The “Youtube” Democratic debate is getting fairly heavy coverage here – CTV (what liberal bias?) had a gushy little segment on it last night. Via Slate, this moment,, seems to be getting some attention on the blogosphere;
Biden’s obnoxious response when he insulted the gun owner toward the end as being nuts. It wasn’t so much a personal gaffe as a moment that projected an ugly image of the Democratic Party as out of touch with rural voters and gun owners — big problems the party has been trying to overcome. He got a huge cheer from the audience, but that just compounded the problem.
Could Biden be anymore condescending towards the gentleman who asked the question?
Implying someone is mentally unstable because they are an enthusiastic gun owner perpetuates the Democrats’ problem – an earned stereotype of working against protecting the constitutional rights of gun owners.
This won’t help them.
Typical tactic of the left. If you disagree with someone’s view, attack them instead of debate the issue.
Don’t believe in AGW? You’re a denier.
Not in favour of affirmative action? You’re a racist.
You want to own a gun? You’re mentally unbalanced.
The leftards pretend to be tolerant. But they’re only tolerant of those who think just like them. They’re extremely intolerant of everyone else.
Reid “The leftards pretend to be tolerant.”
By all means Reid, lead by example.
Is Biden’s brain tumour back?
Address the issue and drop the ad hominem Jose…
Oh sorry, didn’t notice you where pulling a Leftard SSD (Sneer, Smear and Disappear) but in case you missed it we are talking about Biden and his continued gaffes which reveal his, and his Party’s, true feelings about gun owners.
Reid’s comment was about the topic and Biden’s response to the question, yours was an attack on Reid. You, not Reid, is setting the example but we expect no less from you and are never dissapointed, keep up the SSD work.
Jose: Did I claim to be 100% bias free? If so please point it out to me.
I am pragmatic enough to accept the reality that ALL people are biased in one way or another. Some people are racially biased. Some gender biased. Some sexually biased. Some religiously biased (I could go on forever). It’s human nature. Anyone who claims to be perfectly tolerant is a liar. That’s what I was getting at. And it’s generally the lefties who claim their own freedom from bias first and deride others prejudices the loudest. And in doing so prove themselves to be hypocrits.
Me? I’m politically biased. It’s the cross I’ll have to bear I suppose.
While flipping channels last night, I stunbled upon self absorbed CBC sissy Strombo freaking out over the fact that Ted Nugent had a custom guitar made that comes complete with a cavity on the back that holds a handgun. Quite a clever axe, I thought.
He goes on to denounce the Nuge as a scary washed up has been rocker, prior to his interview with the ultra leftoid Starbucks swilling pseudo metal band Foo Fighters. (These guys aren’t worthy of picking up Ted’s spent shells, BTW)
Hey Stombo: I’m sure the main reason Nuge had this custom guitar made was simply to get a rise out of lefty pussies. I’m surprised he didn’t acuse Bush/Cheney of owning similar guitars.
Time to close Mothercorpse once and for all.
The science of gun control is settled: if there is a delay between attempted crime and police arriving on the scene, the only possible solution for the victim is a gun. The deniers of this should be tried at a special court, like Nuremberg one.
I live in an area that has historically been heavily Democratic. Nearly all elected officials, be it township, county, state or federal level, are Democrats. It is a remnant of mining unionization. But the mines are all gone.
It has always been deer hunting country, first and foremost. Opening day is like a national holiday. Most of the population are gun owners. There are very few households around here that do not own a gun.
The Dems stand on gun ownership has been eroding their support in this area. That erosion has been even faster than I would have envisioned.
I would like to see more Dems like Biden step out and publicly state what they believe. The Dems are shooting off their own toes in this area (pardon the pun).
The exposure is really good. Give them more exposure, please.
The guy in the Youtube video did seem more than a bit nuts to me. To refer to your gun as your ‘baby’?
And wasn’t that an automatic assault rifle that he had as well?
Well we have the registry and since the criminals got job security inherint with the registry crime has gone up.
Well, I’m totally against gun control, don’t own one but am thinking about it, and am thinking about joining the NRA just to pi** off some liberal “friends”.
That said, this guy on the clip (if you’ll pardon the pun) is not a good advertisement for responsible gun ownership, which is not to say I don’t despise Joe Biden.
This kind of over-the-top advocacy is tone deaf and dumb and counter-productive and plays right into the unctous hands of the nanny-state enablers. In fact, I’m guessing the clip was used on this show for exactly that purpose: to portray all gun-owners as would be McVeighs.
Conservative/libertarians should be cringing at the “gentleman” in the clip more than the bilious Biden.
It openly displayed the sneering contempt effete left wing statists have for individual rights and private property ownership.
NO ONE is more contemptuous of the common man and his rights than a statist leftoid on his way to construct the perfect anthill society.
