Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Talking Points Memo)   Guns and Ammo editor apologizes for "pro-gun control" editorial....except that it wasn't, you know, "pro-gun control", just "pro-common sense"   (talkingpointsmemo.com ) divider line
    More: Followup, common sense, gun controls, you know, editorials  
•       •       •

1638 clicks; posted to Politics » on 08 Nov 2013 at 9:43 AM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



434 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-11-08 07:53:29 AM  
Here is the editorial in question:   Let's Talk Limits by Dick Metcalf

"I understand that driving is not a right protected by the Constitution, but to me the basic principle is the same".

Here is the problem with that:  If something is a right, but you must get government permission to exercise it, then it ceases to be a right.

And if you can do that for one enumerated right in the Bill of Rights, you can do it for the others.

Besides which, he's making the basic mistake that *EVERYONE* makes in the whole guns/cars thing:

You don't have to get prior government permission to *OWN* a car, or to drive it on private property.

If you want to own a race car that you only drive on a racetrack, or own a collectible car in a garage that doesn't get driven, or even a POS pickemup truck you only use on the back 40, you don't need a driver's license.  You could have 100 DWI convictions and be forever barred from operating a motor vehicle on public roads, and you could still drive your Pontiac on your own property, or the property of others.

Which is how most states now treat guns:  You can own them without government permission, but if you want to "use" them in public, you have to show you know how to do it safely (CCW license, hunting license).

But what the article in question talks about is stricter regulation of firearms ownership than car ownership.  You may agree with that, but don't say it's not "pro gun control", because that's precisely what it is.

/It's also not common sense.
 
2013-11-08 08:06:02 AM  

dittybopper: It's also not common sense.


So, what is then?
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-11-08 08:34:20 AM  

dr_blasto: dittybopper: It's also not common sense.

So, what is then?


It's the sort of sense that should be common but isn't.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-11-08 08:40:14 AM  

dittybopper: Here is the problem with that:  If something is a right, but you must get government permission to exercise it, then it ceases to be a right.

And if you can do that for one enumerated right in the Bill of Rights, you can do it for the others.


It's not a problem at all.  All rights can be regulated.  You have to get a permit to hold a protest march and you should have to get a permit to buy a gun.


it may not be "common", but it's sense.
 
2013-11-08 08:42:28 AM  

dr_blasto: dittybopper: It's also not common sense.

So, what is then?


Define "common sense".  Common sense is generally what people retreat to when they don't have a good logical argument for their position, but they feel the alternative is absurd or wrong.

To steal a phrase from Barack Obama, what might be "common sense" in Chicago might not not be in Cheyenne.  So if it's not universally applicable or nearly so, then it can't be "common".   It used to be "common sense" that black people should be slaves, for example.  Until people with a sense that it was wrong made it (eventually) uncommon sense.

It was "common sense" in the Soviet Union that anyone who had any significant private assets at all, including just a small, simple farm, was an enemy of the people.

It was "common sense" in the Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge that anyone with an education was an enemy of the people.

It was "common sense" in California 100 years ago that the Chinese were subhumans that should be marginalized.

I have 3.2 metric farktons of examples of "common sense" that was wrong.   So appeals to it, like "do it for the children", tend to make me wary as all get-out, and make me suspect that the person behind the appeal has either a hidden agenda, or they are what Lenin used to call "useful idiots" for those who do have an agenda.
 
2013-11-08 08:55:35 AM  
Idiots.
 
2013-11-08 09:04:40 AM  

dittybopper: Define "common sense".  Common sense is generally what people retreat to when they don't have a good logical argument for their position, but they feel the alternative is absurd or wrong.


"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen."

"Common sense" is a phrase stupid people use to feel smart.
 
2013-11-08 09:12:33 AM  
In a lengthy note published on the "Guns & Ammo" website, Bequette apologized and explained he only wanted to spur a "healthy exchange of ideas."

