White House.

    His extreme and radical socialist policies, his in-your-face racism, his arugula-eating elitism, his b!tch of a wife harping on endlessly about how hateful America is, his American hating Preacher of 20+ years, his terrorist, cop-killing buddies. All of these things – and SO MUCH MORE – will combine to renew the still burning embers of racial tensions and hatred that have been seething under the surface since the 50′s and 60′s.

    Mr O will deliver violence to the streets of America faster and more intensely than ANY previous American President.

    It is precisely for these reasons that so many Americans feel the need to protect themselves. They know – as I do – that to rely on the police or the government for help is the most ignorant think any American can do.

    Read the book called: "Dial 911 and Die" and decide for yourself. Do you trust Mr O or his Jack Booted Thugs to be there in the middle of the night when some drug-addled punk is sliming his way into your daughters bedroom window?

    And when he does, will you cower in your closet, clutching your cell phone and praying like hell that the under paid, out-of-shape, donut-eating cop cares enough to respond to your particular need in a timely manner?

    Remember this, the Supreme court has ruled (on numerous occasions) that the "police are under no obligation to provide security or protection to citizens".

    Did you get that? "Police Are Under No Obligation To Protect You." Police are there simply to act as "an auxilliary deterrant to crime" and basically just to clean up the mess after the crime has been committed.

    No thanks. I choose to provide for my own protection. And if that scares some liberal-minded, yellow-journalist, well that’s just tough dookie. Deal with it or go cower in your closet.

  4. Snowflakes in Hell &raquo; Blog Archive &raquo; More Hating on Gun Owners Says:

    [...] highlights some more.  These people must be enjoying some bile, with some invectives on the side for [...]

  5. CGHill Says:

    The Daily Press is Tribune Company’s outpost in the Tidewater area. Tribune is probably better known for its fearless, hard-hitting, never-even-slightly-one-sided Los Angeles Times.

    CGHill´s last blog post..More music and Les Nessman?

  6. Nosmo Says:

    Here is the email I sent her

    Sorry to disappoint your bigotry, Ma’am, I happen to be buying another ( soon to be banned) gun and more ammunition because of the Color of the Party in power, not the color of the President-elect’s skin. I fear the Reds, not the blacks, browns, or whites. The dirty little secret in my family is that Mr Obama has more Caucasian ancestors than I do. I am sure glad I was not in LA during the Rodney King Riots, as I would be so confused, not sure to Riot because of my African ancestors, Defend my self in deference to my honorable Asian ancestors, or Sit on my fat American posterior watching the drama on TV like my Caucasian cousins.
    I am buying guns because Mr Obama and friends are various shades of Red.

    We see the writing on the wall, we know that the Pelosi-Reid gang is chomping at the bit, ready to force more insane restrictions on law abiding citizens in a futile attempt to stop law breakers from breaking laws.

    I do not listen to the platitudes and pontifications emanating from the Dear Leader’s mouth, I prefer to use his past as a prediction tool for his future performance. Mr. Obama is no friend of the second amendment. His deeds have proven that – in the state senate and what little he did in the US Senate followed the same pattern. He is gathering like minded people to his cabinet and as unofficial advisors. Yes I will admit that there are some angry white racists trolling the boards that you sought out. How nice of you to pepper your piece with cherry picked quotes as you try to tar all gun owners with the same brush. Who is more bigoted, a couple of mouth breathing idiots on the Internet, or the person who uses the newspaper’s soapbox and her creative writing skills in lieu of her journalism skills to cast dispersions on 100 Million normal Americans who happen to own guns?

    I wonder how loudly you would howl and what expletives you would use if they were to restrict your first amendment rights by limiting access to high speed, mass distribution media, maybe forcing all paid scriveners to register with the state and keep a database on your personal style of word usage, just in case some anonymous seditious message were to be penned. Ahh yes pens, the original weapon of the scribe – mightier than the sword, they say. Maybe all such tool of your trade should be licensed, taxed and restricted at the whim of your elected masters. It sure would stop a lot of drive by defamation. It would give 100 million Americans relief from being slurred with bigoted labels like “gun nut” “Rambo” “redneck” etc. Yet I would not support such restrictions on the first amendment as they all are equally inviolate. ( besides I may have to turn in my custom nibbed Namiki Pilot Vanishing Point fountain pens and my quick reload cartridges of ink.)