I hope Binden gets bitch slapped for his uncivil contempt.
“And wasn’t that an automatic assault rifle that he had as well?”
It may be what the MEDIA likes to call an “assault” rifle, but it works no differently than any other semi-automatic rifle (ie. it fires one shot each time you squeeze the trigger); these rifles have been used safely and legally by ordinary people for more than a CENTURY now, and the only reason gun banners call them “assault” rifles is because they’re trying to SCARE people who don’t know the first thing about them, other than they saw something that looked vaguely like them used during the last installment of “Die Hard”. If you applied the same “logic” to automobiles, this would mean that you’d be trying to ban red or black cars, or cars that had scoops, spoilers, or anything else that made them “look fast”.
it was an AR15 and many Canadians have these fior rifle match comp and pest control…they are common as mud but if you fraudulently stigmatize every self loading rifle made since the war of 1812 as an “assout weapon” you can scare the lemmings into pissing away even more of their constitutional rights in the ensuing hesteria and stigamtization.
Only society’s criminals fear an armed. empowered responsible citizen…seems there are a lot of criminals in leftist politics.
Me No Dhimmi:
If you want to pi** off your liberal friends, buy THEM a membership in the NRA! Give it to them as a Christmas gift. (If they celebrate Christmas, that is)
If Miller’s/McGuinty’s/Bryant’s “ban them! Ban them now!” bad joke doesn’t work, maybe they need to “double secret prohibit” them, in order to prevent things like this: http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23405562-details/Boxing%20champion%20shot%20in%20the%20head%20for%20saying%20'don't%20smoke'/article.do
(handguns have been banned in England for some time now, but it doesn’t seem to have made any impact on the people who do this sort of thing)
I’ve withdrawn from the gun control debate in Canada. I’m convinced that overwhelming gun control will be upon us sooner or later.
Private gun ownership will never be illegal, but it will become so cumbersome to own a gun that people simply won’t bother.
Myself, I will soon be moving my family to a rural area. I’m buying a gun.— PERIOD.
I don’t care what regulations are involved since I won’t be concerning myself with them anyway. I don’t not intend to get any permits or registrations. I have no intention of asking anyone’s permission to buy it, own it, or use it.
It’s not difficult to buy an unregistered firearm. I don’t care a bit what laws are passed & administered by useless lawyers, politicians and judges. Let the elisits scream about wacko gun owners all they want. I’m not interested in listening anymore.
The url doesn’t seem to have come through; the gist is that a heavyweight boxer who tried to help a bouncer who asked some people in a Fulham nightclub to stop smoking (the law there now), was shot in the head for such affrontery and is now on life-support.
If people refer to their cars as their babies, and then kill someone on the road – are they nuts? I don’t hear much outcry about that, Wayne. But as soon as a gun owner refers to his gun as a baby although that gun never killed anyone, he is a nut. That’s why I own guns – to not to let Waynes of the world to decide for me what’s good for me.
“And wasn’t that an automatic assault rifle that he had as well?”
Posted by: Wayne at July 24, 2007 12:22 PM
Wayne,
With all due respect, your question exhibits exactly the response *they* hoped for in using that clip.
No, it wasn’t an *automatic* **assault** rifle. As pointed out above, it was an AR15. If you *knew* guns, you would have known that.
If, on the other hand, you don’t *know* guns, which is where a large percentage of the population rest in knowledge, your reaction and question is EXACTLY what Biden,the Dems, and the media host were striving to achieve.
That clip was a setup. The owner was supposed to come across as a right-wing, automatic-assault-rifle-toting, *baby*-loving, rednecked NUT. Your response illustrates that they achieved liftoff.
Be afraid, be very afraid. Not of that AR15 (which is actually a very nice, and highly accurate rifle), but of the people who will stage that kind of clip to win votes from the less-than-well-informed.
Democrats aren’t liberal. They are conservative.
The only time ol’ Joe opens his mouth is when he needs to change feet.
Big surprise, this discussion has fallen into the same quagmire as every gun control debate I’ve ever been a part of.
If both sides could put aside the silly ideological pissing match for a moment they might see that gun control can benefit gun-owners as much as gun-haters.
How does Biden still show his face in public after the Neil Kinnick plagiarism thing?
(Yes, I am old…)
There are probably 15 concealed weapons from handguns to full auto machine pistols within 50 ft. of that stage.
Lets disarm those payed to protect these morons ,…first, and see how that goes.
John said:
“Let the elisits scream about wacko gun owners all they want. I’m not interested in listening anymore.”
That’s because the “debate” over private ownership of firearms is not a “debate” at all…it is a policy dictate from the effete political class and their camp followers to the soiled masses.