That starry eyed belief in healthy discussion and debate is sooooooo last century.  I mean if you discuss and debate ideas like that then you start to create a movement to a synthesis of understanding and the next thing you know, you have republicans agreeing with democrats and vice versa.  Soon you can't easily identify who you are supposed to be against and even worse the extremist are shown to be the small minority.  This type of thing leads directly to gay marriage, tolerance, and cats and dogs living together.  No - Today we pride purity above all.  I mean, if we pollute our minds with ideas based on fact then how can we destroy our enemy.
 
2013-11-08 09:16:57 AM  

impaler: dittybopper: Define "common sense".  Common sense is generally what people retreat to when they don't have a good logical argument for their position, but they feel the alternative is absurd or wrong.

"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen."

"Common sense" is a phrase stupid people use to feel smart.


100% agreed.
 
2013-11-08 09:22:43 AM  
"I made a mistake by publishing the column. I thought it would generate a healthy exchange of ideas on gun rights..."

There can be no healthy exchange of ideas when one side's answer is no to absolutely every and any policy or proposal no matter how small or reasonable. Welcome to the club, champ.
 
2013-11-08 09:28:14 AM  
What is common sense to someone in rural Kentucky wouldn't be common sense to someone in NYC. So can we stop with the whole idea of 'common sense' please?
 
2013-11-08 09:43:11 AM  

Nadie_AZ: What is common sense to someone in rural Kentucky wouldn't be common sense to someone in NYC. So can we stop with the whole idea of 'common sense' please?


Now that's what I call common sense.
 
2013-11-08 09:48:58 AM  
Giant wuss.
 
2013-11-08 09:49:07 AM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: "I made a mistake by publishing the column. I thought it would generate a healthy exchange of ideas on gun rights..."

There can be no healthy exchange of ideas when one side's answer is no to absolutely every and any policy or proposal no matter how small or reasonable. Welcome to the club, champ.


if you suggest a waiting period you are pushing us one step closer to confiscation just like hitler did
 
2013-11-08 09:49:34 AM  
Whether the editorial is right or wrong, the fact that the guy felt compelled to apologize for publishing it is not encouraging.
Closed minds are immune to truth, yet vulnerable to lies.
 
2013-11-08 09:49:59 AM  
I don't understand why it is news that the editor of a magazine that takes a position contrary to the opinion of the vast majority of a magazines readers would get fired.

That you may or may not share the same opinion as the readers is not relevant.
 
2013-11-08 09:50:42 AM  

dittybopper: And if you can do that for one enumerated right in the Bill of Rights, you can do it for the others.


The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people
 
2013-11-08 09:51:08 AM  
This thread never stood a chance.
 
2013-11-08 09:51:24 AM  

Nadie_AZ: What is common sense to someone in rural Kentucky wouldn't be common sense to someone in NYC. So can we stop with the whole idea of 'common sense' please?


The article was about the need for gun safety training (not about gun access control) safety really does apply everywhere. Look at the stats for the number of people killed by firearms accidents. Read the story about  the guy in PA who shot his own son when the loaded 9 mm he kept in the truck (safety off) discharged.
 
2013-11-08 09:52:20 AM  

dittybopper: Here is the problem with that: If something is a right, but you must get government permission to exercise it, then it ceases to be a right.


Let's apply that logic to casting a ballot in the election or exercising free speech or being treated like equals under the eyes of the law.
 
2013-11-08 09:53:06 AM  
"I firmly believe that all U.S. citizens have a right to keep and bear arms, but I do not believe that they have a right to use them irresponsibly,"

What a moran. In 'murika you carry guns everywhere and don't be responsible.
 
2013-11-08 09:53:09 AM  

dittybopper: Here is the editorial in question:...


Blessed Oliver Plunkett.
 
2013-11-08 09:53:17 AM  

blackminded: This thread never stood a chance.


Gun threads never do. Kinda like this guy's hope for a healthy exchange of ideas, eh?
 
2013-11-08 09:53:22 AM  

dittybopper: Here is the problem with that:  If something is a right, but you must get government permission to exercise it, then it ceases to be a right.

And if you can do that for one enumerated right in the Bill of Rights, you can do it for the others.


That is fundamentally incorrect.  We have a right to free speech, but there are numerous limitations on free speech, for example, requiring a permit to hold a march, not to mention laws against types of speech such as libel and harassment.
 
