Wednesday, September 8, 2010

Sad But Predictable - A Case Study

To all who are reading my posts: Mike W. has posted 6 of the most offensive and inane comments yet received by me on this blog. I will no longer post his comments but I will keep them in my files as an example of how rude and perjorative some of the gun guys get while trying to intimidate people about the gun issue. If any elected leader wants to know why they should not believe what they hear from the NRA, Mike is a prime example of the type of hyperbolic rhetoric that should not be considered valid in this "discussion".

- Japete of "Common Gunsense"

The above is the embodiment of the "Sad But Predictable" way anti's address the gun issue. Nothing in my comments was rude nor did I attack her personally, but then to an anti having the gall to dissent is viewed as an offensive and intimidating attack on the author herself.

A few minutes and 6 comments that contained not one bad word nor even a hint of personal attack and I get banned. I would laugh if the anti-gunners weren't so sad. Thoughtful Discussion" indeed......

Update - Joe Huffman points out that Japete is on the Brady Campaign Board of Directors. As usual the anti-gunners are in the minority and have virtually no grassroots support. Her real name is Joan Peterson.

7 comments:

RuffRidr said...

She just invalidated her own point:

1. " Almost all anti-gun blogs moderate comments, while few pro-gun blogs do. Many claim to only moderate for civility, but there is usually evidence that content plays a big part as well--extremely rude anti-gun posts are allowed to stand, while relatively trivial or nonexistent transgressions are cause for deletion if the content is pro gun." The writer of this comment is pretty sure he is correct in his assessment and makes a statement of opinion as if it is fact. He's mistaken.

Uh, nope. Doesn't look like it.

FightinBluHen51 said...

I wouldn't even have bothered to link to her blog. It gives her credibility.

I try not to edit anyone's posts (not that my readership is that high or varied yet) because I do believe in free speech. I did have to delete 4 spam comments that was nothing but a copy post from the national popular vote movement. Sorry, I'm not going to allow you to pitch your propaganda on my website and then check back like 12 times to see if anyone else has spammed the blog post.

Oh the liberal world, it's a wonderful thing only understandable to other liberals.

Weer'd Beard said...

Yeah Ruff, but remember anti-rights people receive far more threatening and insulting comments than we ever do.
http://gunnuts.net/2010/01/09/rob-russell-is-staying-classy/

But while pro-rights people actually publish our hate-filled threats, the ones they receive are so volatile they can't be seen by human eyes!

Even better, is I think most of them believe their own lies!

FightinBluHen51 said...

Well, I couldn't leave it alone. I just couldn't. We'll see if it gets published, but I'm not holding my breath.

" It seems as though you have taken a tough stand with the potential readership of your blog. Since it's your blog, it's your domain.

I myself moderate comments, only to archive them via email, and I'm guessing Mike W. does the same. I learned that lesson the hard way when I was first starting and got what I determined was spammed propaganda. Someone decided it would be nice to publish four comments without my moderation that were effectively a cut and paste from a website. Considering the Right Haven mess, I didn't want to end up sued (as a rule, I try to link news stories and comment on them as much as possible while excerpting quotes and giving credit).

My point is, to run a good blog, there is a balance between trash comments and good debate. It's nice that if you delete them, to have the ability to recant your mistake and republish them. Hence the moderation with email backup.

I am sorry to hear about your sister and the emotional distress it has appeared to cause you. I hope you find great solace in the peace of her passing and hopefully the full punishment of the criminal scum that caused the murder. I do feel as though your agenda is unwarranted, but I do respect your rights as a blogger to moderate comments on your blog (whether you choose to publish them, delete them or hide them, it is your blog).

Just remember that while your side has emotion, the opposite side has facts (like this story http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2010/09/07/long-island-man-arrested-for-defending-home-with-ak-47/), first hand accounts of positive firearms use, as well as history, tradition, and civil rights protection status.

Additionally, I, being a libertarian, fully support your right not to own and even speak out against criminal gun use, but please respect my right to own and use for lawful purposes any weapons within the scope of strict scrutiny for reasonable restrictions as will be (and has been) outlined by the court. After all, it seems from my short time here you do advocate for the rule of law."

Weer'd Beard said...

http://tinyurl.com/2d3blsx

Here's her profile page on the brady website.

Happy walker said...

nice blog.. have a view of my blog when free.. http://www.lonelyreload.blogspot.com .. do leave me some comment / guide if can.. if interested can follow my blog...

Linoge said...

Intellectual coward.

Unwilling to tolerate dissent.

Incapable of identifying facts.

Blinded by grief.

And a paid shill, to boot.

I am unquestionably sorry for the loss she has suffered, but using that emotion as a springboard to abridge and infringe upon the rights of law-abiding citizens is simply wrong, no matter how poignant it might be.

But, given that she is on the Brady Bunch board, she has so much of her identity wrapped up in her cause, she is never going to be willing to admit it...