    Personally, I do not like the AR-15 or the AK-47 style rifles, having spend too many years carrying a real M-16 and all the AK clones come from totalitarian regimes that I would rather not support with my dollars. But I am buying one of each, since they are sure to increase in value after the ban – a hedge fund of wood, steel and polymer I guess you could say. My preferred weapon of choice is the venerable M-14 clone. Large calibre, large capacity magazines and long distance knock-down power. I bought mine right before the last so-called Assault weapon ban was enacted, and it has served me well. I hunt with it using a standard capacity magazine, I shoot in competitions, long range and standard 300 meter matches, shooting paper, bowling pins and ringing steel plate gongs out to 1000 meters. Yes over half a mile 0.6241 to be exact. I own pistols, revolvers, rifles, shotguns, fowling pieces and muskets. I use them all, each for a different purpose, just as I use pencils, ballpoint pens, fountain and dip pens, typewriters, and computers. As a matter of fact, this missive is being composed on a Panasonic Toughbook, the same model used by the military in Iraq and Afghanistan. Not a look-alike clone like the rifles we are permitted to own by our benevolent government, but the real thing! I did not have to go through a background check for this mil standard piece of first amendment hardware either. Isn’t freedom wonderful?

    It is interesting that the states and cities with the most restrictive gun laws have the most crime. Maybe you can get some Government Grant money to fund a study as to why criminals prefer unarmed victims. I would love to read the report. Maybe you can even use some of the money to take refresher courses in objectivity and journalistic ethics.

    Kevin

  7. Instapundit » Blog Archive » A LOOK AT those “paranoid” gun owners. Says:

    [...] A LOOK AT those “paranoid” gun owners. [...]

  8. Assistant Village Idiot Says:

    Thanks Tribal. I went to W&M and had never heard of the Daily Press and thought it was me who was asleep at the switch.

    Tamara’s essay is an excellent example of how liberals simply do not understand what the conservative arguments are. They believe they have refuted them somewhere, somehow, but have merely failed to apprehend them. Jonathan Haidt from UVA has very interesting research illustrating that liberals are simply unable to understand conservative moral reasoning, while we are fully capable of understanding theirs. (Haidt goes through some interesting contortions to show that it all proves that liberals are still better, but that’s a minor irritation).

    Assistant Village Idiot´s last blog post..How Smart You Are

  9. dorkafork Says:

    Well I for one thought it was a fine piece of investigative journalism into the comments on a Daily Press article. At least I assume it’s comments to a DP article. That’s how she describes it, though she links to just about every article but that. (Some may say that’s ridiculous if not incompetent to not link to the very article she’s discussing, but she has to protect her sources, right?)

    In any case, it’s a powerful, in-depth look at a handful of anonymous commenters on that one article. It speaks volumes about the world we live in. I can only hope she alerts us to further trends she discovers through the comment section.

  10. paul Says:

    Dietrich’s subtext is clear. White’s deserve the righteous retribution of the black man. They have it coming. It is bad form to resist by arming one self.

    One wonders what Dietrich would think after being raped by an Obama crazed mob. That she had it coming?

  11. Ray Says:

    I’m black, a gun-owner, and looking to buy more. And the one’s i want are precisely the scary, boogie man “assault rifles”. It’s not a black or white thing, it’s not a fear versus bravado thing, it’s a free versus not free thing, a citizen versus subject thing.

  12. Norman Conquest Says:

    When candidate Obama could no longer duck the question, he told gun owners that he COULDN’T confiscate their guns — meaning that the Republicans in the Senate would filibuster any attempt to tighten gun ownership.

    But I remember noting at the time that he never went on record as saying he WOULDN’T take them, only that political realities would make that impossible.

    Pray for Norm Coleman.

  13. Pondering Says:

    I’ve found that many liberal attempts to “explain” conservative thinking revolve around re-directing their own (apparently) hidden prejudices by projecting them onto conservatives…much like “CAT” in this blog entry. That is why history and facts have so little weight in their arguments.

  14. Ride Fast Says:

    Yeah, Instalanche!