2013-11-08 09:53:24 AM  

blackminded: This thread never stood a chance.


Clintoned in the boobies.
 
2013-11-08 09:53:45 AM  

WhoIsWillo: Let's apply that logic to casting a ballot in the election or exercising free speech or being treated like equals under the eyes of the law.


woah woah dont get carried away now hes been working on that one post since the last gun thread and finally figured out how bold tags work

please try to limit your comments to 'i agree' or 'you got me i want to grab all the guns'
 
2013-11-08 09:53:46 AM  

BiffDangler: I don't understand why it is news that the editor of a magazine that takes a position contrary to the opinion of the vast majority of a magazines readers would get fired.

That you may or may not share the same opinion as the readers is not relevant.


It is certainly a reminder that the "Guns & Ammo" crowd is as firmly set in their beliefs as always... no need for discussion.  That Metcalf got fired isn't news, but it was news that a lifer like Metcalf even had a differing opinion on the matter.
 
2013-11-08 09:54:14 AM  

blackminded: This thread never stood a chance.


It's momma was a whore, and it's daddy is a junkie.
 
2013-11-08 09:54:18 AM  
Gun clingers are a sad bunch. Good thing they are being depleted demographically. Sad that we will probably have a few more Auroras and Newtowns before we can get some sane gun laws on the books.
 
2013-11-08 09:55:24 AM  

PDid: Gun clingers are a sad bunch. Good thing they are being depleted demographically. Sad that we will probably have a few more Auroras and Newtowns before we can get some sane gun laws on the books.


What do you believe are "sane gun laws"?
 
2013-11-08 09:55:45 AM  

blackminded: This thread never stood a chance.


They never do.  The best you can hope for is the initial derp to have such a gaping flaw that it can be mocked for an extended period before the hardcore trolls show up.
 
2013-11-08 09:56:12 AM  
I just cancelled my subscription...
 
2013-11-08 09:57:49 AM  
yep, I predict another reasonable discussion ITT.
 
2013-11-08 09:58:19 AM  
My usual statement: I think it's fine, a good idea, in fact, to require proficiency training/testing if you want to carry a firearm in public, operate a firearm around other people (the "idiots at the range" Metcalf mentioned are a real thing), etc.
 
2013-11-08 09:58:47 AM  

Satan's Bunny Slippers: yep, I predict another reasonable discussion ITT.


fark ate my graphic.  Preview is my friend.


[insertyourownpopcorneating.gif]
 
2013-11-08 09:59:11 AM  

Dimensio: PDid: Gun clingers are a sad bunch. Good thing they are being depleted demographically. Sad that we will probably have a few more Auroras and Newtowns before we can get some sane gun laws on the books.

What do you believe are "sane gun laws"?


More to the point - what would be an insane gun law? That might be more fun. Like all babies being required to carry loaded derringers.
Or funding to develop a gun that shoots leprosy.
I could get behind that.
 
2013-11-08 09:59:23 AM  
in the USA common sense is an apologizable offence
 
2013-11-08 10:00:02 AM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: blackminded: This thread never stood a chance.

Gun threads never do. Kinda like this guy's hope for a healthy exchange of ideas, eh?


There is a small chance sometimes. It certainly doesn't help when they refresh the submission queue every five seconds so when the topic appears it can vomitted on right off the bat.
 
2013-11-08 10:00:28 AM  

Dimensio: What do you believe are "sane gun laws"?


Mandated firearms safety training seems like a pretty sane law.  The NRA happens to sanction those, and given the frequency with which we read about dumbasses violating the three little rules and shooting at/maiming/killing themselves and others in public, I'd say the need is present.
 
2013-11-08 10:00:31 AM  

Dimensio: PDid: Gun clingers are a sad bunch. Good thing they are being depleted demographically. Sad that we will probably have a few more Auroras and Newtowns before we can get some sane gun laws on the books.

What do you believe are "sane gun laws"?


Don't know about him but here's my short list.

