Subscribe via RSS Feed

Trooferism

[ 102 ] January 16, 2013 |

Sandy Hook edition. I suppose it’s not shocking that people who can convince themselves about non-existent federal conspiracies to eliminate gun ownership would take things to the next step.

Share with Sociable

Comments (102)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Disgusting. Speaking of disgusting, there’s the NRA’s latest effort to shoot themselves in the head.

    • Vance Maverick says:

      Are you referring to the ads that ask, how dare the President request armed protection for his children?

      • Murc says:

        The best part of that ad is the unspoken assumption that people who can pass the almost comically lax requirements to own weapons in this country are the precise equivalent in skill and professionalism to hardened Secret Service Agents.

      • Dagney says:

        @ Vance Maverick ,

        I fear you missed the point.

        The NRA was NOT denouncing the fact that President Obama’s children are protected by The Gun. No. The NRA is perfectly fine with the fact that President Obama has an army of well-trained and well-armed soldiers (parts of the military and a full division of The Secret Service) whose job it is to make sure that the President does not have to worry about the security of his family.

        The NRA was pointing to the fact that President Obama have the gall to tell the folks that their children must be unarmed targets in “gun free zone” — while armed soldiers stand at the ready next to his own kids to prevent the same thing from happening to them.

        The NRA ad was denouncing the so-called “gun free zones” as nothing more than an advertisement that the persons within them zones are unarmed and thus, targets for any thug hell-bent to commit murder.

        The NRA is outraged by the demand made by President Obama (and others, such as Mayor Bloomberg) that folks submit unprotected not only themselves but their own children to slaughter by murderers — while Obama and Bloomberg hide behind their armed guards, armored vehicles and bullet-proof windows.

        That was the point of the ad. I’m surprised you were not able to see it.

        • Scott S. says:

          It’s weird that the NRA didn’t fantasize about killing Ronald Reagan’s wife and children when he supported common-sense gun control measures.

          • Dagney says:

            The NRA is not in the business of killing those who oppose its mission; that’s only a fantasy of twisted academics, journalists and urban hipsters.

            • Jberardi says:

              “The NRA is not in the business of killing those who oppose its mission; that’s only a fantasy of twisted academics, journalists and urban hipsters.”

              So they’re going to fight off looming guberment tyranny with… what, a bake sale and a strongly-worded letter?

            • Erik Loomis says:

              “The NRA is not in the business of killing those who oppose its mission; that’s only a fantasy of twisted academics, journalists and urban hipsters.”

              Given that I personally have received death threats from gun nuts, somehow I’m not really buying this one.

              • Dagney says:

                May you stay safe; and may those nuts threatening you be prosecuted.

                There are psychopathic nuts everywhere, left and right. It does not make the NRA a terrorist organization however, even if those crazies claim to act in the name of the NRA.

            • sharculese says:

              Just in the business of subtly intimating ‘no seriously, we don’t want to start with the killing but we will if you push us to far so like we really mean it and you should be afraid, for real, guys’

            • DrDick says:

              No, it is only in the business of threatening and intimidating them. They leave the actual killing to the rightwing whackjobs they inflame with teir hyperbolic rhetoric.

        • Hogan says:

          So both you and the NRA have no understanding of relative risk and have never seen Obama work a rope line. Good to know.

          Where was Obama on gun control before he had Secret Service protection? I wonder if there’s some way to figure that out.

        • Brandon says:

          I wonder if there’s a reasonable risk assessment that the children of the President of the United States are a significantly more likely target than some random citizen.

        • Murc says:

          The NRA ad was denouncing the so-called “gun free zones” as nothing more than an advertisement that the persons within them zones are unarmed and thus, targets for any thug hell-bent to commit murder.

          The countries that have heavily restricted civilian handgun ownership don’t seem to have this problem, though. By this logic, Japan, where it’s difficult to even own knives above a certain length, ought to be attracting all kinds of thugs hell-bent on committing murder.

        • unarmed targets in “gun free zone”

          If you go through your life thinking you are a “target,” you need to find yourself a good psychologist, and you shouldn’t be allowed to possess firearms.

        • djangermats says:

          Its almost like he thinks he’s the president or something

  2. Jeremy says:

    I haven’t had to deal with it yet (though that may change now that a gun control bill is being discussed), but friends of mine have had people posting facebook photos of their weapons along with pro-gun graphics.

    I can only imagine how much worse it will get in the near future.

  3. M. Bouffant says:

    people posting facebook photos of their weapons along with pro-gun graphics

    Same people having fits about publishing lists of gun owners? Same people screeching “No national registry, ’cause then the gummint will know who has guns when they come to take them?”

    It may get worse, but the NRA & the loons are showing their true faces, & (I hope) most Americans don’t much like that face.

    • cpinva says:

      the NRA showed their true face, when they had a hissy fit back in the 80′s, after congress passed legislation making the manufacture/sale/possession of the bullet-proof vest piercing “Talon” bullet illegal, for other than military/police.

      “It may get worse, but the NRA & the loons are showing their true faces, & (I hope) most Americans don’t much like that face.”

      it’s been pretty much a downward spiral since.

  4. Dagney says:

    Alex Jones and the truther brigades are nutso, crazies; and they are NOT conservatives.

    But this blogger *maha* of The Mahablog conflates grossly the people of the Midland, the rednecks, with those crazy truthers, those conspiracy freaks.

