"If I had to commute on the NYC subway, for that matter. I'd probably want to be armed regardless of the law."
Anti-gunner MikeB, in a stunning admission.
So I guess Mike will admit that if he wanted to carry right now he could, regardless of the law. Right? If he makes the value judgment that carrying illegally is worth the risk of getting caught, then he carries anyway. That's exactly what every violent felon who owns and carries a gun does, despite a myriad of laws proscribing such actions.
How do you stop that? Laws, no matter how numerous, cannot stop criminals from carrying weapons if they so choose.
I'm getting quite thet laugh out of an anti-gunner admitting he'd want to be armed even if it meant committing a felony. Odd, he wants to restrict the rights of all of us with more laws, yet openly admits that he might not follow them. Even worse, despite this admission he will still claim that "more laws" are the solution to the problem. I see a career in politics for MikeB.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
And this guy is a former NRA member and competetive shooter?
How does someone go from pro gun to anti gun..there is no logic in it.
He is? That's news to me.
As far as going from pro-gun to anti-gun. I could see it happening if you developed psychosis or some other mental issue, or if something happened in your life that left you severely emotionally disturbed. Beyond that I don't know and honestly I don't really care.
Wanting the cake and eating it too.
Some people make a virtue out of their own non-compliance, since they see themselves as ultimately the MOST virtuous. Such is the mindlife of a Liberal, bulldozing logic into conformity.
Hammer you're thinking of a different Mike. Mikeb302000 is a 60-something living in New Jersey who made up a fake identity about being an ex-marine living in Rome with his wife and kids.
He's also likely a pathological liar.
He's certainly never shot a gun.
I'm guessing there's some mental illness involved.
I'm still annoyed that he says he wants to carry and per his previous comments says we are responsible for illegal gun owners.
I don't see why plain, coherent logic is venomous to some people. Mike has let him post here and many of has have responded with genuine, well thought out responses. . . which were promptly either taken out of context or had critical parts ignored.
Politics aside- thats just downright not friendly.
Mike I wouldn't take it too personally. I mean the guy openly lies about guns and gun laws, as well as lies about his whole life history on the internet.
Would you take it personally if the fat 17-year-old kid working security down at the food court who tells you the SEALS could call him in for ANOTHER mission any day now says something untrue?
This fake Marine, Fake Ex-Pat is no different.
Honestly I feel bad for him more than anything else.
Mike W (damn there's a LOT of Mikes around here) BTW do you use sitemeter? I wouldn't mind some independent confirmation that MikeB is accessing via a New Jersey IP.
Admission? That was no admission. That was simply nothing more than the standard "ok for me, but not thee" viewpoint of so many anti-rights folks out there. Sure, he would be ok if he happened to carry a gun around, but the rest of us folks? Oooh, no, we cannot trust you with guns.
What is it with the liberal fasciation with solipsism?
Mike W., Finally Weer'd said something that makes sense: "I wouldn't mind some independent confirmation that MikeB is accessing via a New Jersey IP." His obsession with me and my being a "liar" is tiresome to say the least.
You've been coming to my blog long enough to make up your own mind. I know we disagree about gun issues, but that's a different kind of lying, don't you think?
It's true that I've moved away from guns over the four decades of my adult life. I was never an NRA member and my competitive shooting was limited to pre-military summer camp experience, nothing really. In my twenties, I've owned guns legally and illegally in several different states. For a variety of reasons, I gradually became more and more anti.
The only way laws can affect the scofflaws and criminals is through gun availability. If the laws were organized and enforced in such a way that eventually we had fewer guns around, I believe we'd have less gun crime.
Now I'm not totally pulling that out of the air or making it up or going on how I "feel." I'm using my common sense and logic, I'm reading a lot about the subject including some of your stuff, pro-gun stuff, and I'm writing what I really believe.
No, I don't have proof. But you know what, I'm not writing a book or a PhD thesis. I'm not preparing a deposition for Congress. I'm just talking with you guys. OK?
Proof adds validity to an argument mike. If you can't offer empirical evidence to back up a single claim you've made then everything you say is highly suspect.
I'm not writing a thesis on this blog either, but using facts to back up my position makes my position that much stronger, and it really isn't that hard to do.
A few minutes at the CDC, BJS, or FBI UCR is all it takes for me. I understand how frustrating it must be for you, since facts, common-sense, and logic are not on your side in this debate.
As for Weer'd. That's between the 2 of you. I could care less about your personal life, where your from etc.
MikeB,
The only way laws can affect the scofflaws and criminals is through gun availability.
In discussing ch1ld porn we can say:The only way laws can affect the scofflaws and criminals is through computer & camera availability
Are you willing to give up your rights to computers and cameras to reduce the availability?
If no, why not? Is there something to my OPINION that some/much child porn is being produce by ex-patriots living overseas?
How do you feel about being morally responsible for all the ch1ld pron that is produced, since you lawful computer/camera owners are contributing to the flow?
There comes a point where it simply becomes ridiculous to give up our rights to try to make society better. Namely because there are people who don't want to make society better, those criminals will always find a tool to use.
Now I'm not totally pulling that out of the air or making it up or going on how I "feel." I'm using my common sense and logic,
We aren't totally pulling anything out of the air but we can back up our logic and common sense with multiple sources of facts, figures, statistics, laws and moral concepts.
The anti-freedom crowd, including you, can't do that.
No, I don't have proof.
You have no proof, no evidence to suggest your plan would work, but you want to try it anyways.
Again, we have proof that the gun control laws don't work. You must be insane if you think anyone is going to buy that "While I have no proof, I want you to give up your guns and violence in will drop". It won't work. All the evidence shows it won't work.
I consider it absolutely immoral to try to deprive a person of their right to self defense, since firearms are one of the most effective forms of self defense those are protected.
The right to keep and bear arms isn't negotiable, no repeal of the 2nd amendment will negate that right.
No, I don't have proof.
You have no proof, no evidence to suggest your plan would work, but you want to try it anyways.
How appropriate that this song is playing on Sirius right now...
"Point the finger, slow to understand, arrogance and ignorance go hand-in-hand....holier than thou, you are....you know not...yeah, who the hell are you..."
Post a Comment