The anti-gun people frequently claim this but that is grossly inaccurate and is actually nothing but projection.
Look at the responses to Just One Question, “What color is orange? True or false?” What kind of a response is that? It is totally nonsensical and people claim it is some sort of brilliant insight.
Or MikeB302000 who recently proposed the VPC report on the low “gun
deaths” in Hawaii, while ignoring violent crime and murder in general,
was an adequate response to my question. I responded in his comments by
pointing out the question is concerned with safety, not the total
number of deaths (including justifiable and praiseworthy homicide)
inflicted with the use of a firearm. This sort of thing has been
pointed out to him so many times and his ass handed to him so many times
that this morning when he came back with another post claiming my
response made him wonder if my response was “an elaborate con job” it
reminded me of a joke:
A man goes hunting with his buddies, although he’d never been hunting and barely knew how to hold a rifle.
On the first day out of camp he’s walking through the woods and he comes upon a big ass bear. “Great!” he thinks to himself. But he’s so excited and nervous that when he raises his gun and fires he misses the bear by 10 feet. The bear looks at him and stands up, and shockingly speaks. “Excuse me, but you just shot at me and missed. I’m afraid I’m going to have to rip your throat out.” says the bear as he takes out his claws and ambles towards our hero.
“You’re a talking bear! Wow! I’m really sorry for shooting at you, please don’t kill me.” The bear looks at him and says, “You know I should kill you, but I’ll tell you what, if you perform oral sex on me I’ll let you live.”
Now our hero was torn between life and death, so he chose the only option he could. That night, as he sat in camp, he heard the bear walking around jawing about how he got a human to give him a mouth hug.
So the next morning he woke up knowing that he had to kill the talking bear. He walked through the woods, and suddenly came upon the bear. This time he was very tense, the adrenalin coursing through his veins. He shot, and once again missed.
The bear looked up, stood up and walked over to him. “This is the second day you’ve tried to kill me. I’m afraid I’m going to have to tear your throat out.” said the bear in a kindly fashion.
“Please Mr. Bear, I didn’t mean to do it, please don’t kill me.” our hero whimpered. “Tell you what, you bend over and let me get Gentle Ben on your buttocks and I’ll let you live.” said the bear.
Having no choice our hero did as instructed. Later on that night as he drank himself silly in camp he heard the bear walking around chanting, “Now this human took it bear style. Once you go black bear you never go back bear.”
Thus the next morning our man woke up and knew only one thing; he had to kill the talking bear. So once again he trod out to the woods. Low and behold he came upon the bear sitting on a log. He was terrified this time, more so than before. He raised his gun and BANG!!! He missed.
The bear stood up and walked slowly over to him. And when he spoke he seemed to have gotten a French accent. “Ah, it is you again.” At this point he took out a cigarette and began smoking. “But alas, do not fear me. For I think we both realize that you are not here for the hunting.”
And so it is with MikeB302000. He is so incompetent with his apparent goal of being an advocate for gun restrictions there are only three possibilities that I can think of to explain his actions:
- He really is that stupid.
- He is on our side and wants to make anti-gun people look stupid.
- He is a troll that enjoys sucking up our time.
But although sticking it to him a few times is entertaining there comes a point when getting your rocks off at his expense just isn’t that much fun and is a waste of time. (Again) I have reached that point in time.
I’m betting on a combination of #1 and #3. I don’t think he’s clever enough for #2.
I’m betting on mostly #3 — his very actions betray his focus.
Notice how many of his posts are just repetitions of the same tired anti-gun slogans over and over again.
As long as pro-rights advocates keep responding, he’ll keep posting in my opinion.
Which produces a conundrum, we need to respond to that type of garbage in case undecided people find it and think it reasonable but responding to it feeds his ego.
Back in October, he had a high of over 6,000 visits to his blog. After several of us announced we were done and boycotting his blog, it’s dropped. He now averages about 4,100 visits a month.
The reason I believe his efforts are mostly troll is his response to not being linked to. He throw a fit about the lack of etiquette, he refuses to comment on sites that don’t link back to him, etc.
If he was truly concerned about the issue — wouldn’t he comment anyway?
If he was truly concerned about the issue, would the links or the truth matter more?
The last point that I would make is – don’t confuse feelings with intelligence. While some people may have deep feelings on an issue, apparently that doens’t mean that they think things through –or even want to — in an intellectual manner.
For them, their feelings have a validity all their own. Don’t try to confuse them with the facts, MikeB302000 is a great example of this. This is why he doesn’t like his “logic” applied back to him — as in the case of the “shared responsibility” and child pron analogy.
I also go with 1 and 3. His comments and posts are so idiotic I don’t even see a point in talking to him; it’s like dealing with a mentally challenged eight year old.
Definitely 3 is legit. The man wants attention above anything. (You’ll note in all of the linked posts Joe, you made him look like an abject ass, and he thanked you for talking about him…that’s nothing more than pure honesty)
Still I’d put a vote in for a 1a.
http://weerdbeard.livejournal.com/648568.html
He’s not stupid, but actually messed up in the head, which would LEAD him to seek out #3 above anything else.
My vote is for 1 and 3 as well.
He showed up on my blog after a video of Boomershoot talking about how wrong it was. Someone else sliced him up for me, but I read it immediately as “troll”.
B
Personally I tend to think that his blog hits would slow to a trickle if ALL of us pro-gun bloggers no longer stopped over.
He’s a mentally ill attention whore and nothing else.
Hell, his only other regular commenter is Jadegold, and the antics of that nasty troll are quite well known.
The fact that we talk of such people in an open forum is all that matters to them.
He’s not stupid, but actually messed up in the head, which would LEAD him to seek out #3 above anything else.
In my opinion, this. Any other individual would have hit a point where the fact that so many people disagreed with him would have caused them to take a look at their own opinions. He hasn’t… and he likes it.
Hell, his only other regular commenter is Jadegold, and the antics of that nasty troll are quite well known.
You forgot Laci the I-can’t-remember-if-I’m-a-subject-of-the-Crown-or-an-American.
eheheheh Laci’s shifting citizenship amuses me too!
He’s totally bugfuck nuts, FYI.
So that is where the “hunting” line is from… I somehow managed to miss the explanation when everyone was running with that line over at Kevin’s place.
Now that I finally understand… yeah, that seems 110% accurate, apart from us receiving significantly less satisfaction from the experience than the bear does :).
Heh, I remember that joke.
Jim Davidson did a variant, where each time, the gun got bigger (SVD, RPD, RPG-7), and more bears appeared (one, then five, then a line of them all smiling).