Police Search For D.C. Shooter at Navy Yards

Yeah, us surface folk call ships boats and subs subs, so I assumed Bear was talking about folks in point number 2.

Pretty much sums up America when this shit happens.

Oh, excuse me for not following this thread 24/7, and for assuming the "you" here was generic.

Now that it is fresh in your mind and it is clear that I was speaking to you, do you have an answer?

Can I personally guarantee any of that? Since I'm not your Congresscritter, obviously not.

(That's a "no" for the GNAQ* .)




*:tantrum: "Garamet Never Answers Questions!!!11!" :tantrum:

I will say that if I were in a position to mandate it, the first time you act out in any way with a gun in your hand, you're going in the federal, state, and local databases. And if there's a second instance, your ass goes in the slammer and your guns get broken down for scrap.

You are not off the hook. I'll give you a nice, easy yes or no question. If it was your call to make, would you subject me to background checks, mental health certifications, training certifications, or a paper trail of any kind?

If you've been arrested, you're already in a database. I'd say that database should be nationwide, and even Barney Fife should be able to access it. Stay out of trouble, and you're fine.

Your guns, however, need a paper trail, and you need to be trained in how to use them. To use the gunlubbers' go-to analogy.

And if you own guns and repeatedly try to get help because you're hearing voices but everyone passes you off to the other guy, you should move next door to Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, or Wayne La Pierre.

You are not a good test case. Your posting history indicates a severe mental illness.

Background checks and registration, then. You are a gun grabber who isn't honest enough to admit it.

So you do have an arrest record and you're stockpiling unregistered guns, check. Combine that with your posting history, and I think some proactivity might prevent the next mass shooting from happening in Omaha...

Now, here's why I never understood "gun grabber", as a term.

If I run up to you, and try to grab your gun, you can just shoot me.

If I'm fast enough to grab your gun out of your hand, you're either some kind of sloth-man, or my DNA is so jacked up, the bullets probably wouldn't have stopped me anyway.

Whomever came up with this bit of slang isn't good at his job, and should be fired.

...aaand the preemptive presumption of guilt. One of the worst gun-grabber traits there is.

Proactive. The fuck outta here with that bullshit.

Actually, it's very telling. The people hollering it most often are usually fatasses or weak willies for whom a gun is their only means of defense. They've been so conditioned to expect this guy:



or this guy:



or, lately, this guy:



to break in the back door in the middle of the night so they can be a Big Damn Hero that they can't imagine any other scenario.

You don't do it personally. You seemed an armed civil servant to grab it.

Yeah. Case 2.

And there it is again, folks, the real gunlubber rationale.

"The Second Amendment guarantees my right to bear arms to defend myself from the government that guarantees my right to bear arms under the Second Amendment."

>>BZZZZZZZZZZT!!<< Wrong guess. The government does not guarantee our rights. The Constitution restrains the government from infringing upon them. Our rights are inherent to We the People, they are not "given" to us by government. Hence the Second Amendment, should it become necessary to remind the government of that fact.

It applies to anyone who would willingly create circumstances in which bans and confiscation are forseeable outcomes. Strained attempts at disowning these implications notwithstanding. There is the variety who, while still being malicious little hypocrites, at least has the spine to openly admit they don't want anyone but police and military to have firearms. And then there's the shifty little bullshitters who think slapping a different label on "register, ban, then confiscate" somehow makes it OK.

Thank you, Professor Pedant. Deliberately missing the point you personally have made more than once, that you're anticipating that the Gubmint is going to to take your guns - any minute now - and that's why you need them, and you sure are glad for that there Second Amendment.

The irony of this rationale from a government contractor is, well, ironic.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, politics, shmolitics, I'm talking about the goddamned language.
And you damned well know I was.

Oh, all right, I'll deal with the politics...

Yes, there are authority worshippers on the left.
I despise them.

But, there are authority worshippers on the right too.
Dayton is a textbook example.

They're either outright sheeple, or fantasize that THEY'LL be the ones kicking our doors in.

Frankly, I can't decide which is worse.

Right & left become increasingly more meaningless to me.
People are wired up to be assholes, and that overrides their self-narrative of whatever their dumb little ideology is supposed to be.

So are we enacting a policy where direct, literal meaning is the only one to be accepted?

I am not a government contractor. Second error. You're on your way to being flawed and imperfect, and being corrected by sterilization.

It's not being pedantic to point out a very basic flaw in your argument. Rights do not come from government. They are an inherent (some might say unalienable) condition of being a human being. The Bill of Rights does not exist to tell the government what it can do, but rather what it can't.