Saturday, May 15, 2010

Logic

You know the old saying, that if there's no evidence of a conspiracy, that's just proof that the conspiracy is working!

That was the line of attack of half-term Gov. Sarah Palin yesterday at the National Rifle Association convention in Charlotte. She said that President Obama and Nancy Pelosi wanted to ban all guns in the United States, and her proof is that they haven't done anything to ban all guns in the United States. But they want to, and the more they want to, the more they don't. Which is just a damn conspiracy to confuse all of us real Americans.

I'm not making this up.

The rhetoric at an NRA convention could be used to strip old oak furniture.

38 comments:

D9 said...

President Obama is the most anti-gun President in our nation's history. Sarah Palin knows this. The emasculated NRA knows this. And most importantly, American knows this. Why else would gun and ammo sales soar to record levels right after Obama was elected.

Back to how Obama and Pelosi are anti-gun. President Obama voted in favor of every gun control bill that came across his desk. So did Pelosi. Their past record of gun control would make the late Ted Kennedy pale by comparasion. Right after Obama was elected by confused voters, his website said one of the overarching priorities of his administration would be the re-enactment of the assault weapons ban. Not sure why he would want to ban these types of weapons, however the statement on the website was suddenly erased after members of the Jews For the Preservation of Firearms Ownership publiscized it.

At any rate, Obama and Pelosi have never met a gun control law they didn't like. Just a matter of time until Obama uses some tradgedy perpetrated by criminals (not guns) to push his radical and well documented gun control agenda.

Oh yes, and one more thing. How is all that gun control working out for the residents of Chicago? I hear Mayor Daley wanted to place National Guard Troops in the city to quell the violence. How about letting residents protect themselves for a change? The upcoming McDonald Case will hopefully erase many of the misguided gun laws of Chicago and the rest of the US and allow us to concentrate on more pressing issues rather than spending energy defending something (2nd Amend.) that is guaranteed to us by the Constitution.

D9

D9 said...

Something else I forgot to mention in my last post - Obama is using Mexico to try and reinstitute the Assault Weapons Ban. Obama and Calderon are saying that 90% of weapons recovered by drug cartels came from the United States. What a blatent lie to mislead voters.

The 90% figure misrepresents the issue. 90% of all weapons TURNED OVER BY MEXICAN AUTHORITIES FOR TRACING turned out to come from America. Quite a bit of difference now isn't it? The Mexican Government knows that drug cartels obtain most of their weapons from China, Eastern Europe, Central America and China.

Obama and Eric Holder tried to link guns in Mexico to American Gun Shows!!! What!! I am not sure what gun shows they are referring to, but in the many decades I have attended gun shows (remember the ones held IN Watauga High School?), I have never seen rocket launchers, grenades, belt fed machine guns and claymore mines for sale! Yet Obama still claims the 90% figure and misleads the American public on gun shows. And he is not anti-gun?

In last years issue of "The Year in Homeland Security", page 46,a large weapons seizure by ICE Agents destined for "Mexican Drug Cartels" was shown. To the uninformed, the 30 or so weapons might look menacing. To the discerning, intelligent, intrepid and typically smart gun owner the photo was a reflection of lies purported by Obama and Napolitano. All but three of the weapons were .22 rifles! The other two were single barrel shotguns!!! So drug cartels are now using 40 year old wooden stocked .22 squirrel rifles and single barrel shotguns to fight drug wars? Are you kidding? What happened to all those belt fed machine guns and grenade launchers? What Obama and Pelosi fail to mention is that Mexico has some of the strictest gun laws anywhere on the planet (really doing wonders for the crime rate eh?) which prevents ordinary citizens from buying and owning guns. These "squirrel guns" were headed for ma and pa paisano who want to plink or keep the rabbits out of the cabbage patch. Yet Obama and Pelosi would twist this photo into "dangerous weapons feeding drug cartels". Yes, I believe, to a tee, what Palin said during her speech to the NRA in Charlotte yesterday. Check out the article I mentioned and see if what I say is wrong in ANY fashion.

Someone show me a gun control law that has ever resulted in a lower crime rate or safer society. Just one.

I once had a run in with a UN peachkeeper in West Africa. The young man, a Brit, was fresh from the field where his job was to strip weapons away from villagers and farmers. He seemed proud that he was destroying thousands of weapons. I politely asked him how these villagers and farmers would protect themselves from the despots from whom he was not stripping weapons from. He didn't have an answer so I pressed him on the issue. Noting that many massacres in the Sudan took place by despots picking on unarmed villagers, I insinuated that he might be contributing to their already bleak plight. The young Brit ended up storming out of the pub we were in. I still yet to this day do not understand the intentions of the UN. It is kind of hard to cut a villagers arm or labia off when they are pointing a gun at you isn't it?

Sarah Palin has it dead right on Obama and Pelosi.

D9

Watauga County Anarchist said...

Wake up gun owners! When are you going to realize that the NRA is a government front to ban guns? Join the GOA or the JPFO instead.

