Celebrities on guns:

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

wisdom:

"...the right to defend one's home and one's person when attacked has been guaranteed through the ages by common law." - Rev. Martin Luther King

"It's better to have a gun and not need it, than to need a gun and not have it." - Christian Slater

"There are no dangerous weapons. There are only dangerous men." - Robert A. Heinlein

"I have a very strict gun control policy: if there's a gun around, I want to be in control of it." - Clint Eastwood


just the facts:

When a gun isn't enough, add cyanide. - Adolf Hitler

A gun beats a sword. - Indiana Jones

And from the King, himself, Elvis Presley - When I can't find the remote, I've got a revolver. ;)


Feel free to share some of your favorites.

[krispos42]

1. Get off my lawn

-Clint Eastwood

[Euromutt]

9. Strictly speaking, Walt Kowalski

I.e. the character played by Clint Eastwood in Gran Torino. The same way that it's not Shakespeare who advises to "put money in thy purse" or "neither a borrower nor a lender be," but Iago and Polonius, respectively; the first is a manipulative sociopath, the second a self-important senile git, and their advice should be weighed accordingly.

[rrneck]

2. Here's one

http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?desktop_uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DDZXlhSgq7us&v=DZXlhSgq7us&gl=US

[gejohnston]

3. so many quotes, so few electrons

But I had to go for irony.

“If you’ve got to resist, you’re chances of being hurt are less the more lethal your weapon. If that were my wife, would I want her to have a .38 Special in her hand? Yeah.” Dr. Arthur Kellerman(Health Magazine, March/April 1994)

"But if someone has a gun and is trying to kill you ... it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun."
- Dalai Lama (Seattle Times 2001).
http://www.buddhistchannel.tv/index.php?id=8,3916,0,0,1,0

[iverglas]

5. funny thing about that Kellerman quotation

Complete with the spelling/grammar error as you reproduced it, it gets nearly 7,000 google hits.

And yet somehow I find it difficult to believe that Health Magazine published something as egregiously bad as "you're chances of being hurt".

Odd, isn't it? Almost makes one doubt the whole thing.

In the grammatically correct form, it garners somewhat over 1,000 hits.

Me, I'd like to see the actual article, with the actual words in their actual context.

Any chance you can produce that, rather than a plainly falsified version of something that may or may not exist and that may or may not be accurately represented in that snippet?

[gejohnston]

7. I'll see what I can do

so?
If it is a direct quote, maybe. Depends on the editorial style at time. I read one issue once.
A little, but my irony meter was pegged while my BS meter moved a little. Some people see communists under their beds, some people see hypocrites. I'm cynical in that way.
So?
I was curious about it too, to be perfectly honest, I would like to see it too.
I doubt it would be on line, If I can find the old issue of Health I'll let you know either way.

[petronius]

8. Here you go - it's online through my university library

I doubt I'm allowed to repost the whole thing, but here are the the relevant 4 paragraphs:

But underneath the statistical discrepancies so typical of the heated debate over gun control, there is surprising overlap in Kleck's and Kellermann's views. Both men agree, first, that a gun is not a magical tool, conferring invincibility on its owner, nor should it be the first line of household defense.

But sometimes, they acknowledge, all the locks, lights, and precautions fail, and a violent stranger has invaded your home. As Gainesville firearms instructor Alan Hagan says, "You've got about as much chance of needing to use a gun in self-defense as of winning the lottery, but someone wins that lottery darned near every week."

In that rare event, when a violent confrontation seems to be unavoidable, Kellermann and Kleck agree on which response will be most effective. "If you've got to resist, your chances of being hurt are less the more lethal your weapon," says Kellermann, the no-guns-in-the-home man.

"If that were my wife, would I want her to have a thirty-eight special in her hand?" he asks. "Yeah."

Health (Time Inc. Health); Mar/Apr94, Vol. 8 Issue 2, p52

On edit: the actual author of the article is Ann Japenga, if that helps...

[Tuesday Afternoon]

14. thanks, petronius

interesting.

here are some more links for iverglas to peruse at leisure:
https://encrypted.google.com/#hl=en&sugexp=tsh&cp=54&gs_id=i&xhr=t&q=Health+Magazine%2C+March%2FApril+1994+Dr.+Arthur+Kellerman&pf=p&sclient=psy-ab&source=hp&pbx=1&oq=Health+Magazine,+March/April+1994+Dr.+Arthur+Kellerman&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=&gs_upl=&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=6b9c960563ede235&biw=1366&bih=673

on edit:

more links:
https://encrypted.google.com/#sclient=psy-ab&hl=en&source=hp&q=%201994%20Dr.%20Arthur%20Kellerman&pbx=1&oq=&aq=&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=&gs_upl=&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=6b9c960563ede235&biw=1366&bih=673&pf=p&pdl=3000

[iverglas]

21. uh, you think I don't have google?

You did notice that my question in the first place related directly to the search results for the misquotation? It's always fun when something like that happens, and you can see how many people/websites (nearly 7,000, was it?) just copy and paste bumph to the internet.

Maybe you think I've never heard of Kellermann ...

But oh look, your specific search terms (I had searched for an actual passage in the quotation) turned up this:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=432580&mesg_id=432626

Only last June. I'll bet a DU-specific search would come up with a few more. The tiresome predictabilty of the disingenuous Guns forum.

Kellermann stated what the findings of his research were, and gave his response to a hypothetical question, and we know perfectly well that his actions in reality are not based on hypothetical questions about events in a vacuum.

So gejohnston's remark in that thread -- "He wants his wife to have a gun but no one else." -- is simply false.

Kellermann did not say "I want my wife ...", he said "If that were my wife, would I want her to have ...? Yes."

It was a HYPOTHETICAL QUESTION. It related to a hypothetical situation that he does not anticipate happening. A hypothetical question that excluded all other relevant factors that exist in real situations. He might as well have been asked what he would take to a desert island, or what the best way would be to avoid being killed by zombies.

People who answer hypothetical questions do so at their own risk, the risk being that someone will twist their words and present them as if they were their final answer to something completely different. Oh look.

Of course, if someone has evidence that Kellermann has equipped his wife with a thirty-eight special and she hauls it around with her everywhere she goes, I'm sure we'll hear.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

24. uh, mea culpa

sorry for bothering.

I promise it won't happen again.

Have a good day.

[gejohnston]

38. I did?

So gejohnston's remark in that thread -- "He wants his wife to have a gun but no one else." -- is simply false.

Kellermann did not say "I want my wife ...", he said "If that were my wife, would I want her to have ...? Yes."

