Radio Shack tells Montana store owner to stop offering guns with satellite dish

[RamboLiberal]

The owner of a RadioShack in Montana is refusing an order from the company to stop offering customers a free gun if they buy a satellite television dish service.

Steve Strand, who has owned an electronics outlet in Hamilton, Mont., since the early 90s, said RadioShack called him Tuesday and asked him to stop the promotion, which offers a gift certificate for a free shotgun or handgun to customers who sign up for Dish Network service.

Strand said RadioShack's concerns were legitimate, but that the electronics giant wasn't plugged into the Big Sky Country lifestyle.

"They are concerned that we are tarnishing their brand name," Strand said. "But you realize we're an independent store. In Montana, guns are part of our everyday life.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2011/03/30/2011-03-30_radioshack_to_montana_owner_stop_promo_that_offers_free_guns_to_satellite_dish_b.html?r=news/national

[applegrove]

1. Come on you NRA types.... I'm ready for ya!

[cleanhippie]

3. What does that even mean?

:shrug:

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

9. "NRA Types"... He's ready for them!

:shrug:

[lawodevolution]

12. It's an N word for gun owners

[cleanhippie]

2. .

[TheCowsCameHome]

4. Hehe. Great deal. Gun or $50 pizza coupon.

It must be a top of the line weapon at that rate.

[David West]

14. I checked out their website...

Looks like it's a Hi-Point handgun.

http://getagun.net/

So yeah, definitely cheap, but it's still kind of a cool deal, and depending on the caliber it should be somewhere in the $100-$150 range, so it's a much better deal than the pizza.

[TheWraith]

29. Hi-Points aren't bad guns, from what I've heard.

Because of the way they're made, they're heavier and have fewer features than other weapons, but they make up with that with cheapness. They're supposed to be relatively reliable too, and would probably make a good nightstand gun for someone out in the country, if you need to take out a raccoon digging through your garbage in the night.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

30. They make good throwaway guns to keep in your glovebox or trunk.

That or an old cheap .32 or .38 revolver.

[David West]

33. Agreed. Hi-Points may be ugly as sin...

...but a buddy of mine has one of their 9mm carbines and it's very useable. Considering the price I certainly wouldn't rule one out as something I could buy and pack away in a bug-out-bag to be stashed somewhere.

[AzNick]

101. I own two Hi-Point - Here's my opinion

I have their 9mm and their 45.

They are very finnicky on the ammo you put in. Lately they refuse to shoot Federal (since the 45 ACP recall, Federal's QC has gone down).

They like PMC, Remington & Lellier. They hate Federal, Winchester and Magtech. By that I mean lots of FTEs.

I have a Pashmayr slip-on on the C9 and custom sights a machinist made for me. It is fat, ugly, heavy but shoots pretty well with the right ammo.

They are ok for self defense, if you train yourself to eject a stovepipe :) and lose a live round.

[Kurska]

94. Woah you back the heck of hi-point fella.

Hi-points are reliable, accurate, cheap but no thrills, heavy and boxy.

They are a testament to function over form and I love My hi-point carbine to death.

[Tesha]

5. The gun's Reign of Terror in this country will end when...

...the corporations that are harmed by guns
decide to exert their might over the corporations
that profit from the manufacture and sale of guns.

Tesha

[Atypical Liberal]

8. You're right.

You're right, and that day will only come if and when the proletariat finally figure out how badly they are getting shafted by such corporations and that their vote no longer can compete with the monetary power of such corporations.

The day the people of this nation rise up in violent protest against the tyranny of corporate money will be the day that corporations turn against the right to keep and bear arms.

Until then, probably not so much.

[spin]

11. It is possible that when the oligarchy formed of the big corporations

and the politicians that they own becomes so large and powerful that they feel threatened by the impoverished citizens that they have trampled in their quest for power, riches and control, they will get their puppets in Congress to pass draconian gun laws.

Of course, the rich, the famous and the powerful will always be able to own firearms. Our country will revert to a society similar to those existing in Europe at the time our country launched its revolution against England. Our great experiment of trusting the common man to run the government rather than being a mere serf subject to the whims of his rulers will end.