No autocrat, social Darwinist, statist utopian, Corporate Feudalist or ruling class chauvinist which aspires to create the type of elite micro manged society like that being constructed by neo-statists of all stripes in today’s decaying democracies, can rest easy as long as the means to effective revolt or self defense from statist tyranny resides in the hands of the common citizen.
An armed public scares the hell out of those statist elites with a guilty conscience over their unspoken agenda to consolidate power and wealth within their class at the expense of the wealth, freedom and liberty of the common classes.
As long as we are armed the political criminal class are always looking over their shoulder…they have decided to become tyrants…and they know instinctively that from that day forward, as long as the public is armed, they have to be “lucky” every day of their autocracy…an armed dissenter to tyranny only has to get “lucky” once.
Their agenda occasionally is articulated by the elite…when their political lackey’s say “only the police and army should be armed”….but what have they described but the text book definition of a police state?
You bet your life/freedom and last dollar that they want you disempowered, disarmed, subserviant and dependent on them ( as well as you numbers vastly reduced)…it’s a bloody religion with them to be the corporeal lords of humanity….those independent liberty minded individuals stand in the way of their utopian return of the age of kings…they have contempt for any dissent to their vision…and no one garners more contempt from this Feudal elitist class as the common gun owner….he is everything they detest…he is a unapologetic individual with his own ideals the greatest of which is the love of freedom and individual liberty….. he is not the frail mindless, soulless material that makes a perfect bond servant of the utopian anthill society.
The old maxim holds true:
A man with a gun is a citizen….a man without a gun is a slave.
Charles, your father is a kind man, you should listen to him more, instead of wishing communism on him.
Charles said: “If both sides could put aside the silly ideological pissing match for a moment they might see that gun control can benefit gun-owners as much as gun-haters.”
I see you have drunk the Jonestown punch fabricated by the kleptocrats for consumption by “reasonable: people. This is the line they spin to boil the reasonable frog.
It is unfortunate you fail to see that everything the so called “radicals” said would happen has happened with this gun law….the control system was hijacked after the passage of C-68 and special interests retooled the enabling legislation into a administrative regulatory system focused at confiscation and producing legal liabilities to honest gun owners that results in confiscation…in practice the “gun control” laws have produced a confiscatory regime.
Frankly I see no “benefits” to involving myself and my property in a reverse onus registry system that places 100% criminal liability upon me and does not address the criminal misuse of firearms.
Canada’s gun control regime is not about control it is slow systemic confiscation…civil disarmament.
“Did you really think we want those laws observed?” said Dr. Ferris. “We want them to be broken. You’d better get it straight that it’s not a bunch of boy scouts you’re up against… We’re after power and we mean it… There’s no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What’s there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or objectively interpreted – and you create a nation of law-breakers – and then you cash in on guilt. Now that’s the system, Mr. Reardon, that’s the game, and once you understand it, you’ll be much easier to deal with.” (‘Atlas Shrugged’ 1957)
A prophesy of Liberal gun control laws, hate laws, feseral regulatory statute.
A couple of liberal, rabbidly anti-gun ownership celebrities that employ ARMED bodyguards:
Rosie O’Donnell
Michael Moore
The hypocrisy may not come any thicker than that found surrounding anti-gun clebs. Of course they say that it is because they are public figures that the special protection is needed.
Of course their choice, in most cases, to make themselves public figures now makes their life worth more than yours or mine is to you or me. Makes sense to me.
The ethically fradulent behaviour exhibited by CNN in selecting that question as being in any way a reasonable basis from which to proceed with the debate of important issues that affect current U.S. politics is typically indicative of the degree to which the main-stream media have become an enemy of informed society.
Rich — My father’s is a nice man. Look at you, the gamma male praising the alpha in your pack. Cute.
Rich, my old man participates in reasoned discussion, you should try it instead of falling back on the old “Beware of the Reds” defense. It’s so 1980’s.
WL Mac — You lost me at Jonestown punch for kleptocrats. Your rants read like they should be written in feces on the padded walls of an institution.
Thanks for proving my point, by the way.
Hell. You could call a M1917 Enfield or an SMLE an assault rifle, mainly because they were originally used for the same purpose, even though they are only bolt action repeaters. Its amazing how far those gun control nuts will go to try and get them banned.
Charles, bud, WML didn’t prove your point – he called your bluff. There isn’t a shred of truth to your argument in your blog. You simply have no idea what you’re talking about, and arrogant enough to not get that, too.
When I was in high school & below legal drinking age my freinds and I ignored the law and got beer every weekend.
At the same time neither me nor my best friend had driver’s licenses yet we still bought an old junk car and drove it around on back roads without licences or insurance.
When we briefly discovered pot & hashish we obtained these any time we pleased no problem at all.
Now, a bunch of know-it-all, left wing, elitist dicks say they are going to *TELL* me whether or not I’m *ALLOWED* to own a gun?