You got that how? Are you telepathic? Or do you just like telling lies about me? Is this going to turn into another lecture about concrete thinking? Do you do this just to piss off people to see how many "gun militants" you get TSed? Where did I say that he wanted his wife to have a .38 or any other gun? The above paragraph reads:

In that rare event, when a violent confrontation seems to be unavoidable, Kellermann and Kleck agree on which response will be most effective. "If you've got to resist, your chances of being hurt are less the more lethal your weapon," says Kellermann, the no-guns-in-the-home man.

read that however you want.

I also guess Kellerman and his wife didn't actually go out and get some thirty-eight specials and start hauling them around with them.

maybe, maybe not. Ask them. Now that he is head of RAND, he probably has other people to carry guns for him. He would not be the first gun control advocate to be a hypocrite. Take former Washington Post writer Carl Rowen for example. Shot at some kid using his pool.
http://www.nytimes.com/1988/09/27/us/trial-opens-for-rowan-in-shooting-of-trespasser.html

Kellerman seems to have exhibited refreshing intellectual honesty. Yes, the more lethal your weapon, the lower the chance of getting hurt in a situation where you need to resist. And yes, if you are in a situation where you need to resist, you'd probably want to have a gun.

Yes, very refreshing from the gun control movement.

The fact remains that his assessment does nothing to refute the fact that guns in the home are a risk factor for injury or death in the household, and the idea that in doing a risk-benefit analysis, the likelihood of any risk materializing, and what can be done to avert any risk, and the likely effectiveness of any risk-reduction action, need to be considered.

Has anyone said otherwise? It is up to the individuals to make that assessment and not up to anyone who does not know shit about them or their situation to make it for them or judge them. The risks can be eliminated or mitigated by inexpensive biometric pistol safes and other means, if they chose that route. Or simply not buy one at all. What works for them. You are the one telling what people should or should not do, not me.

[iverglas]

48. I gave you the link

gejohnston
Wed Jun-29-11 04:43 PM
Response to Reply #14
29. my bad. The irony just hit me. Updated at 1:22 PM

I read it closer, Kellerman is one of the Joyce funded shills.
He wants his wife to have a gun but no one else.

That is a complete misrepresentation of his words, which were:

"If that were my wife, would I want her to have a .38 Special in her hand? Yeah."

If he wants his wife to have a gun (but no one else), as you SAID he does, why would she not have one? Do you imagine he got her one for Christmas and she returned it for a refund? Or do you maybe know something we don't know, and she does have one?


It is up to the individuals to make that assessment and not up to anyone who does not know shit about them or their situation to make it for them or judge them.

I wonder whether you can quote Kellermann saying something different. If not, I wonder what your point is.


Now that he is head of RAND, he probably has other people to carry guns for him.

And there we see that bitter envy, and that willingness to spew unfounded crap about people we can't discredit any genuine way, yet again.


You are the one telling what people should or should not do, not me.

If that's true (and I have no clue what you're talking about), I'd guess it's what we commonly call "free speech".



html fixed

[gejohnston]

52. ancient fucking history

in the context of the quote given at the time, it stood to reason.
That he did not give honest information in his studies, nor did he release his data for 11 years. When it was, the 43 times was exposed for total bullshit that it was.
Not envy in any way, there is nothing unfounded about the crap I send his way and it is very genuine. You are hardly a person to lecture me about such things.
Yes free speech, but I don't judge their actions. If they make a choice not of your liking they become "brain washed by right wing crap, racist, misogynist, anti choice etc."

[iverglas]

54. 4 months and 4 days ago???

in the context of the quote given at the time, it stood to reason.

Well there ya go. Next time you'll ask for context rather than seizing what you see as an opportunity to level unfounded attacks at someone whose science makes you unhappy?

That he did not give honest information in his studies, nor did he release his data for 11 years. When it was, the 43 times was exposed for total bullshit that it was.

Blahbittyblahbittyblah.

Yes free speech, but I don't judge their actions. If they make a choice not of your liking they become "brain washed by right wing crap, racist, misogynist, anti choice etc."

I think you've been reduced to sputtering at this point.

[gejohnston]

57. yeah ancient history

I have a life, and a lot of things to remember. Do you actually have something constructive to say, or are you just going to waste electrons on bitching about nothing?

[SteveM]

66. Noodling: It's not for crappy rock stars anymore. nt

[Starboard Tack]

89. "in the context of the quote given at the time, it stood to reason."

Kinda like 2A "ancient fucking history"

[iverglas]

92. deleted

wrong place

[gejohnston]

93. not exactly

it is still written. I would argue still relevant, be it by our interpretation or yours (dismantle the MIC and replace it with a Swiss style army, have an active air force and navy large enough to take care of US needs. The MIC and large active duty military is making the founders spin in their graves.)

[iverglas]

18. I was kind of hoping for whatever came after that

But I guess it probably didn't continue that line of thought.

I also guess Kellerman and his wife didn't actually go out and get some thirty-eight specials and start hauling them around with them.

Certainly goes a long way on a point often asserted here though, doesn't it?

Kellerman seems to have exhibited refreshing intellectual honesty. Yes, the more lethal your weapon, the lower the chance of getting hurt in a situation where you need to resist. And yes, if you are in a situation where you need to resist, you'd probably want to have a gun.

How strange, for such a dishonest stooge of the gun-prohibition cult, eh?

The fact remains that his assessment does nothing to refute the fact that guns in the home are a risk factor for injury or death in the household, and the idea that in doing a risk-benefit analysis, the likelihood of any risk materializing, and what can be done to avert any risk, and the likely effectiveness of any risk-reduction action, need to be considered.

[SteveM]

65. He answers his own question. That's context. nt

[provis99]

4. "From My Cold, Dead Hands!" -Charleton Heston.

well, he wasn't buried with his guns, so from his cold dead hands, indeed.

[gejohnston]

6. I always thought

they were dead and cold when he said it. He did seem kind of undead at the time.

[jmg257]

10. Blondie and Tuco...

"You see in this world there's two kinds of people, my friend. Those with loaded guns, and those who dig. You dig."


"When you have to shoot, shoot, don't talk."

[Euromutt]

11. Again, those are characters

Rightly quotable though those lines are, they don't necessarily represent the opinions of the actors portraying those characters, or the scriptwriter, the director, etc.

[jmg257]

12. Understood, but they are more interesting opinions then what most celebrities have to say. :)

[Euromutt]

13. I was going to mention "When I hear of culture, I disengage the safety on my Browning"

The line having been attributed mostly to Goering and sometimes to Himmler, but it was in fact originally spoken by a fictional character named Thiemann in Schlageter, a pro-Nazi play written by Hanns Johst and performed for Hitler on his 44th birthday.

Can I just paraphrase Rosie O'Donnell instead? Something like "no private citizen should have guns, except the bodyguards I hired."

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

16. I've always found Rosie to be instructive...

...sometimes intentionally so.