    Ride Fast´s last blog post..Crowd mentality can kill you

  15. E Anderson Says:

    If it looks like a duck, waddles like a duck and quacks like a duck it must be a dog. That’s how the left thinks. By word and deed Obama has indicated he is anti-gun why would any rational being think otherwise. But the progressive left has been believing a lie for over a century now I don’t expect that to change either.

  16. Mangas Colorados Says:

    I’ve a friend at work, a reasonable democrat, voted against Kerry, etc. After the election he said people who wanted to stock up on guns were paranoids. “Nobody’s going to take their guns away!” Then he spoke of a nephew who bought an “assault type” rifle, said that nobody needs a gun like that, and finished by comparing people like his nephew to people who keep a house full of poisnous snakes, and finished by saying that I don’t have a right to do that. I asked how many people his nephew’s “assault weapon” had killed so far. His respnse was, “I hope none” I’m sure he knew what I was driving at, but didn’t want to acknowledge it.

    So let me summarize the national conversation about guns in the coming years: “You’re a paranoid! You’re a paranoid! Gimme your gun!”

    “The right to buy weapons is the right to be free” — Robert Hedrock

    Mangas Colorados

  17. John Says:

    That was a .50 caliber Fisking.

  18. Dennis Says:

    Buying more ammunition and guns is just like investing. If Obama does try to control guns and ammunition the value of the guns and ammunition already owned will go up. Buy more guns and ammunition!

  19. Fred Says:

    Obama’s supporters are going to be his biggest problem.

  20. MikeinAppalachia Says:

    Kevin-Nice thoughts-good taste in rifles!

  21. jvon Says:

    The author’s use of the race issue is completely transparent to anyone used to reading crap like this; it’s an attempt to conflate the desire to be able to defend one’s self with racism. Take the race issue away and you have what is essentially a civil liberties problem — we have a right enshrined in the Bill of Rights that is threatened by a Democratic president.

    That isn’t supposed to happen, right? After all the Dems are awfully big on the rest of our rights (even imaginary or new ones like the “right to not have anyone look at what books you take out of the library”, the “right to have unmonitored conversations with people in other countries”, and of course the “right to marry someone with the same plumbing as you”).

    I am hoping that after spending the last 8 years railing against the alleged excesses of the Bush administration in curtailing our rights (I haven’t noticed any impact on me personally), Obama will find it difficult to take away actual rights from people on the grounds that it might protect us from ourselves. Of course, it is possible that I’m being naive.

    In which case, I will just have to cling to all the guns and religion I already have stocked. Which would be a considerable amount. ;)

    jvon´s last blog post..The Election Is Over

  22. Jerry Says:

    Well, if we reduce every issue to the category one belongs to (identity politics). The person that wrote the article is some kind of reporter. That, for me, sums it up. Also, possibly a woman, may be 50%. Why use facts when you can just dismiss with categories. Anyway, next election I would like to vote for Kevin.

  23. M. Simon Says:

    I can see banning hand guns. But please, tit guns should be off the table. Consider it self protection for women who want to protect their guns.

    M. Simon´s last blog post..I’m Looking For A Party

  24. James B Says:

    I don’t know what’s dumber, an opinion piece based on anonymous comments on the internet, or an opinion piece response dissecting the first opinion piece.

    9/10 comments on the internet are worthless, because that same person would never make that point to you in public. As I said in my response in their forum, the anonymity that the internet provides has a wonderful way of allowing people to be stupid. Her article is based on mostly stupid comments…so I’m not really sure what you expect the end result of her article to be.

    Internet posters make stupid comments? OH GOD SOMEBODY ALERT THE INTERNET.

    A better response to her article would have been to say why people are buying guns right now. Because we lived through the ban before, and we saw what happened last time. Prices jumped. Availability dropped. New guns manufactured during the ban had stupid restrictions that made them less valuable, desirable and functional. Crime? Well…crime wasn’t really the point.

    It’s not because he’s black (who cares). It’s not because he’s going to come get our guns (he can’t).

    It’s because we remember what the last ban was like, and he says he wants to re-enact the ban and make it permanent.

  25. John Galt Says:

    Strange.