[Starboard Tack]

63. What version of history did you read? Disney or Classics Illustrated?

You think the colonists were serfs? They were colonists who came with guns and bibles and slaves. A bunch of teabaggers who didn't want to pay their taxes.
You think they came up with the idea for a Bill of Rights that included RKBA? Read your history.

[spin]

68. The governments in Europe at the time of the American Revolution ...

didn't allow their citizens the freedoms that Americans gained after the revolution.

England in the 18th century was an oligarchy and power rested in the hands of the wealthy. The common man had little say in his government in England at that time.

Meanwhile in 1760 George II died at the age of 77. George III succeeded him. The first two George's were content to leave government in the hands of their ministers. However, according to his enemies, George III tried to gain more power for himself.

During his reign Britain lost her colonies in North America. Fighting began in 1775 and the colonists declared themselves independent in 1776. George was determined to suppress the colonists, ignoring the wishes of those who wanted reconciliation. However the Americans won a decisive victory at Yorktown in 1781, which ensured their independence. That caused George's crony, Prime Minister Lord North to fall from power.

Meanwhile London was rocked by the anti-Catholic Gordon riots in 1780. Riots were common in the 18th century. The workers could not vote and there were no trade unions so if the workers were disaffected they rioted.

The Gordon riot was the worst. Lord George Gordon (1751-1793) was an MP who led a huge crowd to parliament to present a petition demanding the repeal of a 1778 act, which removed certain restrictions on Roman Catholics. The demonstration became a riot. With cries of 'No Popery!' the rioters held London for several days until the army restored order. About 300 people died in the rioting.
http://www.localhistories.org/18thcenteng.html

English citizens at that time did have a right to own firearms for self defense. The Colonists didn't invent that right.

The rights of English subjects, and, after 1707, British subjects, to possess arms was recognised under English Common Law. Sir William Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England, were highly influential and were used as a reference and text book for English Common Law. In his Commentaries, Blackstone described the right to arms.<14>

The fifth and last auxiliary right of the subject, that I shall at present mention, is that of having arms for their defence, suitable to their condition and degree, and such as are allowed by law. Which is also declared by the same statute I W. & M. st.2. c.2. and is indeed a public allowance, under due restrictions, of the natural right of resistance and self-preservation, when the sanctions of society and laws are found insufficient to restrain the violence of oppression.

Formerly, this same British common law applied to the UK and Australia, as well as until 1791 to the colonies in North America that became the United States. The right to keep and bear arms had originated in England during the reign of Henry II with the 1181 Assize of Arms, and developed as part of Common Law. These rights no longer exist in the UK, since the UK's doctrine of Parliamentary sovereignty allows the repeal of previous laws with no enshrined exceptions such as contained within a codified constitution.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_the_United_Kingdom

Slavery was not illegal in the British empire until 1833.

After the 1807 act, slaves were still held, though not sold, within the British Empire. In the 1820s, the abolitionist movement again became active, this time campaigning against the institution of slavery itself. In 1823 the first Anti-Slavery Society was founded in Britain. Many of the campaigners were those who had previously campaigned against the slave trade. Sam Sharpe contributed to the abolition of slavery with his Christmas rebellion in 1831.

On 28 August 1833, the Slavery Abolition Act was given Royal Assent, which paved the way for the abolition of slavery within the British Empire and its colonies. On 1 August 1834, all slaves in the British Empire were emancipated, but they were indentured to their former owners in an apprenticeship system which was abolished in two stages; the first set of apprenticeships came to an end on 1 August 1838, while the final apprenticeships were scheduled to cease on 1 August 1840, six years later.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abolitionism

I stand by my statement in the post you replied to.

Our country will revert to a society similar to those existing in Europe at the time our country launched its revolution against England. Our great experiment of trusting the common man to run the government rather than being a mere serf subject to the whims of his rulers will end.

Today, we are already well down this path. We vote for people who do not represent our wishes but instead bow and pander to the big corporations and the wealthy.

[lawodevolution]

13. "The gun's Reign of Terror in this country will end when..."

when the anti-gun people stop trying to teach their children that guns are evil and only for killing which causes them to use the gun they buy later in life to evil and killing. The people who are part of the gun culture (concealed carry permit holders are a good example) rarely commit crime.