Anonymous said...

Interesting! Blackwater show up at the NRA meeting with a Booth using a fake corporate cover known as Xe. When Sara Palin was informed of the Xe booth, she said " I am glad the Thai Government came to hear me and their defense of the 2nd amendment in Thailand"......

BikerBard said...

It's so good her speeches can me mined for their entertainment value. ANYONE who takes her seriously is an idiot!

D9 said...

Mr. Bard,

And what did she say at the NRA Convention that would lead you to say this? Can you qualify your statements? What gun control law has resulted in lower crime rates?

D9

bridle said...

D9- "Someone show me a gun control law that has ever resulted in a lower crime rate or safer society. Just one."

OK

bridle said...

My question for D9 and all the gun lovers is, why do you think all these gun laws were enacted in the first place? Legislatures don't create laws unless there is a problem in the first place. Are you OK with the extraordinary murder and violence rates in this country? If so, I hope you don't call yourself "pro-life". If you are uncomfortable with a rate of death from guns 8 times higher than comparable countries, then what is your proposed solution to this problem?

BRockBlue said...

Too bad we didn't get real health insurance reform passed. D9 would have been able to get the medications he so clearly and deperately needs.

BikerBard said...

Wow! What a briliant idea. Let's issue guns to all of Chicago's residents. We're back to the OK Corral, pardners. Yeee Ha! And Obama, who has done nothing to prevent gun ownership, and in fact signed a law enabling one to carry on federal land, is against gun ownership? No evidence?

That is like my saying, "Hey, while I have absolutely no evidence, I KNOW D9 is a cross-dresser!"

You are ridiculous, D9. Probably a toned-down REEK-O.

What say you? REEK-O, are you hiding there, REEK-O? You have an obsession with science fiction. I know what D9 is, thus your political outlook is also fiction. Come out, come out, wherever you are!

Still love Hienlen and Assmove?

Liberal POV said...

D9

"Why else would gun and ammo sales soar to record levels right after Obama was elected."

A lot of people listen to the fear and hate media.

The NRA is spreading lie to get NRA members to buy the guns and ammo their advertisers sell.

BikerBard said...

Lib POV:

Does D9 (District 9, Sci-Fi Nut) sound like a toned down Rico? He certainly is one of the looneys who hangs at the other site. Just which one? Faux also considers himself the master of disguise.

Hmmmm?

Syd said...

Wow. D9 needs a nap.

Anonymous said...

Unlike the rest of you, D9 posted statements that were based in facts and supported by examples that could be proven.

It must hurt when you have nothing to back up what you say.

Brible's link was proven o be incorrect by the vast amount of information contained in the book More Guns, Less Crime, by John Lott. Also this link did not provide a example of a single gun control law that made any place more safe.

Anonymous said...

Te Charlotte Observer said there were 80,000 people at the N.R.A. convention and 20 protesters. Sounds about right.

bridle said...

Anonymous, Lott's work is quite controversial and has been disputed by many other researchers. This review for example concludes (Page 104) that Lott's hypothesis has "not withstood the test of time and that no longer can any plausible case be made on statistical grounds that shall issue laws reduce crime".

I wonder why people who advocate for the second amendment always seem to forget about the first half of the sentence. The part that states "well-regulated".
What's wrong with keeping balance and common sense in the picture? Sure, we shouldn't outlaw all weapons, but let's regulate them at least as much as we regulate cars!
The founding fathers had no idea that weapons such as the AK47 would ever exist. No one needs an assault weapon for hunting or even protection, unless they are drug dealers.

bridle said...

Anonymous, Lott's work is quite controversial and has been disputed by many other researchers. This review for example concludes (Page 104) that Lott's hypothesis has "not withstood the test of time and that no longer can any plausible case be made on statistical grounds that shall issue laws reduce crime".

I wonder why people who advocate for the second amendment always seem to forget about the first half of the sentence. The part that states "well-regulated".
What's wrong with keeping balance and common sense in the picture? Sure, we shouldn't outlaw all weapons, but let's regulate them at least as much as we regulate cars!
The founding fathers had no idea that weapons such as the AK47 would ever exist. No one needs an assault weapon for hunting or even protection, unless they are drug dealers.

Anonymous said...

The phrase a well regulated militia meant having the ability to resist a standing army.

The founding fathers also had no idea there would be computers and the internet or radio or television. This does not negate the first amendment. In their papers they wrote that the people should always be armed as well as the standing army. The Supreme Court Case the U.S. vs. Miller agreed with this.

As decided in the Heller decision, one has the right to own a gun. Owning and driving a car is a privilege, not a right.

Your arguments do not stand up to scrutiny.

BikerBard said...

Bridle: Nicely done on both of your last posts! You have the patience to refute this moron - I do not. Also, these clowns like to post under one name, then congratulate themselves under another name. D9 and Anonymous = one blogger?? Hmmmmmm???

Watauga County Anarchist said...