    I was out shopping yesterday for the best price on ammunition here in Arizona. Went to three gun shops – all three were literally full of customers – and I noticed that about one fourth of the buyers in all three were Hispanic.

    I approached one middle aged man (Hispanic) and asked him why he was there and what he was buying. His reply was, “I am here to buy a rifle. Mr. Obama wants to stop me from doing this. I am a CITIZEN with rights. I learned these rights when I became a CITIZEN, so I will buy a gun today.”

    I shook his hand.

  26. Crotalus Says:

    Tamara, you must be a closet racist, or we wouldn’t have to keep explaining to you and your ilk that IT’S NOT ABOUT THE COLOR OF HIS SKIN! IT’S ABOUT HIS CLEARLY ANTI-GUN RECORD, AND WE DON’T BELIEVE HIS CAMPAIGN RHETORIC, EITHER!

    NOW, QUIT LYING ABOUT US!

  27. JorgXMcKie Says:

    “Good God, can just anybody get a job writing for a newspaper these days?”

    Is this some sort of trick question?

  28. Jones Says:

    The current officeholder of the Office of the President-elect has stated previously that his first act will be to sign the Freedom Of Choice Act. This legislation is intended to supercede ALL state local and municipal laws that IN ANY WAY infringe on a woman’s ability to obtain an abortion on demand.

    Given Obama’s leftwing political views and his noted antipathy to the 2nd Amendment, why would we be surprised if he tried similar such legislation regarding our 2nd Amendment rights? A bill that would supercede ALL state local and municipal laws that permit Americans to have guns in their homes, or on their persons. It would have a wonderfully innocuous title such as the “Freedom From Violence Act”, but its intended effect would be to disarm law-abiding citizens.

  29. Roger Godby Says:

    I work in a “progressive” environment and fairly frequently encounter the “only idiots own guns” in-joke among new hires before announcing that I have some. Usually there’s a brief tense silence followed by a clearing of the throat and a change of topic.

    “Progressives” used to say that people hate gays because they’re afraid of things they can’t understand, afraid of what’s different (diversity, now). Oddly I don’t hear the same argument used by the same people about gun owners.

  30. Black Man with a Gun. Or, Perhaps—Without. | Little Miss Attila Says:

    [...] Xrlq on why those who want guns might be buying them now, and it may not have anything to do with our President-elect’s built-in suntan. [...]

  31. sid jones Says:

    Kevin, your message is inspiring! I’m with you!

    I can achieve 1/4″ groups out of my Rock River AR 15 but,

    like you, I still favor the m-14 for across the course or

    1000 yds.

  32. amr Says:

    My wife, one who would not use a weapon if her life depended on it, has urged me to buy more ammo after hearing Mr. Obama’s position on firearms. We live in a rural area and one is lucky to have the police at your home within 30 minutes; been there, saw that! In my area calling 911 is only a courtesy; weapons locked and loaded is unfortunately a necessity in our modern world.

  33. Some Gun Nut Says:

    Isn’t the Newport News Daily Press the same newspaper that was trying to print the names and home addresses of Virginia concealed carry license holders a few years back?

    Seems to me that this is a newspaper that has too many paying advertisers.

    [Not to my knowledge. You may be thinking of the Roanoke Times, whose writer, Christian Tejbal, used the same smug line "au contraire" to defend his indefensible actions. Then again, for all I know, maybe the Daily Press pulled that stunt, too. -X]

  34. Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup » Pirate’s Cove — Avast, Sea Dogs! Says:

    [...] led to this article at XRLQ, who discusses paranoid gun [...]

  35. hutch1200 Says:

    I honestly believe barry wants to take guns. Gut says so. Always go with the gut. His “civilian posse” thing is reason enough to up-arm and lay in ammo now. BTW. Screw the Congress(D) numbers, think about who/what he will appoint to replace the senior members of the SCOTUS!…Hey, Soros gets to choose the next one as payback….I just found this site from Ace of Spades(tm). You make a moron (me) feel at home.

  36. Ride Fast Says:

    [...] Why The Main Stream Media Is Dying [...]

Leave a Reply

CommentLuv badge

Subscribe without commenting

 

Powered by WordPress. Stock photography by Matthew J. Stinson. Design by OFJ.