[Starboard Tack]

64. Guns are not evil. They are sometimes necessary. Loving guns is sick.

Guns may be used defensively, but they are deigned to be offensive. If you choose to carry one for self defense, then you must accept that others find that highly offensive. That's the price we pay for our "freedom".

[Glassunion]

69. How would anyone know? Most people who carry firearms do so concealed.

Do you find it offensive when you see a police officer's firearm?

[Starboard Tack]

71. How would anyone know? Are you kidding?

Sales figures! Folks posting about carrying! Bulges where there shouldn't be!

"Do you find it offensive when you see a police officer's firearm?" Damn right I do

[Glassunion]

75. Your right... This dude must have a bulge'y nose or something...

[PavePusher]

15. Do you have any idea how big the firearms industry actually is?

How much their revenues are?

I'm betting you can't guess within an order of magnitude.

[pipoman]

18. Here's a hint...

if all US gun manufactures combined their revenues, the resulting company would not be in the Fortune 500.

[Tesha]

20. But they have a great marketing organization and many willing fools to carry their message. (NT)

[cleanhippie]

22. Step 1: float an ignorant argument. Step 2: when said argument fails, insult. Rinse, repeat.

Two posts is all it took for you to get to your point, a childish insult. What a shame.

[DonP]

24. America spends more on potato chips and salty snacks than on firearms

But please keep making shit up to fit the latest conspiracy theory.

The myth of "Big Gun" companies keeps floating around, desperately trying to get traction with people, the media, anybody to believe that a handful of relatively small companies somehow exert a massive "hidden" force on politics.

Occams razor applies here. The reason they have clout is there are almost a hundred million gun owners and most of them vote like clockwork. That's why the politicians listen to their spokespeople, not because Smith & Wesson or Colt took them all to Aruba for a week or wrote them a 7 figure check for their campaign fund.

You're just upset and flailing about because the tide against more gun control is moving against you and is picking up speed. But remember it's because there are so many of us damn "willing fools" supporting it and so few of you enlightened folks against it, not because of "Big Guns". Now, put your tinfoil back on, remember shiny side out.

[Tesha]

25. The funny part is that you all *PAY* for the privilege to lobby on behalf...

...of the gun manufacturers.

It's not unlike how the Teabaggers pay to attend seminars
where they're taught how to lobby on behalf of the Koch brothers.

Tesha

[PavePusher]

26. Something about a Civil Right really chaps your hide, doesn't it?

And more insults as well. Go figure.

[DonP]

27. Yes, and happily so, how stupid of us - huh?

Almost a "stupid" as all those union member paying dues to support their values and point of view politically, right?

4.5 million of us at $35 a year, not including the GOA membership, state associations and families included in memberships.

Gun control supporters, on the other hand, are happy to let large, faceless foundations pick up the bill for their top down attacks on the Bill of Rights.

What kind of political voice or clout do gun control advocates have when the legislators realize they have no real voters behind them? None that matters.

You really just refuse to get it. But that's OK, don't like guns, don't have one and don't allow them in you home.

But leave the rest of us the fuck alone. If the Brady bunch had done things that way we probably wouldn't have almost universal concealed carry and a lot of the other liberal gun laws we have today. Hell, they are directly responsible for the record number of AR-15s sold today and making it the most popular target rifle sold today.

you just keep poking that bear with the stick some more and before you know it you'll have universal constitutional carry.

[Tesha]

34. Here's what's *REALLY* going to happen....

You'll make progress for a while because, stirred-up
by the gun manufacturers' lobby (the NRA), you folks
are clearly far more motivated than is the anti-gun
crowd. And you'll have/gain your rights for open
carry, concealed carry, required carry, or what-
have-you in many, many places.

Then, as sure as the sun rises in the East and "safe"
nuclear power plants eventually catastrophically fail,
humans being human, there will come a series of gun-
related disasters. Shoot-outs, righteous or wrong,
that kill dozens, some of them uninvolved bystanders,
some of them just children. Even white, middle-class
children! There'll be an LEO who kills an open- or
concealed-carry proponent when that proponent reaches
for his wallet and the officer sees (or even doesn't
see) the proponent's gun. Or worse yet, an LEO,
uniformed or undercover, who is killed by a gun
carrier, deliberately or through an accident.

