69 Replies to “The Citizens Of Oak Harbor”

  2. @SDH… I’m dead serious. There are no background checks at all. And Yes, any drunk can wander down to ye olde gun shoppe right now in the US and buy an incredible amount of firepower while under the influence. Or angry. Or mentally ill.
    I doubt you are seriousness though, because you are incapable of acknowledging the simple fact that this is true.
    @NME666. Nope. Like those other shooters, it was the Bushmaster. He shot himself with a handgun. Don’t believe me… take it from somebody you might be more inclined to listen to:
    http://www.redstate.com/2012/12/27/setting-the-record-straight-adam-lanza-did-use-the-bushmaster-ar-15/

  3. I’ve noticed that you guys have ignored my core points. I don’t blame you. There is no answer. You just have to ignore or face the truth. Instead, you claim that I’m insulting you, when if you go back through these comments, you can see it’s a two way street.
    You guys fail to realize that here at SDA, you make up less than 10% of the population in terms of opinion. You’re basically extremists. Even centre right people like David Frum (and he’s not all that centre) seem like lefties to you.

  4. @Sasquatch I’ve noticed that you guys have ignored my core points, even though if you go back through this thread, you can see I nailed almost every opposing opinion to the wall for being flat out factually incorrect. I don’t blame you guys for ignoring this. You just have to ignore or face the truth.
    @North of 60… if you are refering to my washroom comment, you will notice that this was a snarky response to Cam who made the Gay dig first. It was clearly a Gay dig, because he stated “all the men and women’s phone numbers of those you have had sex with”, even though statistically I am likely to be straight, UNLESS I’m one of those faggy libs. I lowered myself to his level and responded in kind, but maybe your comment re insults and fears is right after all.

  5. Well I read every comment to here, John you had core points?
    Sorry you’re out to lunch, my sympathies, if that is your point.
    When government is in breach of contract and charter, you babble on about trust?
    So tell me, what has successfully stopped mass shooting so far?
    Seems like the only unsuccessful mass murderers are the ones that came up against armed citizens, yet your apparent solution is to disarm the citizens?
    Perhaps you wish to encourage more slaughter of unarmed people?
    Finally are you so unstable that you can not refrain from shooting your opponent when you lose an argument?

  6. John John John,
    Your knowledge is extremely poor.
    In fact the early Americans often carried firearms to public meetings. And like most Englishmen, begrudged the weekly militia training they had to perform. People would also carry firearms on travel to the towns to protect against highwaymen. Joyce Lee Malcom, well recognized professor of English history, the Consitution, and the right to keep and bear arms is well known as the expert on these aspects of English history. She’s a professor at George Mason, while you’re a troll. So I believe her. But go educate yourself by getting one of her books.
    As to the founders, Thomas Jefferson, along with many of the other founders, wrote constantly about firearms being necessary for the protection against tyranny. This was a philosophical idea from the Age of Enlightenment, but had older roots in both the Italian Kingdoms and Ancient Rome and Greece in terms of the rights of citizens to own various arms. That being said, the English at the time had strong convictions about firearms for the defence of the person and state as not more than a 100 years prior to the American Revolution they had fought their own Civil War against a tyrant. It was in fact one of actions of King George, the confiscation of firearms and the regulation of importation of firearms which unnerved the colonies as it suggested martial law was to be the order.
    However Jefferson also excercised and walked with firearms and wrote about it several times. He says, “A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercise, I advise the gun. While this gives a moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprize, and independance to the mind. Games played with the ball and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be the constant companion of your walks.”
    Later in the United States, the honky tonk era of political partisanship pocket pistols were carried quite frequently. The United States had rather a surplus left over from the Civil War, and these were carried frequently.
    I also reflect upon Canada’s Prime Minister, Sir John A MacDonald who was strongly against gun control. He writes that banning of pocket pistols would be “disarming the person who ought to be armed, and arming the rowdies.” Of course gun control back then was racist in nature, and mostly about controlling blacks, natives, unionists, and socialists rather than white upstanding men and women of the community. Interestingly enough, many pistols made for women to hide in purses are on display at museums across Canada, such as Fort Henry.
    Now in the modern times, gun ownership has in fact decreased in the United States in terms of household ownership. However the return of conceal carry after years of prohibition against it which turned out to be useless, has returned. Many States keep excellent records of conceal carry licensees, and in fact we find that the numbers of gun owners behaving badly is lower than the police. Moreover years go by with no licensee commiting a homicide. So much for your wild west hypothesis.
    I suggest you take some steps towards learning the history of firearms ownership as well as the roots of the right to keep and bear arms. Moreover a lesson in the recognition of our ancestors of the benefits and rights of firearms for self defence would do you some good as well as increase your knowledge in these areas.