Ignorant Bridle says, "The founding fathers had no idea that weapons such as the AK47 would ever exist. No one needs an assault weapon for hunting or even protection, unless they are drug dealers."

I own an AK-47, but I don't own an assault rifle. My AK is a legal, semi-auto, less powerful than my grandpa's semi-auto BAR. But because it is uglier than my grandpa's BAR, gun grabbers like Bridle want to ban it. BTW, all of my AK ammo is full-metal jacket, less damaging than Grandpa's hollow points, but the gun grabbers want to ban my AK ammo simply because it is military ammo.

Anonymous said...

BikerBard, you do not have the ability to refute anyone.

Keep dreaming that other people use your tactics.

Anonymous said...

Watauga County Anarchist, good luck in explaining the difference in a semi-automatic AK47 that functions the same as a hunting rifle and a fully automatic or select fire assault rifle to someone that does not know the difference between a right and a privilege. Also good luck if you ever mention that it is not illegal to own a fully automatic assault rifle.

Anonymous said...

The founding fathers had no idea that weapons such as the AK47 would ever exist. No one needs an assault weapon for hunting or even protection, unless they are drug dealers* bridle

Sure they did! They were into Weapons of Mass Chaos against the Redcoats! No doubt your fuzzy knowledge of revolutionary history is a little short on weapons own by individuals against the King! I am sure a Kentucy long rifle would have got your attention at the battle Kings Mountain right between the eyeballs!

Watauga County Anarchist said...

So Bridle drags out the old gun vs. driving argument. Right vs. privilege aside, the argument doesn't hold water, because you don't need a license to buy or own a car, and you don't need a license to drive a car on private land. So why would someone need a license to buy or own a gun?

Olevet69 said...

ya can't argue with gun nuts...after all the NRA convention was filled with Palin Stiffies!!

BikerBard said...

Sure, Bridle: Don't you remember the Glock Flintlock and the AK-1 the Minutemen used? Changed the war with weapons of mass instruction!

Anonymous said...

BikerBard, what was the effective range of the Brown Bess musket used by the British troops? What was the effective range of a Kentucky (Pennsylvania) long rifle owned by an individual that was used against them. Which was the "assault rifle" of its day?

Your enormous ignorance is showing again.

BikerBard said...

And here I thought a Brown Bess was a slave girl bringing water to the musketeers. And a Kentucky Long Rifle, well, I assumed it was Daniel Boone's, er, well, you know.

Anonymous said...

Pitiful rebuttal, BikerBard. Why do you want to make assumptions about some man"s "you know"? How is that relevant to the thread? Wouldn't it be better if you answered the questions?

Ishmael said...

"Why do you want to make assumptions about some man"s "you know"?"

Those kind of things seam to stay on BikerBard's mind. Notice the cross-dressing statement about D9.

Isn't D9 a bulldozer? I have never heard of District 9. What is that?

BikerBard said...

I'll be happy to call you Ishmael. But if you insult me, I'll just call you a "moby dick!"

District 9 is a sci-fi film, recently released on video. Try Blockbuster - it's a fine film!

Now:
"How now, what art thou?" -W.S.

Dog Tom Coffey said...

Mr. Bard,

D9 has nothing to do with a Sci Fi movie. It is indeed a bulldozer. I have always been a fan of big bulldozers! I am Dog Tom Coffey and have posted under that name in the past. Do you know the significance of this name? If you are a true local, then you should have heard of this name.

Dog Tom (Aka D9)

Ishmael said...

No one insulted you BikerBard. I just pointed out your obsession. You then proved the observation right by making the "moby dick" comment.

Thank's for the District 9 explanation.

Ishmael is a Biblical name not just a Melville character. He was Abraham's eldest son. Some consider him to be the father of the Arabs. He is also supposed to be representative of the Old Testament Jews.

BikerBard said...

Moby Dick:
The obsession is with YOU looking for sexual meaning when there is none. Is sex all you think about?

Thanks for the Bible lesson. Now here's one for you:

"Physician, heal yourself."
- Luke 4:23

BikerBard said...

D9 AKA "Dog Tom"

I guess I owe you an apology. If you say you are not the lying weasel Guy Faux, then so be it. Faux likes to hide under assumed names. Sorry.

D9 said...

I am not Faux. He has a far different picture of things than me. I simply thought that many folks would understand what a D9 was as I did by my childhood fascination with Bulldozers. I really love to watch bulldozers. I remember one particular instance back in 74 when I would go to the Roses Parking Lot (Southgate Shopping Center) and watch an extremely brave (or stupid) bulldozer operator carving a road out on a sheer cliff on the hillside behind Roses. Anyone remember that? I think that cliff is mostly overgrown or maybe the new student condos are there now. Exciting to watch.
Apology accepted.

I believe I will switch to Dog Tom Coffey for a while and retire D9 for the time being.

Anonymous said...

BikerBard, why to you fear Guy Fuax so much?

BikerBard said...

Spent some time on excavation sites myself. Some operators are skilled technicians! Wonderful to watch!