After this happens a few dozen times in a dozen or
so states, the folks who are agnostic on gun issues
will finally say "Enough of this foolish little-boy
fascination with firearms!". LEO organizations around
the country will be fed-up as well. And at that point,
the laws will all be changed again, severely curtail-
ing your rights, as America finally joins the rest
of the civilized world in recognizing that constant
personal possession of firearms is *NOT* a good thing
and that reasonable restrictions on gun ownership an
use leads to a society that is generally better for
everyone.

It may take a while for this to happen, but it's
as inevitable as human nature,

Tesha

[DonP]

35. Uhhhh, not so much

Your comment wouldn't bother me quite as much, if you didn't sound so smug and hopeful for more gun crimes and violence to prove your terribly misguided point.

You're not going to find any posts here, or anywhere else, from gun owners hoping for more "shootouts". But I see all kinds of posts from your friends in the gun control movement predicting, in a hopeful tone, the return of street shootouts to prove how right they were.

Maybe if you tempered your wishful thinking once in a while with a "I hope this doesn't come to pass but ..." you'd sound a little less like your looking forward to more violence so you can say "I told you so".

But considering for the last 2 decades the media and "reasonable well informed" folks like you, already take every incident with a firearm and try and turn it into "the OK Corral", every criminal with more than one gun has "an arsenal" etc. you have all overplayed your hand for decades.

A growing number of citizens started to recognize the BS from Brady and their ilk a while ago. If the tide ever does turn (I don't think it will turn any more than I think segregation will ever return) it won't turn for another 2 or 3 generations.

In short, Don't hold your breath for it changing in your lifetime or your children's. But cheer up, based on thw actual facts, neither lifetime is likely to be impacted in any way by firearms.

[Tesha]

36. I'm not smug;I've just been around long enough to know how these things work out.

You (the collective "you") tell us gun owners are
responsible persons.

The Nuclear Industry tells us nuclear power plants
are safe.

But the statistics of large numbers can't be avoided
even when they offend your politics.

Run enough nuclear power plants long enough into
their senescence and a few will self-destruct taking
the surrounding countryside with it.

Give guns to a hundred million or so Americans and
it's a certainty that after a while, we'll have a
number of incidents of the Gunfight at the OK Corral
along with deaths of LEOs and persons at the hands
of LEOs.

I'm tired of the bullshit that essentially denies
the Law of Large Numbers. It's a lie and I'm tired
of lies. So I'm just telling you how it *WILL*
play out. You can believe me or not; your belief
(or not) will not change things one whit.

I'm not holding my breath waiting for change; I
don't know when it will come. But that it will come
is inevitable.

Tesha

[DonP]

37. Large Numbers = Fallacious "logic"

So, based on your "Law of Large Numbers" when guns are banned eventually or somehow uninvented, because of OK Corral style shoot outs that are inevitable because there are so many people with guns, the criminals will just switch to knives, clubs or other methods of brute force to get what they want.

Kind of the way they have in the UK.

Or are the criminals going to be transformed somehow into being law abiding because they have no firearm access anymore?

Even using your logic, firearms in the hands of the law abiding, at least serve as a "temporary" equalizer of force, allowing the 100 pound woman to effectively resist the 250 pound home invader, as they have for the last 150+ years. So Colonel Colt was correct, at least for another century plus or so. I'll settle for that

[Tesha]

39. I didn't say *ANYTHING* about what the criminals will do.

Please don't use "distact" debating tactics.

Tesha

[cleanhippie]

45. Yes, your posts indicate that you have some clairvoyant ability to foresee the future...

[Tesha]

46. Not clairvoyance. Just logic and a sense of history.

Then again, with more than a hundred million
armed Americans, "what can possibly go wrong?",
ehh?

Honestly, there seems to be a lot of magical
thinking on your side.

Tesha

[cleanhippie]

53. You may feel that you know history, but its obvious you don;t pay attention to it.

Then again, with more than a hundred million
armed Americans, "what can possibly go wrong?",
ehh?

Considering gun ownership is at an all time high, ever, and crime is at its lowest in 40 years, and continues to decline....

Honestly, there seems to be a lot of magical
thinking on your side.

Perhaps you meant to say "factual thinking"? Yeah, I think so.