  7. “So tell me, what has successfully stopped mass shooting so far?”
    Countries that have fewer guns have fewer mass shootings. Likewise, countries with fewer guns (1st World countries, that is) have fewer homicides. Those are the facts.
    Out to lunch? Like the part where I corrected the mistaken assumptions regarding the Bushmaster? Gotcha.
    And I haven’t the slightest idea as to what your last comment means. I’m not the guy who wants to bring my gun to the PTA meeting for some crazy reason.

  8. John, I think of you as a commentator, like a back seat driver, commenting on a subject you know nothing about. I was ok with the FAC, you had to go down to the local police station, and say you wanted to buy a firearm. A policeman would talk to you, someone who lived in your neighbourhood, and would do a background check on you. After several weeks, you would get in the mail a FAC, and you could go buy a firearm. Now teleport to C68, you are dealing with a clerk in Miriamachi, (don’t tell me that wasn’t political)CFO’s who can arbitrarily reclassify firearms, and Order in Councils bypassing parliament, grandfathering and warrant-less search and seizure.
    You said you were ok with sharing your sexual history with the government, would be also in favour of sharing that information on a job resume with a corporation?
    John, I own firearms, and I hold my head high in society, and I don’t look to a government program to fix problems. The firearm community has gone to great lengths to comply, under threat of the state, and we rightfully believe the focus has been on the lawful, and it has gotten to the point where NO! spend the resources of the taxpayers, the bureaucratic industry, the police and the legal system and put the focus on the lawless, who are laughing at you and your ilk.
    Cam Kroeger
    Chemainus BC