[SteveM]

70. Jodie Foster pretty much implies what Rosie says, but Foster is...

better looking.;-)

"I don't believe that any gun should be in the hand of a thinking, feeling, breathing human being. Americans are by nature filled with rage-slash-fear. And guns are a huge part of our culture. "I know I'm crazy because I'm only supposed to say that in Europe. But violence corrupts absolutely." (mis-placed quotes in source)

Foster was accompanied by armed guards (evidently of the non- "thinking, feeling, breathing human" kind) while at Yale.

[iverglas]

91. sadly for Jodie Foster

... and Ronald Reagan ... and James Brady ... not everyone agrees with her.

Maybe you're aware that Hinckley enrolled at Yale to be near her?

http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/hinckley/HBIO.HTM

She was stalked there by both him and another man who apparently also originally planned to shoot her.

After the Reagan shooting she retired from the public eye to the extent possible. It didn't help. For some reason, presumably her early films and the bizarre fantasies that weird men based on them, she is a stalker magnet. Another one arrested.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/03/12/us-crime-stalker-foster-idUSN1163290620080312

One tends to think that her position on firearms kind of derives from being the target of people with firearms and the collateral victim of shootings (I wouldn't want to be the "reason" someone shot my head of state, myself).

Jodie Foster as an example of someone who did not need an armed guard; phew. I would be surprised if Yale had not insisted on it. Her mere presence was obviously a risk factor for other people.

Not that armed guards are actually much use at stopping people from shooting at you ... just ask Ronald Reagan ...

[SteveM]

96. She feels threatened; good for taking action. The rest get goose-eggs.

[iverglas]

98. I don't even know what that was meant to mean

[SteveM]

124. The way I took her actions to mean was she was entitled to self-defense...

with a firearm due to elite position. She probably was not cognizant of the fact (or didn't really care) that everyone else gets "goose eggs" (zero, nada, nil, etc.) with regards self-defense w/ firearm.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

15. from some of my favorite celebrities -

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Adams, John
Adams, Samuel
Bartlett, Josiah
Braxton, Carter
Chase, Samuel
Clark, Abraham
Clymer, George
Ellery, William
Floyd, William
Franklin, Benjamin
Gerry, Elbridge
Gwinnett, Button
Hall, Lyman
Hancock, John
Harrison, Benjamin
Hart, John
Hewes, Joseph
Heyward Jr., Thomas
Hooper, William
Hopkins, Stephen
Hopkinson, Francis
Huntington, Samuel
Jefferson, Thomas
Lee, Francis Lightfoot
Lee, Richard Henry
Lewis, Francis
Livingston, Philip
Lynch Jr., Thomas
McKean, Thomas
Middleton, Arthur
Morris, Lewis
Morris, Robert
Morton, John
Nelson Jr., Thomas
Paca, William
Paine, Robert Treat
Penn, John
Read, George
Rodney, Caesar
Ross, George
Rush, Benjamin
Rutledge, Edward
Sherman, Roger
Smith, James
Stockton, Richard
Stone, Thomas
Taylor, George
Thornton, Matthew
Walton, George
Whipple, William
Williams, William
Wilson, James
Witherspoon, John
Wolcott, Oliver
Wythe, George

[PavePusher]

30. Bah... Rich, dead white men.

No posible bearing on modern circunstances.

:sarcasm:

[SteveM]

71. With regards "rich" and this white boy, you got that right!

[-..__...]

17. A few from the Dark Side...

"Gun control? It's the best thing you can do for crooks and gangsters. I want you to have nothing. If I'm a bad guy, I'm always gonna have a gun. Safety locks? You pull the trigger with a lock on and I'll pull the trigger <without a safety lock>. We'll see who wins."
-- Sammy "The Bull" Gravano, Vanity Fair, September 1999

"Until America, door to door, takes every handgun, this is what you're gonna have."
--Sylvester Stallone

"I don't care if you want to hunt, I don't care if you think it's your right. I say 'Sorry.' it's 1999. We have had enough as a nation. You are not allowed to own a gun, and if you do own a gun I think you should go to prison."
- Rosie O'Donnell

[iverglas]

19. we should start a project

Search up what every one of the dozens and dozens of Anti-Gun Individuals & Celebrities said or did to get themselves on the NRA blacklist.

Joyce Brothers and Michael Moore, well, no credit for them.

Kyra Sedgwick and Mark Harmon?

[-..__...]

20. Well... go for it.

Those were just a few of my favorite nuggets of anti-gun/gun control opinion and insight.

What are some of yours?

[iverglas]

22. ah, here's one of my favourites

It seems to have been taken down from the site (old news, I guess, dating from about the mid-90s).

http://www.guncontrol.ca/Content/ConstitutionalChallenge.html

While the Alberta Government claims that there is no "proof" that gun control works, the standard of "proof" it is demanding goes far beyond what is required for justice reforms. Dr. Neil Boyd, Criminology professor at Simon Fraser University argued that the detailed evaluation of the 1977 legislation provides stronger evidence of the effectiveness of gun control than is available to support on most other reforms. Dr. Martin Killias, criminologist, University of Lausanne, has suggested that demands for conclusive "proof" are often a strategy for delay.

Having worked in the same place as Boyd about 35 years ago, and being a fan of his work and seeing him in the media regularly, I'll call him my celebrity. ;)

[Remmah2]

27. He is not famous nor is he a celebrity

http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/celebrity

Entry from World dictionary: celebrity

Pronunciation:/sɪˈlɛbrɪti/
noun (plural celebrities)
a famous person, especially in entertainment or sport:
he became a sporting celebrity
:
a celebrity interview the state of being well known:
his prestige and celebrity grew

[Tuesday Afternoon]

32. and that "quote" has been manipulated to the point that it is virtually unrecognizable.

[iverglas]

41. I beg your pardon??

and that "quote" has been manipulated to the point that it is virtually unrecognizable.

What exactly are you saying here?

[iverglas]

83. I'd like an answer

You appear to have accused me or someone else of falsifying the text I quoted in my post.

I very much want to know exactly what you are saying, and why.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

101. never mind. forget it.

you will never understand and I don't want to waste my time or yours trying to explain to you why that "quote" looks weird to me.

on edit: sorry to take so long to reply. I have been away from the computer and am just now finding your question.

[iverglas]

102. that doesn't quite look like a retraction

but I suppose that's what it might be.

I still have no idea what "quote" you are referring to precisely. The passage I quoted was taken from a page at guncontrol.ca which had worked on the challenge to the Firearms Act. It was rather long and it contained various information related to the case. That was a paragraph on the page. I really just have no clue what seems "weird" about it, but I'll assume that you have decided to withdraw the allegation that I or someone else "manipulated" something, I know not what.

This is the case it was referring to.

http://csc.lexum.org/en/2000/2000scc31/2000scc31.html

[-..__...]