[Tesha]

56. Crime isn't only affected by guns (and I'm sure you know that).

And American gun deaths are still at levels
that would appall most of the world, whether
or not gun deaths are trending slightly down
or up.

By the way, that BOLDNESS still doesn't
impress me. Try THIS instead.

Tesha

[cleanhippie]

59. Ahh, the old "ignore the facts" and the "deflection" gambits.

Facts are facts, argue with them, not me.

The bold was to annotate YOUR words from mine, a common posting technique. But nice try to deflect.

[Tesha]

76. You're projecting. (NT)

[cleanhippie]

98. Considering how you have just used that word, I don't think you really know what it means.

But again, I will assist you...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

[Hangingon]

72. I think the criminals must be made law abiding mutants

when the nuclear power plants catastrophically fail.

[Blown330]

38. Apparently you prove that there is always an exception...

...to the rule. The rule in this case is that with age comes wisdom.

You (the collective "you") tell us gun owners are
responsible persons.

The VAST majority are.

The Nuclear Industry tells us nuclear power plants
are safe.

They are VERY safe. Only those uneducated in their construction and operation say otherwise.

But the statistics of large numbers can't be avoided
even when they offend your politics.

You have no proof until you provide these statistics. Preferably from somewhere other than your 4th point of contact.

Run enough nuclear power plants long enough into
their senescence and a few will self-destruct taking
the surrounding countryside with it.

Since virtually all of the existing 100+ nuclear plants are getting renewed 20 year licences to operate and possibly having their operation extended from 60 years to 80 years it seems you won't live long enough to see your half-brained ideas come to fruition anyway.

Give guns to a hundred million or so Americans and
it's a certainty that after a while, we'll have a
number of incidents of the Gunfight at the OK Corral
along with deaths of LEOs and persons at the hands
of LEOs.

Already have that level of exposure and none of that has happened yet. More false rhetoric.

I'm tired of the bullshit that essentially denies
the Law of Large Numbers. It's a lie and I'm tired
of lies. So I'm just telling you how it *WILL*
play out. You can believe me or not; your belief
(or not) will not change things one whit.

Tired of the bullshit from your kind too. Nothing but lies and certainly your beliefs will also not change anything. Beliefs of the willingly ignorant seldom change anything.

[Tesha]

40. There may be some "willfully ignorant" here, but I'm not ione of them.

(Nor am I impressed by BOLD type.)

Tesha

[Blown330]

102. You're also not impressed...

...by facts. Also, yours are the comments bolded so you not being impressed by them is hilarious.

[cleanhippie]

44. False equivalencies, too.

You seem to be simply fabricating things as you go along.

[Tesha]

47. Be specific.

What, precisely, am I fabricating?

Tesha

[cleanhippie]

50. Really?

Nuclear power to gun ownership?

[Tesha]

52. Yes. Both are activites whose proponents have *ASSURED* us are safe.

And demonstrably, neither is.

Both are also widely supported by folks
on the Right.

Tesha

[cleanhippie]

54. WHo has EVER said that?

You continue to use a false equivalency and fail to support your claim that (gun)proponents have *ASSURED* us are safe.

Who has stated that? Please cite your evidence.

[Tesha]

57. Search this forum.

We are routinely told that there's no problem
with any CCW gun-owner. The gun deaths are
always due to someone else.

Tesha

[cleanhippie]

60. SO you are unable to provide any example of anyone saying that? Got it.

Thats what I thought.

[Tesha]

77. No, I'm not going to do your homework for you.

Or you can wait a day and someone will say it
again and then we can both note that it was said.

Tesha

[DonP]

86. Common courtesy suggests that ...

... when one makes a claim as you did, that you provide some evidence or proof of that claim in the form of a link or other evidence that can be verified.

That's why the pro 2nd amendment people, that lack your set of "Miss Cleo Tarot cards" to foretell the future, almost always provide a link to a Government report or other neutral source of information like the DoJ, CDC, FBI et. al.

Not that you would ever do anything like it, but we have had a number of lying sacks of shit down here that made claims, provided no support for their claims and just got louder when challenged.

But I'm sure you'll have no problem correcting everyone, since it happens all the time according to you, with a few cites to recent posts or maybe the NRA home page where one or more people made such a ridiculous claim, right?

