over the cliff, onto the rocks.: Really Kooky unBearable Assholes

Sunday, May 18, 2008

Really Kooky unBearable Assholes

Once every blue moon or so, I surf the blogs and websites of the gun nuts for news of what they're --- Ted Nugent and John McCain come to mind --- up to.

Among other things, they're all up in arms about a House bill to reauthorize the ban on assault weapons, cuz like yanno ya can't bring down a deer with anything less than a sniper rifle.

17 comments:

Anonymous said...: Actually, I can understand a sniper rifle, but I don't understand an autoloading .223 carbine with a 30+ round magazine. It's like hunting rabbits with a 12 gauge and buckshot - there's nothing left to eat.

A single, well-placed, shot and you have food and a nice piece of hide. Dump a clip and you've got a sandwich and fringe.

Autoloaders just aren't accurate. A high quality bolt-action will fill your larder.; Sunday, May 18, 2008 3:45:00 PM
hipparchia said...: a sandwich and fringe

that's got to be one of the best blog titles evah. i may steal that one someday.

i'm willing to be scalia-like on the 2nd amendment and grant everyone the right to own weapons of the vintages and capabilties that were available to the founding fathers. the ability to shoot something [or someone] from 1000+ yards, through walls no less, in the pursuit of food really is overkill.

of course, if world food stocks collapse any time soon, or if any of a number of other dystopian scenarios actually comes to pass, i may regret not owning anything more formidable than a baseball bat and a large dog.; Sunday, May 18, 2008 5:28:00 PM
Anonymous said...: My position is that anyone who wishes to bear arms has the right to do so and be regulated as militia, with a requirement for training and call up for service.; Sunday, May 18, 2008 7:38:00 PM
Anonymous said...: By the way, the second amendment has nothing whatsoever to do with hunting.; Sunday, May 18, 2008 7:40:00 PM
Anonymous said...: Does anyone who refuses to help provide for the common defense have a right to bear arms in his/her own?; Sunday, May 18, 2008 10:55:00 PM
Unknown said...: I have never been able to understand why any civilian, other than a would-be terrorist, would desire to own an assault weapon.; Sunday, May 18, 2008 11:21:00 PM
hipparchia said...: well, nick, i think i can understand that desire, but in the interests of my own safety, i'm not willing to let other people fulfill that desire.; Sunday, May 18, 2008 11:40:00 PM
hipparchia said...: Does anyone who refuses to help provide for the common defense have a right to bear arms in his/her own?

on a purely theoretical basis, probably not. but reality is messy, and i'm willing to grant exceptions. grandma may not be able to jump into the trenches and fight alongside the kidz, for instance, but she probably should be able to shoot anybody who comes bursting through her front door with evil intent.

My position is that anyone who wishes to bear arms has the right to do so and be regulated as militia, with a requirement for training and call up for service.

in a civilized society with a stable and reliable government this would be a good solution.

but some of these gun nuts are already loosely organized into militias of their own, ready to defend themselves from the government, not help it defend itself from outside invasion. confession: the [mostly well-behaved] anarchist in me has a fair amount of sympathy for this view, especially given the nature of the bush/cheney regime.

and i agree about the 2nd amendment and huting, but the rallying cry whenever gun control of any kind is brought up is often they want to take our hunting rifles away from us!; Monday, May 19, 2008 12:13:00 AM
Anonymous said...: hipparchia, I know they have their own "unorganized militias" and that's something that needs dealt with properly. By organizing the militia by law as every able bodied citizen bearing arms, they either agree to accept regulation or lay down their weapons. And if you think we can afford to just ignore them indefinitely, that would be a mistake in my opinion.; Monday, May 19, 2008 1:00:00 AM
Steve Bates said...: "And if you think we can afford to just ignore them indefinitely,..." - michael

And if you think we are at present ignoring them indefinitely, I highly recommend you actually join Southern Poverty Law Center (if you're not already a member) and read their several print publications, because the web site doesn't cover half of what they do. I've been a member for almost certainly longer than you've been alive, michael, and I've seen SPLC's lawyers do some mighty impressive things in putting Klan-like organizations out of business. Check it out.; Monday, May 19, 2008 2:27:00 AM
hipparchia said...: gosh, steve, you are o-l-d. :)

splc has done some awfully important work. thanks for pointing them out, and linking to them. my dad tells some bone-chilling stories of seeing the klan burn crosses and such, back when they operated more openly.

michael: the swiss do seem to be doing better than we are at both gun control and health care [well, practically everybody in the civilized world is doing both of those better than we are....]

i'm basically opposed to the idea of conscription, but if we scaled back our military, waaaay back, to a department of defense, rather than the department of war that we have now, and if we concurrently implemented much more generous social programs than we have now [affordable health care, affordable housing, safe and affordable food, etc], i'd be a lot more accepting of the militia idea. even *i* think shooting stuff is fun [as long as i don't have to shoot people, or heaven forbid, animals].; Monday, May 19, 2008 9:08:00 PM
Anonymous said...: Steve, I'm aware of the SPLC, and Dave Neiwert's blog is much recommended for reading about these issues.

Hipparchia, it isn't a conscription, nobody is required by this to take up arms. If you choose to take up arms then you'd get training and regulation, but more than that would require a call up to active service.

I really don't think it's just a good idea, it's what the second amendment seems to be written to envision, to provide in part for a well regulated militia.; Tuesday, May 20, 2008 1:08:00 AM
hipparchia said...: i don't really know if it's a good idea or not. a lot of people are of a warrior-type temperament, and do we beat/bribe/train that out of them, or give them a structured outlet to work with?; Tuesday, May 20, 2008 10:49:00 PM
Anonymous said...: Why not both? Try to discourage it but if you must bear arms, then here's where you sign up for training and regulation.

I mean, it would be ideal if we could just get everyone to turn their swords into plowshares.; Wednesday, May 21, 2008 12:52:00 AM
andante said...: My position is that if you want to shoot something - anything - you have to be willing to dress it & eat it.; Thursday, May 22, 2008 10:47:00 AM
hipparchia said...: well that conjured up a lovely thought, andante... we'll be sending all our hannibal lechters off to war.; Thursday, May 22, 2008 8:08:00 PM
hipparchia said...: swords into plowshares is my preferred modus operandi, by far. but it's not everyone's cup of tea, and i'm enough of a coward to let someone else take up arms in my defense while i'm out in the fields growing their food.

also, i really like shooting tin cans, but i'd become a conscientious objector and run off to timbuktoo before i'd turn my gun on any living creature.; Thursday, May 22, 2008 8:12:00 PM