34. "I'll take obscure Canadian Criminology professors for $1,000, Alex"

And while we're on the subject... allow me to save anyone the trouble or time and point out that Alex Trebec is a citizen of the Great White North, ya'know... this Alex Trebec...

"Give me a gun and put me near somebody who is just mean and I'll blow him away. No second thoughts about it".

http://www.esquire.com/features/what-ive-learned/ESQ0403-APR_WIL

[iverglas]

42. that's pretty funny

It's "Trebek", of course.

I tend to share his sentiments. ;)

Many bon mots there. I like the one above, too:

"A good education and a kind heart will get you through life in pretty good shape."


Mathematical figures for $1000: what is an exaggerated statement or claim not meant to be taken literally?

[-..__...]

55. "I tend to share his sentiments"...

Of course you do...

Canadian game show host Alex Trebek will host a Republican fundraiser in Malibu tonight.

http://gawker.com/5481135/alex-trebek-canadian-republican

TREBEK, ALEX
STUDIO CITY, CA 91604
JEOPARDY PRODUCTIONS/TV HOST Chuck Hagel (R)
Senate - NE
HAGEL FOR SENATE COMMITTEE Lost $1,000
primary 06/26/07

TREBEK, ALEX
STUDIO CITY, CA 91604
JEOPARDY PRODUCTIONS Chuck Hagel (R)
Senate - NE
HAGEL FOR SENATE COMMITTEE Lost $1,000
primary 07/08/04

TREBEK, ALEX
STUDIO CITY, CA 91604
JEOPARDY PRODUCTIONS Chuck Hagel (R)
Senate - NE
HAGEL FOR SENATE COMMITTEE

http://68.234.14.2/celebrity_political_donations/Alex_Trebek.php

Mathematical figures for $1000: what is an exaggerated statement or claim not meant to be taken literally?

To be taken "literally"? No.

To be taken as to which side of firearms ownership he leans toward... shouldn't be hard to figure out.

Regardless, if a politician had made that statement, I suspect any defense of "not meant to be taken literally" would not be forthcoming by the gun controllers here.

[iverglas]

58. oopsie

Now, who was it who offered up Mr. Trebek as a good guy???

Hint: it wsn't me.


And just why did you leave out the little winkie in quoting my words?


Oddly enough, Alex doesn't seem to pack heat, unless it isn't mentioned here in relation to his burglar-chasing escapade:

http://bangordailynews.com/2011/07/28/living/news-in-brief-%E2%80%98jeopardy%E2%80%99-host-alex-trebek-injured-chasing-burglar/

Of course, if he did, that would make him one of those Hollywood élitists, wouldn't it?

[iverglas]

23. and pesonally, I like to know

what the personnages have to say about other things.

Take, for example, Garry Breitkreutz, MP, leading mouthpiece for the gun militant brigade in Canada, and right-wing piece of shit extraordinaire.

http://www.garrybreitkreuz.com/abortion.htm

Peruse that. Woman-hating garbage from a right-wing, woman-hating, lying piece of shit.

Leading gun militant.

How bizarre, eh?

Oh yeah, when the bill recognizing same-sex marriage (already done by the courts) passed in Parliament, he called it the "Death of Marriage Act". He's a real wit.

[-..__...]

25. Normally, I'd suggest you take this up in the...

"Woman-hating garbage from a right-wing, woman-hating, lying piece of shit" forum, but seeing as DU doesn't have one (maybe you could ask Skinner about creating one), I suppose it'll have to stand here (at least for the time being).

That being said... I don't see what any of MP Breitkreutz's colorful opinions on other matters have to do with firearms related issues?

(I know... I know... right-wing, gun militant, woman hating, misogynistic, hateful, conservative pieces of shit are all in bed together with, and cut from the same cloth as anyone else that speaks out in favor of firearms ownership).

[iverglas]

40. you don't seem to have got that quite right

(I know... I know... right-wing, gun militant, woman hating, misogynistic, hateful, conservative pieces of shit are all in bed together with, and cut from the same cloth as anyone else that speaks out in favor of firearms ownership).

I don't think you even meant to say "in favor of firearms ownership". After all, it's a personal choice, right? None of anybody else's business.

You must have meant to say something else. Not that it would be an accurate representation of what I would say, likely.

I'd say:

right-wing, gun militant, woman hating, misogynistic, hateful pieces of shit are all in bed together.

Because it's pretty obvious.

And a forum where gun militancy is so often the order of the day is really exactly where that needs to be said, eh?

[rl6214]

35. It's amazing to see the number of actors that are willing to

use guns in their tv show/movies but we shouldn't be able to have them? Seems pretty hypocritical to me.

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

82. Deleted message

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

[Glassunion]

29. Stallone btw has a license to carry issued by LA county CA.

[Hoopla Phil]

43. I didn't know that, but I'm not suprised by it.

[Glassunion]

50. Some Sly quotes...

"Look at what's happening in America's inner-cities. If our hopeless legal system continues going the same liberal direction, there will be anarchy before long. We need one person in an influential position to stand up and tell the truth about gun control lobbies, the death penalty and that our criminal justice system basically stinks."
Sylvester Stallone, interview in Cinefantastique magazine, June 1995

"until America, door to door, takes every handgun, this is what you're gonna have... It really is pathetic... We're livin' in the Dark Ages over there."
Sylvester Stallone, March 28, 1998

"I know we use guns in films," but insisted the time has come "to be a little more accountable and realize that this is an escalating problem that’s eventually going to lead to, I think, urban warfare."
Sylvester Stallone on Access Hollywood, June 8, 1998

"It (2nd Amendment) has to be stopped, and someone really has to go on the line, a certain dauntless political figure, and say, ‘It’s ending, it’s over, all bets are off. It’s not 200 years ago, we don’t need this anymore, and the rest of the world doesn’t have it. Why should we?"
Sylvester Stallone on Access Hollywood, June 8, 1998

What a fucking hypocrite...

[Hoopla Phil]

56. Wow. Thanks for all the info. I knew he was a big anti 2A person but

I didn't know he had a CHL. Is there some web site that collects info on the hypocrites that have CHLs?

[Glassunion]

61. DU does a pretty good job... Lol.

[SteveM]

73. That it does -- must all be a bunch of grad. school hacks! nt

[iverglas]

76. good god

If you put

sylvester stallone gun

into your google search box, you get several brazillion of those whining websites, as I had already done before that was posted here.

"Grad school hacks", cripes. Kindergartners with a mouse and all the right-wing crap the internet has to offer.

[iverglas]

51. on a quick google

I'm sure there's a better source ...

http://www.stalkingalert.com/helpusrhonda.htm

January 12, 2000

Detectives hunting new leads in the Jill Dando murder inquiry have flown to Los Angeles to enlist the help of an expert on celebrity stalking.

