Quote of the day—askwhynot

The only thing a gun is good for is taking it out of the hand of the idiot owner and knocking some sense into him/her.

askwhynot
April 14, 2011 at 12:32PM
Comment to Ohio Senate passes bill allowing concealed weapons in bars and restaurants.
[Such a narrow mind in so many ways.—Joe]

19 thoughts on “Quote of the day—askwhynot

  1. 15th.archangel had a better one.

    I have an honest question for the permit carriers out there…So you undergo background checks and whatnot, is some form of negotiation training part of the requirements?

    I ask because it seems like most situations involving a firearm possessing criminal might only escalate if someone decides to pull a gun for protection. Someone mentioned earlier about walking to and from a stadium at night…a man comes from behind to rob you at gun point. When told to give up your wallet do you pretend to do so only to pull out a weapon and begin a standoff? Pull and shoot him in the back as he tries to run with your money? And if he pats you down to look for your wallet himself and finds your gun first, does he take it as well?

    I honestly can’t think of any situation where I would wish more people owned firearms. I live in a country now that bans guns…and feeling safe all hours of the day truly is a blessing. Something I would never feel in Cleveland, whether I was with friends packing heat or not.

    Those are good questions. The explanation is obvious. Insecure, frightened men want to carry guns in order to FEEL safer, even if they’re not. The IDEA of having a gun to play out one of those fantasies in your head, is what it’s all about.

  2. @Mikeb302000, All self-defense classes I have taken and given include conflict deescalation training and addressed most of the questions. The handgun retention and disarming class I took addresses the rest of them.

    If your explanation was true then it would have to apply to police officers as well as private citizens. Do you really want to defend that position?

  3. As the saying goes, why are anti-rights cultists so violent?

    In other news, compare:

    I live in a country now that bans guns…and feeling safe all hours of the day truly is a blessing.

    Contrast:

    Insecure, frightened men want to carry guns in order to FEEL safer, even if they’re not.

    Who is so concerned about “feelings” again?

  4. I’m pretty sure Italy doesn’t ban guns. There could be a licensed CCW holder next to blue-helmet MikeB right now and he wouldn’t even know!!! When it comes to guns, Italy is about as restrictive as NYC. And it’s the go-to country for good switchblades, despite NYC-style laws again’ carrying them. (Ohcrap, Mikie, what if the man next to you has an Opinel in his pocket to…cut a sandwich???!!!)

    Time to move to the UK, you UN bedwetter. I’m sure the yobs will respect your need to feel safe!

  5. What’s always difficult for me to understand are the ridiculous extremes that people like mikeb go to to invent these weird fantasy worlds that work in such a way as to confirm their biases … but have nothing to do with reality.

  6. Mikeb’s hypothesis is that no one has ever been hurt with a gun. No gun-related rapes or murders; therefore no cause to ever ‘escalate’.
    Thank you, Mike, for completely conceding your cause. Please get to work convincing your fellow travelers of your brilliant insight. No danger from guns = no reason to regulate, restrict, or infringe.

  7. Can we all get tickets to watch that short bus rider tryin’ to grab somebody’s gun from their hand?

  8. “Insecure, frightened men want to *ban* guns in order to FEEL safer, even if they’re not. The IDEA of having a gun *owner* to play out one of those fantasies in your head, is what it’s all about.”

    Fixed that for you, Mike. The scared ain’t the people who own them or carry them, it’s the people who look at the gun owners, ignore the relatively low crime rate caused by carriers and decide to ban carry or guns overall “just in case”.

    If you don’t intend on doing wrong to innocent people, then honest people owning or carrying guns shouldn’t worry you.

  9. You guys should really start making up some good DGU stories. The near-total absense of them on the gun blogs is telling. I read or, at least scan, dozens of gun blogs a day, each with between 50 and 5000 daily readers. Where is all the action? Is it likely that if someone had an encounter in which the gun saved the day, they’d not share it?

    The answer is obvious. The action is all in your heads. Having a gun, although it makes you no safer, and contributes to the overall gun flow to the criminals, makes you FEEL like a man – you too Roberta sweetie.

  10. Absolute shite. I don’t own any, I just don’t believe in wronging countless innocent gun owners in an attempt to stop criminals that would fail before it started.

    You talk about the whole “feel” shtick – you “feel” that taking guns from the law abiding will make you safer, although all you’re doing is stealing from innocent people.

    I recall when you last commented on compromise, you said you’d give nothing up because it’s about “what’s right and what’s good” or something like that. For once, you were right, just not in the way you thought.

    This debate is about what’s right, and what’s good. Like it or not, it can’t be disputed – you’re on the opposite side of good and right.

  11. You guys should really start making up some good DGU stories. The near-total absense of them on the gun blogs is telling. I read or, at least scan, dozens of gun blogs a day, each with between 50 and 5000 daily readers. Where is all the action? Is it likely that if someone had an encounter in which the gun saved the day, they’d not share it?

    So that mikeb#####’s malicious lies here do not stand unchallenged, I will point anyone who is not familiar with them to:

    The Armed Citizen – compiles stories about DGU’s from MSM news sources. Sadly, they are currently on hiatus due to lingering financial damage from a malicious lawsuit.

    Jay G’s blog MArooned, where he keeps a running count of criminals killed by their intended victims, including a plethora of DGU’s.