[Tesha]

87. Like I said, we'll just wait a day or two until the claim is made *YET AGAIN*.

In fact, a variant on it was posted in this thread just
a few hours ago. If you search the thread for the string
"99" you'll find it.

Tesha

[DonP]

88. Ummm, there is no post #99 try it again with out the Tarot cards.

But then again it is "common courtesy" which you seem to rather short on. If you spotted one, whatever the number of the post is, just cut anhd paste the address.

Are you incapable,just obstinant or a fraud, choose one?

[Tesha]

89. I SAID (listen carefully) "contains the string ''99''). "String" means "text". Try again.

> Are you incapable,just obstinant or a fraud, choose one?

Someone here may be incompetent but it's not me.

Tesha

[cleanhippie]

97. Translation: "I will wait a day or two until my fabrication has been forgotten."

Really? what variation. Point it out.

[cleanhippie]

96. Fail, Tesha. You fabricated a claim about OTHER DU members and cannot support that claim

with evidence. Thats a fabrication, or in some circles, a lie.

[Glassunion]

61. Could not find any...

Where someone stated or implied that there is no problem with any CCW gun owner and thus passing it off as due to someone else.

Do you have any examples of your claim?

[GreenStormCloud]

65. FALSE.

We are routinely told that there's no problem with any CCW gun-owner.

No one here claims that absolutely all CCWers are perfect. Rather we show that 99.975% of Texas CHL holders are law abiding. And there is no reason to believe that other states with similar requirements are any different.

In 2009, out of over 400,000 CHL holders there was exactly ONE conviction for murder. So we are doing pretty good.

Further, your chances of getting struck by lightning are over 30 times greater than you chance of being illegally shot and killed by a CCWer.

With that kind of safety record there isn't going to be any public outcry against us. For the past 25 years the number of states that are shall-issue has been increasing, and none of them have had any trouble.

[rl6214]

67. Because this has happened *SO* many times, right?

"The Nuclear Industry tells us nuclear power plants
are safe.

But the statistics of large numbers can't be avoided
even when they offend your politics.

Run enough nuclear power plants long enough into
their senescence and a few will self-destruct taking
the surrounding countryside with it"

Allow child predators to remain out in the public, eventually "a few will self-destruct" and abuse and destroy the lives of more children.

Oh wait, that happens, OK well,

Allow rapists and just men in general to remain in public around women and eventually "a few will self-destruct" and assault and destroy the lives of more women.

Oh wait, that happens too,

We can go on and on with this...

Maybe you need to find a more noble cause, one that you can actually impact.

[Tesha]

78. You don't seem to be disagreeing with my point but merely adding points of your own. (NT)

[rl6214]

83. Merely adding points

that are as equally ridiculous as yours.

See how it works?

[Tesha]

84. Ahh, no refutation then. Like so many here.

Just your attempt at distraction.

Tesha

[Callisto32]

42. How wide ARE the doors at your place???

Clouds in your coffee and all.

[Tesha]

48. Ahh! A pair of insults! Well argued! (NT)

[cleanhippie]

43. I didn't realize that one could fit so many strawmen, non sequiturs, and broad-brush insults

into ONE SINGLE POST.

[Tesha]

49. Be specific.

Name them.

Tesha

[cleanhippie]

51. Sure.

you'll make progress for a while because, stirred-up
by the gun manufacturers' lobby (the NRA), you folks
are clearly far more motivated than is the anti-gun
crowd. And you'll have/gain your rights for open
carry, concealed carry, required carry, or what-
have-you in many, many places.

Strawman

Then, as sure as the sun rises in the East and "safe"
nuclear power plants eventually catastrophically fail,
humans being human, there will come a series of gun-
related disasters. Shoot-outs, righteous or wrong,
that kill dozens, some of them uninvolved bystanders,
some of them just children. Even white, middle-class
children! There'll be an LEO who kills an open- or
concealed-carry proponent when that proponent reaches
for his wallet and the officer sees (or even doesn't
see) the proponent's gun. Or worse yet, an LEO,
uniformed or undercover, who is killed by a gun
carrier, deliberately or through an accident.