L A's Deputy District Attorney, Rhonda Saunders, leads an anti-stalking unit which specialises in prosecuting fans who have become obsessed with Hollywood idols.

The Stalking and Assessment Team was established following the l99l doorstep killing of television soap actress Rebecca Schaeffer. So far it has pursued successful convictions on stalkers hounding Sylvester Stallone, Michael J Fox, Madonna and Kevin Costner. More recently, the team was involved in securing a 25 year prison sentence on a man who plotted to assault director Steven Spielberg.

... Ms Dando, 37, who presented the BBC’s Crimewatch programme, was shot in the head at close range with a semi-automatic 9mm handgun outside her home in Fulham, west London, on 26 April last year.

Despite a massive murder inquiry, police have yet to pinpoint a motive or a suspect.

Again I'll say: my own opinion is that carrying a handgun is not an effective way to avoid harm at the hands of a stalker. Dando's death seems to be a case in point.

But those who think it is just don't seem to be able to see past their blind bitter envy of the rich and successful to the fact that people in the public eye are sometimes the targets of insane or politically-motivated would-be or potential killers, while the huge and overwhelming majority of the general population simply is not.

Btw, does someone have evidence that Stallone has a licence at present? I gather he was issued one in 2004; there appears to be credible evidence of that. Is there evidence that he has one now? Does anyone at all ever bother to have facts to back up their assertions?


http://www.worstpreviews.com/headline.php?id=19941

On Saturday night, it happened again. A man named Damon T. Dana showed up unannounced at a fancy restaurant where Stallone was having lunch with Arnold Schwarzenegger. Dana came in sporting cornrows, gym shorts and shirtless.

Apparently he wanted Stallone to put him in "The Expendables" sequel and tried to prove his toughness by doing one-handed push-ups. Stallone chatted with him for a minute, but was obviously very cautious not to get too close or make any promises.

The restaurant called the police, which eventually showed up, questioned Dana and then escorted him to his car with order to leave immediately.

Dana has become a real problem for Stallone, since the man was arrested back in August for trying to sneak into the actor's house.

Anybody here being followed around by a stalker who tries to break into your house? Or spent the last two decades having that be a fact of your life?

[gejohnston]

63. class envy?

But those who think it is just don't seem to be able to see past their blind bitter envy of the rich and successful to the fact that people

In the US, the right wing uses that as an argument against progressive taxation.
You are starting to sound like this guy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFCtkZBvgTk&list=FLGjp21lBK0TiXCoaaHdkeSw&feature=mh_lolz

[iverglas]

72. not going to bother with that link

because the mewling and puking here about the rich and successful has nothing to do with progressive taxation. You still don't have the hang of that analogy thing, do you?

It is possible to advocate taxing rock stars and movie stars and politicians at the rate of 90%, in the social and economic interests of society, and still grasp the fact that some of them are targets of violent or insane individuals or groups and are at seriously elevated risk of harm.

You will want to keep remembering that I don't advocate issuing concealed weapon permits to anybody; Feinstein might have been an exception to my mind, since the danger to her arose directly from her position in public office and it is in the public's interest to ensure the safety of people in that position. Rock stars and movie stars, well, their choices are made in their own interests. Which does not negate the risk they are at.

So again, just in case it somehow is not clear in anyone's mind: I am not advocating issuing concealed weapons permits to anybody.

I'm just pointing out the deceitful portrayal of the situations in which some permits are granted, as portrayed by people who do in fact advocate the issuing of concealed weapons permits, and the obvious bitter envy it springs from.

If it sprang from anything else, the people doing the mewling and puking would simply acknowledge the facts of the matter and construct an argument that addressed them, rather than misrepresenting them or pretending they didn't exist.

Progressive taxation policy doesn't spring from envy, it springs from concern for a healthy society. Mind, if people who advocate progressive taxation went around whining about the wealth and success of the people they want to tax more than others and complaining about the unfairness of it all and muttering about how the rich just didn't deserve anything they had and everybody else should have it too and if nobody else does then they shouldn't either, you'd have a point.

[gejohnston]

88. it is kind of entertaining

because the mewling and puking here about the rich and successful has nothing to do with progressive taxation. You still don't have the hang of that analogy thing, do you?

made a statement of fact, the link has nothing to do with taxation.

I'm just pointing out the deceitful portrayal of the situations in which some permits are granted, as portrayed by people who do in fact advocate the issuing of concealed weapons permits, and the obvious bitter envy it springs from.

utter classist bullshit. What was deceitful? It was not from us. You are sounding so fucking right wing, it amazes me. So you just said, it is OK for some rich person but if the average person has an equally or greater threat, it is their tough shit. If not OK, that at least understandable.

If it sprang from anything else, the people doing the mewling and puking would simply acknowledge the facts of the matter and construct an argument that addressed them, rather than misrepresenting them or pretending they didn't exist.

there is this cliche about pots and kettles

Progressive taxation policy doesn't spring from envy, it springs from concern for a healthy society. Mind, if people who advocate progressive taxation went around whining about the wealth and success of the people they want to tax more than others and complaining about the unfairness of it all and muttering about how the rich just didn't deserve anything they had and everybody else should have it too and if nobody else does then they shouldn't either, you'd have a point.

No shit, I agree. Simply pointing out that you were started to sound like a US supply side right winger. They really use that argument. Then you bitch about concrete thinking.

[iverglas]

94. it's really very simple

assertion: Dianne Feinstein was issued a permit to carry a firearm because she was rich / well-connected.

fact: Dianne Feinstein was issued a permit to carry a firearm because she was a target of terrorist threats and of actual attempts on her life, and the reason she was a target was her position in public office, not her wealth or connections.

See how very simple it is?

The assertion is false. Plain, flat-out false.


Kindly note that I have not said that this bitter envy is directed against the rich and successful only. It is directed against anybody who is getting something that large numbers of people feel they, who are more deserving, should have. It includes welfare, affirmative action of any sort, and even simple equal treatment, as in the case of same-sex marriage or other equality rights of sexual or any other minorities. It is some kind of gut fear that somebody is getting something that "I" don't have.

I guess I might have been better to stick to "resentment", since that more obviously applies across the board, and that is certainly what motivates a whole lot of people. And it certainly applies here.


If it sprang from anything else, the people doing the mewling and puking would simply acknowledge the facts of the matter and construct an argument that addressed them, rather than misrepresenting them or pretending they didn't exist.
there is this cliche about pots and kettles

Indeed there is, although I would call it more a maxim.

What you don't seem to understand is that just announcing "pot kettle black" doesn't actually convey any meaning.

What I said had plain meaning, and I've just explained it all, all over again, at the beginning of this post. There are facts, and no one will stop spinning and acknowledge them as facts.