Yeah, right, lots of luck with that. Sorry to dissappoint you but I’m not asking for your permission.
I am a fiscal conservative. People totting AR15’s, referring to them as their ‘baby’, are nutbars in my opinion, and should not be allowed in the conservative party.
The current gun registry needs to be scrapped immediately! Criminals need to be dealt with severely. Period!
[deleted. Clean up the language and be civil. ED]
John: profanity is discouraged. Be a man.
Don’t like it? Too bad, sucks to be you.
Fran is just the sort of busybody, self righteous snot that will keep me from voting conservative in the next election.
Definition of a “fiscal conservative” – A Liberal who’s just a BIT more greedy than the rest.
Or not.
I think we can take a page from the Swiss gun control situation:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Switzerland
“Everyone over the age of 18 who is not psychiatrically disabled (such as having had a history of endangering his own life or the lives of others) or identified as posing security problems, and who has a clean criminal record can request such a permit.”
This is essentially the US Democratic position on gun control. Other than the issue of how this regulation is enforced and arbitrary definition of the “crazies”, this kind of regulation shouldn’t be a threat to law-abiding gun owners.
Biden should try to emulate great presidentil candidates. Kennedy for example. Yeah he should follow in Kennedy’s footsteps… all the way….
Its just like when FLORIDA got its new CASTLE DOCTRINE stating that if your confrented in your home by some crinmal you can use deadly force to protect yourself and your family and as usial the BRADY CAMPAIGN is spreading lies about it and the liberal left-wing news media is making all sorts of rediclous claims now other states want the same law. Its like when KENNSHAW GEORGIA passed its gun in the homes law and the usial amount to poppycock from the liberal left-wing news media and espeialy from the infamous NYTs I mean the NYTs vulture went to georgia looking for a feast and starved to death instead JAMES BRADY IS A IDIOT
Ace: ” … this kind of regulation shouldn’t be a threat to law-abiding gun owners.”
Believe it or not, law-abiding gun owners don’t want the crazies, gang members, etc, etc to have guns either.
Just can’t figure out how making law-abiding citizens criminals accomplishes this.
The U-Tube dude reminds me of an ongoing occurrence here in Canada during the 90’s Gun Control debate. Whenever there was a rally or meeting of concerned gun owners and civil rights advocates; as regular as clockwork, an old geezer wearing an old beaten-up red mackinaw shirt with a scruffy beard down to his navel would appear. The CBC would make a b-line to him for an interview. He would pull off a Saskatchewan red-neck script all about us gun owners: “jus wanna keep on huntin an shootin”.
The public fell for it every time. But Liberal voters aren’t very smart: thats what devoted Liberal insiders tell me on the Q-T.
The state doesn’t exist to give out rights. Rights come from “God”. Given that we have granted it a monopoly on the legal use of force and coercion, its purpose is to protect those rights that come from God.
Charles froths: “WL Mac — You lost me at Jonestown punch for kleptocrats. Your rants read like they should be written in feces on the padded walls of an institution.”
Ah yes, the Adhominem attack when factual counter argument is missing.
Ya know Charles, having a cursory view at your blog I can see that your lack of experience and naivety are so deep that discussing deep politics, effete ideologies and political cartel agendas would totally escape you.
Every facet of gun control as it is practiced by the federal government of Canada is focused at the criminalization of legitimate ownership and constructing a confiscatory regime for breaching that misplaced criminal liability…this is the pragmatic construct of the administrative law resulting from the enabling legislation passed as the 1993 firearms act( bill C68)….now it may sound like “ranting” to someone unfamiliar with the nature of statute administrative law and these legal constructs may have been “lost” in you, but none the less it does not diminish these realities.
If you doubt the 100% criminal liability the law places you in I challenge you to research the legal nature of a federal licence… tell me how mandatory licencing under criminal penalty escapes the defacto legal entanglement of 100% criminal liability….but I know you won’t and can’t.
So I’m not surprised at your ignorance, I’m not even angy at your infantile name calling…how can I be angry at an cerebral infant….live a while, learn some things, then you may be qualified to talk authoritatively with grown ups.
“I am a fiscal conservative. People totting AR15’s, referring to them as their ‘baby’, are nutbars in my opinion, and should not be allowed in the conservative party.”
You sound like you’d fit right in on the CHRC hunting ideological “witches” for the nanny state.
Charles J, you have no point. Your idea is fatally flawed in two ways. First, in a free society needs are determined by the individual, not the government. If an individual feels he or she needs a handgun, they go buy one. That’s a free society.
Second, your registry assumes involuntary participation. As in, the Army can decide they want YOU in Afghanistan tomorrow and stick you on a plane.
What ever happened to the all volunteer army Charles? Freedom? Ring any bells?