False equivalency, non sequitur and a strawman

After this happens a few dozen times in a dozen or
so states, the folks who are agnostic on gun issues
will finally say "Enough of this foolish little-boy
fascination with firearms!". LEO organizations around
the country will be fed-up as well. And at that point,
the laws will all be changed again, severely curtail-
ing your rights, as America finally joins the rest
of the civilized world in recognizing that constant
personal possession of firearms is *NOT* a good thing
and that reasonable restrictions on gun ownership an
use leads to a society that is generally better for
everyone.

Strawman and ad hominems

It may take a while for this to happen, but it's
as inevitable as human nature,

basless claim and speculation

[Tesha]

55. Strawmen don't have a basis in reality.

There is no doubt that the NRA acts as a lobby
for the gun manufacturers even though much of
its funding comes directly from you (the general
"you").

And the paragraph you claim presents a false
equivalency? Nuclear power is safe right up
until the moment it isn't, just like a gun.
And for both, their proponents distort statistics
and claim each new horror is an "isolated incident"
from which we should learn nothing.

Baseless claim?

What part of human nature makes it unlikely that
some set of the "more than a hundred million
Americans who own guns" won't eventually behave
like humans always do?

Speculation? Why yes, it is, but it's well-informed
speculation. And in a few decades, we'll both know
whether I got it right or not.

Tesha

[cleanhippie]

58. I reccommend reading up on the definitions of those terms.

You seem to lack a basic understanding of what those terms mean. I will assist..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

http://furrybrowndog.wordpress.com/2009/07/22/the-fallacy-of-false-equivalence/

http://www.logicalfallacies.info/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/baseless

[DonP]

62. LoL! Thank heavens you're not smug or anything

"Speculation? Why yes, it is, but it's well-informed
speculation."

You are pretty much the textbook definition of both smug and ill informed wrapped up in one self serving package.

Good luck and good bye.

No point in trying any further discussion, since you already know the future based on your "well informed speculation" and your imaginary statistical inevitabilities. We mere mortals are forced to rely on real world statistics and proven data.

[Tesha]

79. So we'll talk again in a few decades when I'm either proven a prophet or a fool. (NT)

[GreenStormCloud]

99. You have already been proven not to be a prophet.

Your side has predicted "blood in the streets" and "return to the Wild West" (The real Wild West was actually pretty tame.)for 24 years each time a state has gone shall-issue and it didn't happen. It is about time to take your crystal ball in for a tune-up, or maybe an overhaul.

[rl6214]

66. Here's what's [B]*REALLY**REALLY*[/B] going on

Concealed carry has been around since what, 1987 in Florida? Going on 24 years now without:
"a series of gun-
related disasters. Shoot-outs, righteous or wrong,
that kill dozens, some of them uninvolved bystanders,
some of them just children. Even white, middle-class
children! There'll be an LEO who kills an open- or
concealed-carry proponent when that proponent reaches
for his wallet and the officer sees (or even doesn't
see) the proponent's gun. Or worse yet, an LEO,
uniformed or undercover, who is killed by a gun
carrier, deliberately or through an accident"

much less:

" a few dozen times in a dozen or
so states"

You've been here a while, you *KNOW* that CCL holders are much more law abiding than non holders, you just want something like this to happen.

"It may take a while for this to happen, but it's
as inevitable as human nature"

Until *YOU* can change human nature, the human nature or attacking and preying on the young, the old, the female, the weak the need for personal protection will always be there.

[X_Digger]

70. Since 1963 in WA State, I believe. n/t

[rl6214]

73. Didn't realize they went that far back

and I'm assuming they have had 50 years of 'OK Corral' type shootings, right?

[X_Digger]

74. Blood in the Starbucks, I'm sure.n/t

[Tesha]

81. The number of guns is steadily increasing while the stability (and sanity) of American society...

...seems to be decreasing. Also, according to you
folks, more and more folks are becoming armed.
All of this, along with the continuing passage of
time makes such an incident ever-more likely.

Tesha

[Euromutt]

92. 1961, actually.

Yeah, there isn't a log or a Boeing that's left Washington in the past 50 years that didn't have a bullet hole or two in it (!)