Universal background checks
Restrictions on high capacity semi-auto rifles
Outright ban on extended magazines
 
2013-11-08 10:00:47 AM  

mrEdude: in the USA common sense is an apologizable offence


An armed society is a polite society. :D
 
2013-11-08 10:01:30 AM  

mrEdude: in the USA common sense is an apologizable offence


Know thy customer base... even if they can make your skin crawl.
 
2013-11-08 10:02:41 AM  

Dimensio: PDid: Gun clingers are a sad bunch. Good thing they are being depleted demographically. Sad that we will probably have a few more Auroras and Newtowns before we can get some sane gun laws on the books.

What do you believe are "sane gun laws"?


Count me curious as well.
 
2013-11-08 10:03:07 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: impaler: dittybopper: Define "common sense".  Common sense is generally what people retreat to when they don't have a good logical argument for their position, but they feel the alternative is absurd or wrong.

"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen."

"Common sense" is a phrase stupid people use to feel smart.

100% agreed.



upload.wikimedia.org

Peope that hate Common Sense would be opposed to America's independence and it would then be reasonable to assume that they'd want our guns taken away so that the king of england can come back and push us around.
 
2013-11-08 10:03:26 AM  

jso2897: mrEdude: in the USA common sense is an apologizable offence

An armed society is a polite society. :D


images.huffingtonpost.com
agrees
 
2013-11-08 10:03:31 AM  
I feel so safe around guns. They are made to have fun with. And they make me feel important.
 
2013-11-08 10:03:33 AM  

dittybopper: dr_blasto: dittybopper: It's also not common sense.

So, what is then?

Define "common sense".  Common sense is generally what people retreat to when they don't have a good logical argument for their position, but they feel the alternative is absurd or wrong.

To steal a phrase from Barack Obama, what might be "common sense" in Chicago might not not be in Cheyenne.  So if it's not universally applicable or nearly so, then it can't be "common".   It used to be "common sense" that black people should be slaves, for example.  Until people with a sense that it was wrong made it (eventually) uncommon sense.

It was "common sense" in the Soviet Union that anyone who had any significant private assets at all, including just a small, simple farm, was an enemy of the people.

It was "common sense" in the Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge that anyone with an education was an enemy of the people.

It was "common sense" in California 100 years ago that the Chinese were subhumans that should be marginalized.

I have 3.2 metric farktons of examples of "common sense" that was wrong.   So appeals to it, like "do it for the children", tend to make me wary as all get-out, and make me suspect that the person behind the appeal has either a hidden agenda, or they are what Lenin used to call "useful idiots" for those who do have an agenda.


It is common sense to not drive your car into a brick wall at speed.

What I'm asking is, based on the article, appropriate legislation? Call it common sense, call it thoughtful and logical. Call it whatever, but in the end, what does make sense?

I'd say that, in order to consider it, you'd have to acknowledge that not every one should have a firearm. You would also have to argue that firearms are not appropriate in all circumstances - that is, they may not be appropriate to bring into certain situations. It may also be important to note that not all firearms are appropriate for civilian ownership.

With that, any sane person should acknowledge that the United States has a lot of motherfarkers getting shot. You also have to square that with the Second Amendment. Knowing this, you also understand that there are limits to the other enumerated rights based on place and time or method. Firearms aren't any different.

So, what then?
 
2013-11-08 10:04:58 AM  
Extremists and those that express the desire to commit terrorism in the future aren't really open to dissenting opinion.
 
2013-11-08 10:05:07 AM  

Pharque-it: I feel so safe around guns. They are made to have fun with. And they make me feel important.


Now there's some common sense.  You commoner.
 
2013-11-08 10:05:39 AM  

kbronsito: cameroncrazy1984: impaler: dittybopper: Define "common sense".  Common sense is generally what people retreat to when they don't have a good logical argument for their position, but they feel the alternative is absurd or wrong.

"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen."

"Common sense" is a phrase stupid people use to feel smart.

100% agreed.


[upload.wikimedia.org image 510x800]

Peope that hate Common Sense would be opposed to America's independence and it would then be reasonable to assume that they'd want our guns taken away so that the king of england can come back and push us around.


Just let that big-eared sonofabiatch try it!
 
Displayed 50 of 434 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report