    Gun Nuts Media, where the host Caleb has documented his DC&GU (Defensive Coffee and Gun Use) during a robbery attempt.

    The Armed Citizen and Jay G’s count both link to mainstream media sources. Caleb’s story is a personal account that likely didn’t make the news at all because the robbery was thwarted, no one was hurt, and there were no shots fired.

    Despite mikebmumblemumble’s allegations, the stories do exist, and they can be independently verified. They just don’t get a lot of non-local media coverage because there is rarely a significant body count – remember, blood sells papers. Even Jay’s stories where there is a death generally only get local coverage.

  12. “Insecure, frightened men want to carry guns in order to FEEL safer, even if they’re not. The IDEA of having a gun to play out one of those fantasies in your head, is what it’s all about”

    So tell us MikeB the criminal, why did YOU carry guns illegally? Because you’re insecure and frightened, or to play out fantasies?

    Sigh. Yet again another violent anti-gunner. And people wonder why we carry guns and fight against disarmament.

  13. The Leftists’ claim that we can’t possibly defend ourselves against criminals is actually just the flip side of their idolization of criminals, as is evident in their courting of terrorists, both domestic (SLA and Weathermen) and foreign (Hamas, IRA).

    They are cowardly losers who couldn’t even make it in humdrum, boring, peaceful suburban America; therefore, they fantasize about superhuman criminals who will “put the rednecks [by which they mean ordinary working Americans] in their place.” In their twisted, vile little minds, the underworld is made up of big, muscular guys (and, yes, there is a homoerotic subtext in their minds–whether conscious or subconscious I don’t know) who can’t be stopped by mere middle-class Americans. What good would a gun do, when you’re up against my bad-ass homies? is their warped thinking.

    They long for the criminal element to “rescue” them from normal people, who have abused them by telling them the truth about themselves.

    However…in the back of their minds, they know that criminals get stopped by bullets all the time. That is why they want gun control as a back-up: so that honest citizens won’t be able to stop the criminals they admire.

  14. Note that Mike still has not provided any substantiation for his conjecture, and is instead relying entirely on “proof by vigorous assertion”.

    Note that when pressed for substantiation, he instead deflects the argument to something entirely unrelated (something about which he obviously is not well-versed, given Jake’s comment).

    Note that he believes our rights are subject to some kind of proof of utility.

    Note that what passes as his “argument” is based largely on fallacious stereotyping (my owning/carrying a firearm has no impact on criminals procuring their own) and unproven claims (that bearing arms makes us no safer).

    Note that he closes his comment with pure sexism.

    Making a case – Mike is doin’ it wrong.

  15. “I honestly can’t think of any situation where I would wish more people owned firearms.”

    The operative clause being, “I honestly can’t think..”

    Mikeb’s lack of understanding, lack of ability to think, and lack of knowledge of the millions of personal defense gun uses every year, far from making an argument or a case, are proof of nothing but his own shortcomings and bigotry.

    Actually I believe he knows full well the large number of DGUs but is ignoring reality. As we’ve said over and over here; the anti rights movement is not and never has been about crime or safety. It’s purely about political power and control.

    The main point of course is that we have the unalienable right to bear arms, for whatever reason we wish so long as we’re not violating the rights of others. That right was not granted to us by the constitution, or by anyone or anything else, but comes from the fact that we exist.

  16. Aw, gee, Mike B, I thought it was the pair of socks, rolled up and stuffed in my boxers, that made me feel like a man? But it’s the girly little .380 I carry every day that does it? Da-yum. Might as well see if I can get my money back for that Butch Wax, then. (See http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_butch_wax).

    “[Private ownership of arms] helps gun flow to criminals:” where’re they gettin’ ’em from in the UK, then? Also, cite a peer-reviewed source. With nine guns for every ten Americans, you might as well drop that line; malefactors buy (straw purchase) their own guns. You will never disarm Americans. I thought the dire fear ordinary folk with G-U-N-S that was why you left, after your own illegal purchase and ownership of firearms?

    And I should apologize: I can’t prove you work for the UN and I don’t know when or if you stopped wetting the bed. I’ve been taken to task for my unsuppported assertions and I feel almost contrite. Why, I’d give ya one of my cee-gars if I smoked.

    Self-defense is a basic human right. You’re as bad as any Klansman when it comes to denying your fellowman’s inherent rights. You might as well be burning crosses in people’s frontyards — or ordering the womenfolk to stop wearing trousers and shoes and get back in the kitchen.

  17. Defensive uses of a pistol . . . Well, another place to find them EVERY month is American Rifleman and American Hunter. A full page, every month, WITH citations to the newspapers reporting armed citizens protecting themselves and/or others from people who mean them harm or death.

    One thing about the being robbed at gunpoint hypothetical is that you already have a gun pointed at you, and, as the gunbanners like to point out, all it takes is a little twitch of the finger to kill. You, as this miscreant’s walking ATM, is already (or should be) in reasonable fear for your life. The appropriate response, should you be equipped and able to defend yourself, is to draw and fire. The threat is apparent and imminent. If your response is to have a “Mexican” standoff, to use an expression Mikeb*** is likely to find offensive, then you weren’t in fear for your life, and if your response is to shoot the mugger in the back, that isn’t self defense, either. The only legal useage is to address the threat directly and immediately, or hope the criminal has a better nature.

Comments are closed.