What you've said amounts to bibbity bobbity boo. If you're claiming that I am the pot calling the kettle black, you want to show where I have refused to acknowledge and address facts, and instead misrepresented them or pretended they didn't exist. Sadly, you haven't.


Simply pointing out that you were started to sound like a US supply side right winger. They really use that argument. Then you bitch about concrete thinking.

No, you didn't point it out, you ALLEGED it. You understand the difference?

You understand that it's entirely possible that there are people who are driven by resentment and envy and entirely possible to say so without being a supply side economics fan?

Christ, the resenters are the ones most likely to go for that crap. They so can't stand the thought that someone else is richer and more successful than they are that they cling to the notion that the rich are just like them and one day they too will be rich and their interests are the same as the interests of the rich. To acknowledge that the rich and successful actually are richer and more successful than them would mean acknowledging their own failure, by their own standards, which hold that everybody is responsible for their own circumstances. How else to explain that they vote against their own interests??

I don't care who uses what argument, if what they are saying is false. Progressive taxation policy is not driven by envy, so the fact that someone says it is is of no interest to me.

If someone wants to dispute my analysis that this whining about a handful of rich successful people getting firearms permits is not driven by envy, then they need to stop acting like children and address the facts, not keep spewing noise about how the rich get stuff they don't, wah wah.

As far as concrete thinking, I have no idea what relevance you think that has. You might want to google it up. Propriety prevents me from expanding on my reference to it here.

[gejohnston]

103. as usual you missed the point

assertion: Dianne Feinstein was issued a permit to carry a firearm because she was rich / well-connected.
fact: Dianne Feinstein was issued a permit to carry a firearm because she was a target of terrorist threats and of actual attempts on her life, and the reason she was a target was her position in public office, not her wealth or connections

While true, but you don't get how it really works here. If she were not rich or well connected and a target of stalker, terrorist, actual attempts on her life, she would not get a permit. If she wanted one even without the threats, she would have most likely received one. That is the context. Try learning the nuances of here. What may be true there does not mean it is true here.

the rest is irrelevant and stupid bullshit that is not worth bothering with.

[iverglas]

127. how it works

is that you name me someone who was the target of terrorist attacks, or who succeeded to public office after their predecessor was murdered in office, who applied for and was denied a permit.

If she wanted one even without the threats, she would have most likely received one. That is the context.

No it isn't, it's a non-existent hypothetical. She did not apply for a permit UNTIL she had been targeted and been the victim of two overt life-threatening acts.

We're talking about Dianne Feinstein here, not some hypothetical rich and connected person. No "nuance" in sight.

As I said:

If someone wants to dispute my analysis that this whining about a handful of rich successful people getting firearms permits is not driven by envy, then they need to stop acting like children and address the facts, not keep spewing noise about how the rich get stuff they don't, wah wah.

[gejohnston]

129. you still missing it

never said there was
Maybe in her case, but in general no.

I always thought that social democrats were against classim, as well racism and sexism. I thought that part of being a social democrat was that no one is above or below the law? That applies to one applies to all? Perhaps I misunderstood. No, they are driven by how we define social justice in the broadest sense of the term. If you see class envy, that is what you see. That is your problem not ours.

[iverglas]

130. if you want to pretend, that is what you want to do

I don't see "class envy" and have never said I do.

I see a bunch of people whining about what somebody else allegedly has because of their class.

So far it hasn't been proved that that's the case.

But they're the ones framing it that way, not moi.

Attempting to foment class envy, is how I'd put it, I guess.

I guess I should have been clearer that I don't really believe much of anybody is actually feeling envy. Just whining the whine.

[gejohnston]

67. So what if

it were a non rich or celeb. LA county would tell him or her tough shit. You would rant about them being a toter. Elitism is inherently right wing.

[Glassunion]

69. It was the hypocracy that I was pointing out. However you may be correct

that he let it expire last year. That does not change the fact that the man is a hypocrite.

"It <2nd Amendment> has to be stopped, and someone really has to go on the line, a certain dauntless political figure, and say, ‘It’s ending, it’s over, all bets are off. It’s not 200 years ago, we don’t need this anymore, and the rest of the world doesn’t have it. Why should we?" Sylvester Stallone on Access Hollywood, June 8, 1998

He did in fact apply for and receive a permit to carry in 2004. That same permit was still good in 2006 when he attended an event in November. Notice the logo in the background. Also notice the hypocrite(RIP) he is standing next to. I wonder if he was carrying one of the 4 weapons he listed on his permit?
Weapons:
Walther PPK/S .380ACP
Browning HiPower 9mm
Beretta 20 .25ACP
Glock 21 .45

"But those who think it is just don't seem to be able to see past their blind bitter envy of the rich and successful to the fact that people in the public eye are sometimes the targets of insane or politically-motivated would-be or potential killers, while the huge and overwhelming majority of the general population simply is not."

Personally, I do not think this way. I could care less that he has a permit and is exercising its use. I don't care what his reasons are. It is the hypocrisy that bugs me. When one jumps up and down saying something should be illegal, then runs out and does it is a hypocrite.

[iverglas]

75. what doesn't change the facts

is your asserting that Stallone is a hypocrite. I doubt that's even an opinion.

I'd tend to think that Stallone has a healthy fear of the unbalanced and unpleasant people in the world and all of the millions of fucking guns they have access to, should they decide that their own fame and fortune is to be made by shooting him in the head.

I'm not at all surprised that he's in favour of gun control. And I don't find it enormously surprising that in whatever circumstances he put to the issuing authority (knowing as we do of one convicted stalker and another who illegally entered his property) he felt at such risk of harm that he took that step.

Did you follow the Shania Twain stalker case at all? I believe he pleaded guilty but has been seeking bail pending sentencing.

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/arts-and-life/entertainment/music/shania-twain-stalker-denied-bail-next-court-date-is-nov-15-132140218.html

Crown lawyer John Flaherty requested at the time that Palumbo undergo a psychiatric evaluation before sentencing. While Dr. Helen Ward's report concluded that Palumbo suffers from bipolar disorder and a narcissistic personality disorder, she also deemed him criminally responsible for his actions.

... Last month, Twain testified via video link and described the numerous lovelorn letters Palumbo had mailed to her residences in Ontario and Switzerland, and discussed the feelings of fear and vulnerability conjured by his unwanted visits. He was seen at her family cottage, her grandmother's funeral and at the Juno Awards in March, where he was arrested. He's remained in custody since then.

But yeah, eh, to the gun militant mind, it was "élitist" to have armed guards at her wedding:

http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-in-national/shania-twain-wedding-displays-elitist-attitude-toward-guns

I guess when you got married, sociopathic stalkers were on the guest list.



I could care less that he has a permit and is exercising its use.

Oh, and you have evidence of that too, do you?

It's interesting how evidence of a permit is so often turned into "carries a gun" around here. Not very often with any proof that I've seen.

[Glassunion]

84. Unbelievable.

FACT: Statements from Stallone...

"until America, door to door, takes every handgun, this is what you're gonna have... It really is pathetic... We're livin' in the Dark Ages over there."
Sylvester Stallone, March 28, 1998

"It (2nd Amendment) has to be stopped, and someone really has to go on the line, a certain dauntless political figure, and say, ‘It’s ending, it’s over, all bets are off. It’s not 200 years ago, we don’t need this anymore, and the rest of the world doesn’t have it. Why should we?"
Sylvester Stallone on Access Hollywood, June 8, 1998

FACT: That same man purchased and/or already possessed at least 4 handguns after making the above statements.
FACT: He applied for and was approved for a license to carry these 4 handguns.

I could give a fuck if he exercises that license. The fact that he has it is hypocritical. He has made statements that the mere fact of having a handgun is "pathetic" and that the "2nd Amendment has to be stopped" yet he purchased and possessed at least 4 handguns and went out of his way to get a license to carry them. He is a hypocrite.

[iverglas]

97. sad and sadder

Maybe you've noticed that the rest of the US hasn't yet agreed with Stallone (or Foster) on these points, and that as a result they are at significant risk of being killed by other people who do have guns?

I frankly can't imagine what it's like to live like that, although I'll certainly grant that it has its compensations. But should there really be an enforced trade-off: get rich and famous, accept that somebody is going to try to kill you because you're rich and famous?

If you had agreed with Stallone in 1998, and everybody else had agreed with him, and handguns had been placed under the kinds of restrictions I enjoy in Canada, say, you'd have a reasonable point, although the rich and famous would still be targets and there would be no guarantee that the people out to get them would have guns.

If I were followed around by people with obvious animosity toward me or an intent desire to insert themselves into my private life without my consent, if I received insane and threatening letters daily, if I went to bed every night knowing that someone -- not my estranged husband, but one of dozens or hundreds of unknown unbalanced individuals out there with a fixation on me and a desire to do me harm -- might somehow get into my bedroom, I'd be a huge gun control fan too. You really think it's surprising that so many "celebrities" are? They are TARGETS. They live at the whim of whoever might get close to them with a gun, especially.

You're the ones creating the problem, with your obsession with flooding the streets with guns and your wild applause every time a new handgun slips into the obscurity of the private market.

You're the hypocrites here.

And that's it in a nutshell.


Now give us another refrain of wah wah listen to big bad Sylvester Stallone, 'k?

[gejohnston]

106. He fits in with Brady, Sugarmann, and others there

http://usconservatives.about.com/od/hollywoodconservatives/a/HollywoodCons.htm

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2008/01/rocky_supports.html

[SteveM]

74. Who faces the greater threat? Stallone or single-mother in the projects? nt

[iverglas]

77. which gun presents the greatest threat?

The one in Stallone's pocket or the one in an apartment in the projects?

What is this single mother threatened by? Do we have stats on the homicides/robberies of single mothers in the projects? Lots of single mothers in the projects clamouring for guns, are there?

Hm.

[SteveM]

85. Can't/Don't want to answer? No surprise. nt

[Glassunion]

87. I would like to hear your answer to your own question. With an explaination as to why you think that

way...

As one who did a little bit growing up in a project I'd really like to hear your answer.

which gun presents the greatest threat?... The one in Stallone's pocket or the one in an apartment in the projects?

[iverglas]

99. I was asked a stupid hypothetical question

and I responded to it with another hypothetical question.

That's all that was called for, and it's all you're getting.

[Union Scribe]

109. So you won't elaborate on why poor single mothers are so dangerous?

[jmg257]

111. Do you think she was saying it's the single moms that are dangerous, or having the guns in

that environment?

[Union Scribe]

112. You mean an environment where someone may actually need to protect themself?

The comment was classism in action, and no amount of spin is going to make that go away. One finds a lot of that in anti-gun propaganda, insinuations that the "proliferation" of guns means more guns in lower income neighborhoods, and of course THOSE people are inherently DANGEROUS.

[jmg257]

114. Is THAT what you think she was saying?

That single moms in projects are inherently dangerous?

That seems to be a rather ugly accusation.

Well- good luck with it!

[Union Scribe]

115. No, that it is in the same vein as the rest of classist smears used

by those against letting the poor have the same access to protection as the rich. Look at the question that began this. Why is a rich person with a gun less dangerous than a poor person with a gun? Whether by ignorance or malice, people who spread that shit do grave disservice to the common people of this country.

[jmg257]

117. I will not talk for Iverglas, as she does that rather well. I think you will

find that "a rich person with a gun less dangerous than a poor person with a gun" is not what she said.

[iverglas]

128. well, one reason would be

that I don't waste my time speaking to people who are so dishonest that they pretend I say/think things that I didn't say, that only a truly stupid or evil person would have said, and that make no fucking sense in the first place.

Unless it amuses me, which it sometimes does. Not this time.

[Remmah2]

104. Why shouldn't this be about single mothers?

Do you have a problem w/women as people?

[DonP]

26. Army of Darkness - Bruce Campbell

"Good Ash, Bad Ash, ... I'm the guy with the gun"

"This is my Boomstick ..."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFriRcIwqNU

[jmg257]

28. Anyone wonder what quotes John Lennon, Marvin Gaye, or Steve McNair would give us?

If they could, of course.

[hack89]

31. "because happiness is a warm gun." nt

[Tuesday Afternoon]

33. heard it through the carbine . . .

:yoiks:

[Hoyt]

36. “Men possess handguns in order to compensate for sexual dysfunction.” Dr. J Brothers

Hey, one psychologist's opinion.

[DonP]

37. "Many effeminate gays conceal an inner rage" - that Dr. J. Brothers?

Yeah, she sounds like the kind of person you'd admire for her "wisdom".

Pop Psych seems to be about your average depth on issues anyway.

[Hoyt]

45. I did not say I agreed. Just thought it fit with this stupid thread.

[Hoyt]

47. You protest a bit too much. How many guns you wearing today?

[Name removed]

62. Deleted message

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

[Union Scribe]

113. Often the people who break that line out are the ones over-stating themselves.

And, well, you're probably no exception. Show us where Eddie Eagle touched you using this Ken doll.

[gejohnston]

39. I bet her husband liked that

given that he was one of the few people in NYC to have a CCW.

[Hoyt]

46. With her popping off like that, a gun is a necessity. Or maybe she was referring to him.

[gejohnston]

53. you said it, I didn't. nt

[Hoopla Phil]

44. I'm reminded of good ol Siggy, "Sometimes a cigar is JUST a cigar."

[Euromutt]

131. In Freud's case, cigars are the ones that give you mouth cancer

There's no record of his ever having actually said the "sometimes a cigar is just a cigar" line, mind you, though he did smoke 20 of the things a day and ended up having to have 33 operations for the buccal cancer he was diagnosed with in 1923.