[Tesha]

80. Strangely enough, much of the civilized world does perfectly fine *WITHOUT* any need for...

..."personal protection". This seems to only be
"necessary" in places like Somalia and America.

Tesha

[rl6214]

85. Strangely enough, most concealed carry holders do perfectly fine *WITH* their firearms

It only seems to be a problem with people like YOU (and by you I mean gun control activists).

The thing is, most of the US agrees with us (and by us I mean the RKBA crowd) as shown by the ever expanding number of states that are allowing concealed carry. Eventually it will be every state and there will be 50 state reciprocity.

[catenary]

90. Tell it to the many victims of "banned" gun violence in Jamaica.

Why do you value the rights of criminals over those of honest folks? That's a position one would expect from somebody who with an agenda to terrorize unarmed people so you obviously must have a different rationale for expressing it. :shrug:

[GreenStormCloud]

100. Have you taken a look at the violent crime rate in Europe? N/T

[Euromutt]

91. In other words, "blood will run in the streets," like it's been about to for 24 years...

Ever since Florida, and an increasing number of other states subsequently, adopted "shall issue" legislation.

To be useful, predictions must be falsifiable; there has to exist a set of conditions under which we can state that the prediction has failed to come true. Open-ended predictions, like yours, are useless because there's no defined time frame in which they must take place, so you can go on saying "it just hasn't happened yet, but just you wait, any year now..." until the sun swells into a red giant.

There'll be an LEO who kills an open- or concealed-carry proponent when that proponent reaches for his wallet and the officer sees (or even doesn't see) the proponent's gun.

Like it doesn't already happen that cops shoot people mistakenly thinking they're armed? "Amadou Diallo" ring a bell? And that was in New York City, where it's next to impossible to get a CCW permit unless you're a business tycoon, celebrity or are politically connected.

[rrneck]

28. The NRA is what is

because the liberal left threw gun owners under the bus.

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Callisto32]

41. The government, you know, the one you imply will save you from teh eeeevil korporashuns...

is the biggest corporation of them all. All other corporations exist at the pleasure of government.

[Tesha]

82. You seem to have misconstrued my point.

My point (which I'll remind you of) is that right
now, most of the American business establishment
takes a laissez faire attitude towards guns,
leaving the field wide-open for the pro-gun
lobby to have their way and the gun manufacturers
to sell lots and lots of their deadly product.

But eventually, guns and the violence they support
within American society will become a hindrance to
the rest of the corporations making money. At that
point, you will see actions such as that taken by
Radio Shack corporate against their dealer; the
corporations will not only actively disassociate
themselves from gun-related activities they will
begin to act against guns.

At that point, members of the NRA won't be the only
players on the field and the game will change.

And this will be especially so if some high-profile
incidents illustrate why having 100 million+ armed
Americans isn't such a good thing.

Tesha

[Straw Man]

93. So all this rights nonsense will get out of hand...

... and chaos will reign until the benevolent folks of Corporate America decide to step in and restore order?

Sounds like a fascist wet dream to me.

[tortoise1956]

95. Reign of Terror?

:wtf:

Are you serious? You really think there is a reign of terror? I'm thinking your first name is Rick, and you're featured in a Geico commercial - because unless someone was living under a rock, they would surely know that gun violence is down dramatically. If anything, the long reign of unreason and appeals to emotion when it comes to guns is starting to lessen. Not gone yet, and it never will go away completely, but once the actual facts are available for people to see, it gets harder to make a case for banning or severely restricting private gun ownership.

[KT2000]

6. DISH Network

better step in on this. I might be wrong but I don't think Charlie what-his-name would appreciate this promotion. It tarnishes him nationally.

[w4rma]

16. It will help them locally as long as they don't overreact. (nt)

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Common Sense Party]

10. No wonder Radio Shack is a failing corporation.

[ret5hd]

17. S & S Electronics cares about you!

No need to press 1 for English. We are American and we speak English!

(I guess even bigots can be lionized on DU.)

[pipoman]

19. Really?

Not offering alternate languages is bigoted? Wow. Who knew?

[ret5hd]

21. well, strutting it around like a point of pride certainly is.

[cleanhippie]

23. What do you mean? Can you provide an example of what you are talking about?

[catenary]

31. So how many languages do you think they should be required to support?

???