  9. Moreover John any drunk can buy a firearm in Canada.
    In the US when you fill out the NICS form, you have to assure that you are not under the influence or have an addiction to any drugs. Of course you also have to affrim that in Canada. But you can lie. FFLs that sell guns at gun shows must perform a NICS check. Private sales amongst citizens only account for a small number of gun sales not anywhere near the 40% number which is a mistaken read of the studies. Places like Switzerland also allow private sales between citizens without state control.
    As to the founder’s opinions of Bushmaster, we will never know. No one can make any points about it either way. However we do know the founders were adament that the citizens should possess firearms typical of the average soldier, which has been affirmed by the Supreme Court of the United States, so I guess you’re outnumbered again, and wrong again. Once again the reason for this was to have a last resort to defeat a tyranical State and at least serve as a deterrant to the State.
    The founders were also quite familiar with weapons of mass destruction. Gun powder plots were creeping across Europe as people revolted. They did not seem to undergo any concious effort towards restricting ownership of gunpowder.
    However about the Bushmaster, you betray your lack of knowledge about firearms. An average hunting shotgun, 12GA, can fire buckshot serving out 9 pellots as large as a single shot from the Bushmaster AR-15 rifle. Most hunting shotguns are quite easy to reload, and can be done quickly with speedloaders. The point of the AR-15 is that it is a close combat as well as a medium range combat weapon for use against armed combatants with cooperation of a fireteam and designated roles. Against unarmed citizens, who are mostly fleeing or hiding, the shotgun is in fact the most deadly weapon of all. As a specialist in Emergency Medicine, and having treated wounds from both shotguns and the 5.56 (or AR-15 cartridge for you), I most assuredly fear the shotgun wound the most. Against people like children who cannot flee, it would be very easy for someone to amass the same body count in Sandy Hook with a shotgun. So we can ban the aR-15 which is hardly used in any crimes, but when someone goes on a rampage with a shotgun what are you going to do? Be happy because it was done with a good type of gun?
    Some time learning about firearms would benefit you as well.
    As to your assertion about firearms and prevalence, you are once again wrong. Europe has a similar mass shooting homicide rate as the United States averaging out about 10 a year. Moreover the number of mass homicides in the United States has in fact not been increasing, and school shootings have been decreasing. Dr. Duwe writes an excellent peer reviewed article for you to read where he reviews the number of mass homicides in the US, largely the best data set collected, and demonstrates that not only are mass homicides by firearms low, he also shows how the media has hyped our attention towards these shootings giving them a larger presence in the minds of legislators than they likely deserve.
    http://wcr.sonoma.edu/v6n1/manuscripts/duwe.pdf
    http://www.ijreview.com/2013/01/30408-mass-public-killings-less-than-1-of-all-murders/
    As to your assertion about shootings and gun ownership rates, Gary Kleck has demonstrated probably with one of the best statistical methodology to date that prevalence is in fact not correlated with homicide. As well if you plot western european countries in terms of gun ownership and firearms homicide, you in fact find that there is not relationship. The R2 value is not significant.
    Part of your problem is a complete lack of understanding of how to correctly construct epidemiological studies. One must control for multiple independent variables. Comparing for instance the United States with Britain is fraught with error, as if one were to compare apples and oranges. One must control for multiple factors such as the spread of cocaine throughout the United States due to its close proximity to central america.
    Anyway arguing with you is mostly a waste of my time, you haven’t offered any interesting insights and your arguments are basically at the beginning stages of someone learning about firearms. Hopefully you have learned something from these discussions.

  10. (To clarify so John isn’t confused as his knowledge of firearms is simple, a shotgun can fire 9 pellets at once, each the size of a single shot from a AR-15. This would require someone to pull the AR-15 trigger 9 times. The devastation from 9 pellots at close range to a single human is massive, and more likely to result in death than a shot from the AR-15. While it may be that including reloading, the shotgun is somewhat slower in rate of fire than an AR-15, overall against unarmed targets each can easily run up a large body count. Remember also that body counts from mass shootings depend on many factors other than simply the firearm used.)

  13. John,
    Your so cute, you seem to think that being part of a small group ( I dispute your numbers, but I’ll let that go for now) is a problem that requires fixing. I see it as a badge of honour and a distinct possibility that we are not all sheep happily living in quiet servitude in our nicely appointed cages.
    At one time thinking that the earth was round was radical and held by only a small number, the idea that *gasp* the women and children of this world were NOT the property of a man, that people with different coloured skin might be (again *gasp*) equal to whites…..
    Colour me all pink and giddy for NOT thinking like the majority of the sleepy sheep.

  14. John is about as knowledgeable about firearms and the laws pertaining to them as I am knowledgeable about transgendered issues. John’s arguments are emotional. They lack intellect and any real understanding about the subject. Instead he projects his insecurities about his own mental state onto everyone else. Because he doesn’t trust himself, or any of his useless leftist welfare friends, with a gun he figures that no one can be trusted and we should all have our property taken away so that HE can feel safer. He will make a good socialist slave if the left ever gets in power and suspends our rights and freedoms for our own “safety”.

  15. Fantastic! I hope those smug Chardonnay-sucking despots on council felt genuine fear of public outrage at their politically correct tyranny. ALL elected politicians who want to step over that fine line from governing to tyranny should fear the people.
    They thought it was just another routine politically correct purge of rights and civil government when they bullied that council member for his constitutional beliefs. These political revisionist wolves thought the sleeping watchdog would not notice one more missing sheep. I would have payed a lot to see the expression on their faces when they were confronted by an armed public for their treachery.
    This is the only way to deliver a constitutional warning to malfeasant swaggering politicians who pretend armed self defense does not exist in the soialist utopia. God bless the 2nd amendment, as the SCOTUS has ruled repeatedly, it isn’t about hunting or needs-based communism it’s about the means to keep criminals and tyranny at bay.

