LTE: Excellent rebuttals to typical gun-hating letter in today's FLS

Some excellent contributions to the comments on this typical gun-hater letter to the editor:

Letter: More concealed guns won't make us safer

They can have all the "education" in the world, but not enough common sense to tie a shoe.

TFred

We have trained and highly skilled law enforcement officers to protect us. Just ask one of them if they would like to see everyone on the street with a gun in their pocket.

Click to expand...

I thought the USSC said that cops have no obligation to protect us. My government officials never gave me a cop to carry in my pocket.

I know many people who went an got their CCL and have no clue as to what the terms and conditions of that license entail. They are clueless.

Two phrases in this letter pretty much tell you all you need to know about the self-claimed knowledgeable gunowner letter writer: "assault weapons" and "oversized clips". I would bet $1,000 that the "assault weapon" of which he refers are NOT assault weapons at a, but rather semi-automatic rifles. And I would also bet $1,000 that the "oversized clips" he speaks of are nothing of the sort, and certainly not "clips", let alone oversized.

Yep, pretty much tells you all you need to know about this writer and his lack of knowledge about firearms, even though he claims he has owned guns since he was a kid. Guess he hasn't learned much over those years. Bet he calls hollow point ammunition, "dum dum bullets".

"...and did anyone notice that there is no one with a gun around when massacres happen?"

Yes, we did... it's called a Gun Free Zone, which you and your ilk created... so BY LAW Noone is allowed to carry... and thus criminals can shoot with abandon because they know they have plenty of time before the good guys with guns finally show up.

These people really do have a massive disconnect of logic in their brains...

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

SouthernBoy said:

Two phrases in this letter pretty much tell you all you need to know about the self-claimed knowledgeable gunowner letter writer: "assault weapons" and "oversized clips". I would bet $1,000 that the "assault weapon" of which her prefers are NOT assault weapons at a, but rather semi-automatic rifles. And I would also bet $1,000 that the "oversized clips" he speaks of are nothing of the sort, and certainly not "clips", let alone oversized.

Yep, pretty much tells you all you need to know about this writer and his lack of knowledge about firearms, even though he claims he has owned guns since he was a kid. Guess he hasn't learned much over those years. Bet he calls hollow point ammunition, "dum dum bullets".

Click to expand...

Dumb dee dumb dumb, dumb dee dumb dumb deeee.
http://www.televisiontunes.com/Dragnet.html

It seems that a the opine-er is a FUDD.

Responding to such drivel only lends some small amount of credence to his position.

Ignore the liberal with a gun.

OC for ME said:

It seems that a the opine-er is a FUDD.

Responding to such drivel only lends some small amount of credence to his position.

Ignore the liberal with a gun.

Click to expand...

Responding to such with facts/truths educates the fence sitters and those people who have never given it rational thought.

Ignoring the drivel leaves him as being the only voice heard - not a good thing IMO.

Grapeshot said:

Responding to such with facts/truths educates the fence sitters and those people who have never given it rational thought.

Ignoring the drivel leaves him as being the only voice heard - not a good thing IMO.

Click to expand...

I don't like taking up bandwidth with the "+1s", but in this case, I'll say very enthusiastically:

EXACTLY!!!!

And even more so, in many cases it's just like the "give 'em enough rope..." analogy, the more they talk, the more people see "the crazy."

I'll never forget, several years ago, I took my dad to a General Assembly morning session, and we were quite lucky to hear the debate on a pro-gun bill of one sort or another. After our pal Joe Morrissey spoke against the bill for about 5 minutes, my dad, mostly unfamiliar with his antics, leaned over and whispered to me, "This guy is nuts!"

Sunshine is very good, and the more dialog we have, the more exposure they get.

TFred

TFred said:

I don't like taking up bandwidth with the "+1s", but in this case, I'll say very enthusiastically:

EXACTLY!!!!

And even more so, in many cases it's just like the "give 'em enough rope..." analogy, the more they talk, the more people see "the crazy."

I'll never forget, several years ago, I took my dad to a General Assembly morning session, and we were quite lucky to hear the debate on a pro-gun bill of one sort or another. After our pal Joe Morrissey spoke against the bill for about 5 minutes, my dad, mostly unfamiliar with his antics, leaned over and whispered to me, "This guy is nuts!"

Sunshine is very good, and the more dialog we have, the more exposure they get.

TFred

Click to expand...

We with calm demeanor provide facts, figures, and quote law. They will if given enough rope hoist themselves with their own petard.

Really believe it is in part because they will leave no tern unstoned that we are seeing the pendulum swing more our way.
[h=2][/h]

We have trained and highly skilled law enforcement officers to protect us. Just ask one of them if they would like to see everyone on the street with a gun in their pocket.

Click to expand...

http://www.fredericksburg.com/opini...cle_71c62464-3872-59a6-9108-134c3fe8a6c4.html


Laughable^^........



One large agency’s officers scored a gunfight hit rate of just 11 percent during a ten year period.
Their Academy Commander summed it up perfectly: “My officers get a hundred hours of firearms training in the academy and quarterly qualifications thereafter, but are hitting at the same rate as felons with no formal training? We should save all the ammunition, because our training program seems to be worthless!”
https://www.policeone.com/police-pr...1st-century-deadly-force-training-for-police/


Sad^^.........


Thanks, I'll continue to carry my own and not rely of what would appear to be "F" students...

got to fix the metafor

No ropes are used in "hoist on one's own petard". Despite seeming like it is a nautical metaphor, It really means to blow oneself up with a blast you are setting to breech a fortification. Thus, one's demise by such, is even more spectacular. I blame the French.

The Wolfhound said:

No ropes are used in "hoist on one's own petard". Despite seeming like it is a nautical metaphor, It really means to blow oneself up with a blast you are setting to breech a fortification. Thus, one's demise by such, is even more spectacular. I blame the French.

Click to expand...

I'm quite aware of what a petard is. I was intentionally mixing my metaphors. Conceivably, one could be hung from their own mortar.

What is a metafor?

I've come to the conclusion that there's no point in arguing. The reason is that the true basis of the objection to firearms is not the object of any of the arguments advanced by the gun crazies (people with a neurotic morbid fascination with firearms as demonstrated by the use of the phrase, "gun violence"). They don't care about crime, or violence only about guns. So no argument about crime or violence will shut them up. These are people who have an irrational obsession with firearms that is not logical, and cannot be dealt with in a sensible way. They are shrewdly manipulated by different groups who intend to gain control of the machinery of our government and therefore seek to disarm the populace in order to disable effective opposition, from socialists to the Roman State Organization. It's all a distraction, while we're watching what the hand that's waving and flapping, the other hand is doing stuff under the table. Keep your eyes open for legislation, court opinions, and the tendency to pick people who have guns off one by one, beginning with people who live alone in rural areas, off the grid, etc., and moving to urban areas over time. Don't waste time and resources trying to argue with fools.