[SteveM]

79. She must know, since by her actions, she lives with a "compensator"...

DR. JOYCE BROTHERS (Psychiatrist, TV personality): "Men possess handguns in order to compensate for sexual dysfunction."

http://www.mindconnection.com/interests/guns4.htm

[solinvictus]

126. "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity. " Sigmond Freud

I believe Dr. Freud had a little more depth than a talk show circuit couch warmer from the 1970s.

[slackmaster]

59. William S. Burroughs

"After a shooting spree, they always want to take the guns away from the people who didn't do it. I sure as hell wouldn't want to live in a society where the only people allowed guns are the police and the military."

[Hoyt]

60. Fine example of responsible gun owner. Burroughs shot and killed a women playing William Tell.

Maybe you should rethink your heroes and position on guns.

[gejohnston]

68. he was also an heroin addict

that would make him an illegal gun owner.

[iverglas]

80. it was in Mexico in 1951

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_S._Burroughs

but thanks for sharing

[iverglas]

78. oh my

too funny

[SteveM]

64. Eugene V. Debs:

"The Constitution of the United States guarantees to you the right to bear arms…You have the unquestioned right, under the law, to defend your life and protect the sanctity of your fireside. Failing in either, you are a coward and a craven and undeserving of the name of man.” — Eugene V. Debs

[iverglas]

81. "undeserving of the name of man"

Oh, it just defies comment.

I know, we have to be tolerant because it was a different age.

Yes it was. A good century ago. And after all, he was for women's rights and all.


Lots of things have changed, haven't they just?

Lots of people here have apparently been in the US military, and even been involved in the nasty little doings it got up to in places like Vietnam and Iraq. I wonder whether they bother thinking of what Eugene Debs would have to say about them today.
http://debsfoundation.org/pacifism.html

Years ago I declared that there was only one war in which I would enlist and that was the war of the workers of the world against the exploiters of the world. I declared moreover that the working class had no interest in the wars declared and waged by the ruling classes of the various countries upon one another for conquest and spoils.

I think the hypocrites here are those who would cite Debs in support of the gun militant agenda.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

86. Leaving all the B.S. aside:

Would you care to make a logical argument against what has been quoted from Mr. Debs?

[SteveM]

90. You "think." How many you "think" are pro-war and pro-2A on this forum?

[Euromutt]

95. Speaking for myself, I'm pro-war in the same way I'm "pro-abortion"

That is to say, I don't like either, I'd much prefer it if neither were ever needed, but sometimes all other options are worse.

[iverglas]

100. can you not read, or can you not give an honest account of what you read?

Or is there some other explanation?

[Union Scribe]

116. I see you haven't had time to pick up Internet Insults Volume II

[Hoyt]

105. Bill Maher has a few good ones.

"If you love guns, just admit it -- like it's a vice. It's like alcohol or drugs or sex addiction or gambling... It's not good for you or anyone else, but you like it."

Then, there was one about masturbating into your gun barrels.

And one about prohibiting future manufacturing of guns so you guys who want another to add to your cache literally have to pry one from somebody's cold, dead hands.

[gejohnston]

107. you would pick

some arrogant libertarian asshole that thinks that just because he is a good comedian qualifies him to be a theologian, foreign policy wonk, or much else. I like his comedy, but he is no less full of shit as any other talking head anywhere else on the idiot box.

[Union Scribe]

110. Doesn't sound very libertarian of him.

Guess he can't keep his own bullshit straight. Must be too busy being a hypocrite.

[Euromutt]

122. Bill Maher's a germ theory denying anti-vaxxer

He has a distinct, nasty self-righteous streak, which would be slightly less annoying if he weren't completely fucking wrong about the facts. Frankly, I don't give a fuck what he has to say about anything.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

125. Yes!

An elitist, self-righteous, occasionally funny, dick, who won't listen to facts or an opposing POV.

[oneshooter]

108. Power comes from the barrel of a gun. Guess who. n/t

[Euromutt]

118. Let's expand that quote to provide more context

Every Communist must grasp the truth, "Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun." Our principle is that the Party commands the gun, and the gun must never be allowed to command the Party. Yet, having guns, we can create Party organizations, as witness the powerful Party organizations which the Eighth Route Army has created in northern China. We can also create cadres, create schools, create culture, create mass movements. Everything in Yenan has been created by having guns. All things grow out of the barrel of a gun. According to the Marxist theory of the state, the army is the chief component of state power. Whoever wants to seize and retain state power must have a strong army. Some people ridicule us as advocates of the "omnipotence of war". Yes, we are advocates of the omnipotence of revolutionary war; that is good, not bad, it is Marxist. The guns of the Russian Communist Party created socialism. We shall create a democratic republic. Experience in the class struggle in the era of imperialism teaches us that it is only by the power of the gun that the working class and the labouring masses can defeat the armed bourgeoisie and landlords; in this sense we may say that only with guns can the whole world be transformed. We are advocates of the abolition of war, we do not want war; but war can only be abolished through war, and in order to get rid of the gun it is necessary to take up the gun.

Mao Zedong, "Problems of War and Strategy," from his concluding speech at the Sixth Plenary Session of the Sixth Central Committee of the Party, November 6th, 1938.

[oneshooter]

119. I kinda thought that you would be the one to get it. n/t

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

120. Who said this?

"By calling attention to 'a well regulated militia,' 'the security of the nation,' and the right of each citizen to keep and bear arms,' our founding fathers recognized the essentially civilian nature of our economy… The Second Amendment still remains an important declaration of our basic civilian-military relationships in which every citizen must be ready to participate in the defense of his country. For that reason I believe the Second Amendment will always be important."

[Euromutt]

121. Hubert Humphrey?

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

123. actually:

So close...but...

John F. Kennedy, Junior Senator of MA in a 1959 letter to E.B. Mann from the 1974 Gun Digest, article titled Gun Laws.

From Senator Humphrey: "Certainly one of the chief guarantees of freedom under any government, no matter how popular and respected, is the right of citizens to keep and bear arms. This is not to say that firearms should not be very carefully used, and that definite safety rules of precaution should not be taught and enforced. But the right of citizens to bear arms is just one more guarantee against arbitrary government, and one more safeguard against a tyranny which now appears remote in America, but which historically has proved to be always possible."

[RagAss]

132. It's simple...no need to sit on your high horses ....

.38 Special Wadcutters.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

133. We had...

...an intervention. My horse has been off that stuff for 8 months.

The Mark XIX Desert Eagle in .50 Action Express is still the big boy. ;)