  16. John sez: “Countries that have fewer guns have fewer mass shootings.”
    circular argument, fallacious logic John.
    – – and countries with fewer people have less crime
    – – and countries that have fewer rights have less guns
    – – and in countries with few rights and few civilian guns, the government does the mass shootings
    I suppose that make big government worshippers feel more comfortable.

  17. Max said: “I feel a comment from The Phantom coming on…”
    Late to the party today Max. Everybody has said what I was going to already, and I note it has made no impression on the thread hijacker. So I’ll just observe that liberals are living proof that you can’t fix stupid and leave it at that.

  18. Ok, Max got me. I can’t leave it lie.
    ThreadHijacker johnny said waaaaay back at the start of this farce: “Er… perhaps people who bring murder sticks to a civil meeting? A question… let’s say things get heated and people start yelling? Would you yell back at a guy with a gun when you don’t have one? You’d be kind of stupid.”
    Today I’m in Arizona. (Which is very warm and nice and sunny today for all you NorthEasters getting stomped on by the Big Storm, don’t hate me!)
    Thing about Arizona is, nearly every household has a gun in it. Probably a quarter of the people around you in the mall or the grocery store or wherever have a pistol in pocket, purse or gun belt. More than half the cars on the road have a gun in them. You go to a PTA meeting, where people most assuredly do yell at each other occasionally, most likely somebody will have a gun. The clown at the front of the room (who doesn’t get checked!) will 100% have one.
    Even drunks, @ssholes and undesirable Mexicans have guns in Arizona. People you wouldn’t trust as far as you could throw them by the ear have guns in Arizona. People completely unsuitable to have guns, have guns in Arizona.
    What’s the most dangerous city in the USA? Doesn’t matter really, just that it ISN’T Phoenix Arizona. Or any other town in Arizona. If john was right, this place would be one big cemetery.
    The thing about little john here is that he lives in a fantasy. He really does (apparently) think that when people get yelling at each other, if there’s a gun present, somebody is going to die. His belief, way down deep, is that he is not safe unless everyone else around him has been disarmed. People are stupid, they must be controlled. It is a fantasy reinforced by every movie and TV show and song and book since the 1950’s at least. The most graphic example I can think of is the old Twilight Zone episode where aliens get a suburban neighborhood at each others throats by fiddling with the lights. Straw Dogs is another. You get the idea.
    You can’t argue from inside the fantasy. You can’t say that a PAL is better than a registry, or an AK47 is worse than a shotgun, or that anything less than a 100% forcible disarmament of the entire nation is acceptable.
    The fantasy is that anybody will kill you if they get the chance. The old lady with the blue hair is a potential mass killer, she could snap any time. The stupid kid at the OWS rally is the next Anders Brevik, if he had one of those high capacity murder sticks. Gotta take them all away before one of those crazy freaks gets me!
    Hey john. You know what happens at a civil meeting when people have guns and somebody gets mad and starts yelling?
    Nothing. Every single time.
    You know why? Because the last thing on Earth a -normal- human being is going to do is look another man in the eye and kill him over a stupid difference of opinion. Race, creed, colour, sex, makes no difference. Normal humans don’t do that.
    There are people who will do it of course, we call them -psychotic killers-. They make up about half of one percent of the population, which is pretty much the definition of AB-normal. Three sigmas off the curve. People willing to rape/rob/maim you are about five percent, only ~two-sigmas abnormal.
    Historically speaking the mostly prolific agent of destruction in the last three hundred years or so has been governments. Not criminals, not anarchy, not even famine or flood or disease. Governments.
    That’s reality. Smell that coffee, johnny baby.

  19. Well Phantom … they can try ….. intoxicated by their own fumes ….. they come to blogs to show us all what they have imagined.
    A perfect example of why liberals deserve NO respect.

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation