Monday, February 26, 2007
« I would have never considered a rope | Main | Countdown »
Quote of day-R.L.

Gravatar Kevin Baker.......Is the name of your blog "How to win friends(Converts) and influence people.com?" Nice attitude Dude! I got your ignorance hanging right here.

R.L.
February 26, 2007 2:32 pm
A comment in response to this comment by Kevin:

Well, it's nice to finally find out where all of you "moderate" gun owners congregate. Those of you who seem to believe that there are "good" guns and "bad" guns, and that somehow you can compromise with the side that thinks that the U.S. needs to be like Japan.

I invite each and every one of you to come to my blog. I'd love to discuss the topic with you, since you don't apparently grasp the intent of the Constitution in general, and the Bill of Rights in specific.

Let me see if I can make you understand with the short version: The other side wants them all, and will do it in a death-by-a-thousand-cuts process if that's what it takes. The Second Amendment isn't about hunting or "sporting use" and it never was. And if the gun ban groups are successful here, America will make Britain's experience look like a day in Disney World.

If you don't believe this, if you aren't informed as to what's going on, if you think you can "compromise" and that it's OK to throw one group of legal gun owners under the bus so that you can keep your "bambi-zapper," or "daffy-blaster" you're wrong.

The sheer ignorance exhibited by most of you in this comment thread is staggering.

[Kevin is probably the least ignorant blogger I know. The irony that R.L. can claim to deduce Kevin is ignorant without having ever visited Kevin's blog leaves me once again unable to explain it any other way that blatant bigotry. And of course this crowd of bigots don't realize they are being bigots even as they say gun owners "are all empty scrotum shriveled dick creeps who need guns to bolster some sad sense of masculinity".--Joe]

Gun Rights | Quote of the Day
Joe Huffman  Monday, February 26, 2007 5:58:29 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [3]  |  Trackback
Monday, February 26, 2007 6:07:58 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)
Have you noticed that when gun grabbers don't know what to say, they fall back to the old gun=penis extension argument; shouldn't there be a name for this pathetic tactic, similar to the one for Godwin?
BobG
Monday, February 26, 2007 7:04:19 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)
The term you're looking for is "ad hominem". The penis extension accusation (applied generally to any male who has bigger and cooler toys than you) would be a sub set.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

That being said, I cannot make sense of how buying a nice car, big truck, firearm, etc., could compensate for a small penis. It seems to me that a quality vibrator might do the trick, or whatever else the man's partner might like in lieu of a more normal sized penis.

The man with the small penis, as far as I could imagine (not having had any experience with such matters) would not be at any disadvantage himself. That is, unless we're talking about "playing the field" (looking for one-night-stands on an on-going basis) wherein the man's penis size might end up as a matter of discussion among the local females, and in that case the people making the charge of "penis compensation" are of the "playing-the-field” mindset, i.e. juveniles—people most likely to make ad hominem attacks in an argument.

We see variations of this particular ad hominem attack in movies. “Dr. Strangelove” is a good example. “American Beauty” is a very good, recent example—Macho, military dude who’s out trying to show himself for a true-blue, tough guy Marine turns out to be gay, etc., etc, and of course ends up devastating innocent people’s lives along the way. That sort of thing can be found throughout books, movies and television, going back decades. Its ingrained in our culture, which would help explain why its such an automatic response.
Lyle
Monday, February 26, 2007 7:15:35 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)
So now I want to know what they’d say to a woman who owns firearms. Is she compensating for an extra-large vagina, an inability to have orgasms, or small breasts?

If one can make such a gratuitous assertion, one's opponent can make equally gratuitous assertions: Leftists (who call themselves “progressives” for some reason, though they are lobbying for a regression toward statism) are obviously compensating for feelings of extreme inadequacy by aligning themselves with State power structures, thereby satisfying vicariously their otherwise frustrated longing for a sense of accomplishment.

Actually, that sounds plausible when I read back through it...
Lyle
Comments are closed.