    This [truther] mob is made up of the same people who think they must be allowed to carry concealed firearms anywhere they go and have unfettered access to military weapons. Oh, and in their minds they are “patriots” and “law abiding citizens” who believe they must be armed to defend themselves against “bad guys.” [emphasis mine]

    The rednecks of the Midland, and other kind of Tea Partiers, do not coincide with the truther brigades and their conspiracy theories. It’s true that they are generally white folks without college degree, and more male than female; but the similarity ends there.

    Am I alone in growing uncomfortable with this forked-tongue diabolization of the gun-clinging, Bible-toting white folks (mostly) whithout college degree that (mostly) inhabit the Midland?

    Blogger *maha* says the following, not only of the crazy truthers but also of the good, peaceful, law-abiding, gun-clinging rednecks:

    [T[hey also lacked heads that were screwed on all the way or as much sense as God gave pop tarts.

    And joanr16 says the following in the comment section…

    [T]hey’re overflowing with hate and rage, and they want to hurt everyone they possibly can. [...] Batsh*t and evil, the lot of them.
    – joanr16

    …to which blogger *maha* replies, in agreement:

    And in their minds, they’re the “good guys.” That makes them even more dangerous.

    My God. They seem to be doing to white folks what the Third Reich did to the Jews prior to the massacre: diabolize them (“they want to hurt everybody”, they are “evil,” they are “stupid.”)

    When those haters do not conflate the law-abiding rednecks with crazy truthers, they focus their dark hatred on the representatives of the Second Amendment, especially Wayne LaPierre. We had crusty, nutsy members of the academia GROSSLY conflating the NRA with actual killers, I kid you not: Erik Loomis wrote the following, in the middle of the affective storm following the Newton massacre: “Looks like the National Rifle Association has murdered some more children.” Loomis also threw bloody metaphors like “I want Wayne LaPierre’s head on a stick,” Dracula-style.

    And now we have a videogame where hostile keyboard demagogues à la Loomis can target LaPierre (and by proxy, the gun-clinging rednecks he kinda represents) and shoot him with the effect of mildly realistic blood and gore.

    They’re diabolizing the rednecks by way of gross conflations, and actively nurturing and amplifiying an anti-Christian, anti-white, anti-redneck affect. It looks increasingly like those unnuanced, seemingly bood-thirsty, haters are not actually against The Gun, but rather against the rednecks, the glorious people of the Midland.

    • cpinva says:

      wow, either great parody, or let me give you some pancakes, midland style, with some lovely, warmed, pseudo maple syrup.

    • Malaclypse says:

      We had crusty, nutsy members of the academia GROSSLY conflating the NRA with actual killers, I kid you not: Erik Loomis wrote the following, in the middle of the affective storm following the Newton massacre: “Looks like the National Rifle Association has murdered some more children.” Loomis also threw bloody metaphors like “I want Wayne LaPierre’s head on a stick,” Dracula-style.

      Thank you for informing the LGM community of this fact, as nobody here had heard of it. Who is this “Loomis,” and where can we denounce him? Maybe these folks can help.

    • BigHank53 says:

      It’s not often you run into a comment that seems to need its own soundtrack. Might I suggest “The Circle of Life” from The Lion King? Pompous, bathetic, and perfectly targeted to the sensibilities of the Midland. (Though I could have sworn that was in England.)

    • sharculese says:

      My God. They seem to be doing to white folks what the Third Reich did to the Jews prior to the massacre: diabolize them (“they want to hurt everybody”, they are “evil,” they are “stupid.”)

      It really isn’t, and every single time you make this comparison it gets more tone deaf and offensive.

      Seriously, stop stealing other people’s history to make yourself look better. It is really fucked up.

    • Lecturer says:

      Let me respond to this in good faith. Back in the middle of the twentieth century, the AFL-CIO purged its ranks of communists. I’ve yet to see the various “patriot” and Second Amendment groups make moves to purge their movement of the neo-Nazis, terrorists, and fantasists. How hard would it be for gun show organizers to denounce terrorism or to say, “Hitler banned guns, of course purveyors of Nazi literature are unwelcome here?”

      • witless chum says:

        They’d, of course, be lying about Hitler like they always are. Germany had very restrictive gun laws in the 1920s, which the Nazis liberalized in 1938, excepting Jews, Roma, etc, as was their wont. Which shows, again, that the whole theory of an armed populace resisting tyranny is fairly unlikely to happen in real life.

        Germans who had privately-owned guns were much more likely to use them to support the state against its enemies than to use them against it. Guns don’t have much of a chance against social conditioning, so I suspect the gun owners of the United States would not behave at all differently if faced with a popular, charismatic fascist.

        • Lecturer says:

          Well, yes. But what I’m saying is that if the Second Amendment activists really wanted to purge the Nazis, they could use the same rhetorical tricks they’re using now when talking to the world at large. The fact that they rant that Hitler banned guns while at the same time you can pick up Nazi literature at any gun and knife show speaks volumes about the movement.

    • Cody says:

      We’re not talking about handguns here. We’re talking about assault rifles and high-capacity magazines.

      How many college students own either one of these?

      How many people buy a high-capacity magazine for anything except violence against people? Does it take you 30 shots to hit that deer? Do you need an AK-47 to hunt ducks?

      Not to mention the cost of these things. I seriously doubt anyone spends the money on these type of things except loons and serious gun collectors. And serious gun collectors probably aren’t that interested in modern assault rifles…

      • BigHank53 says:

        I know of one college student with an AR-15. She’s on the ROTC marksmanship team, and is allowed to use a personal firearm instead of drawing one from the armory.

        Kind of the exception that proves the rule, but there you are.

        There’s all kinds of gun collectors. Part of the current run on Bushmasters is people who remember how much prices for used guns jumped after the ’94 ban.

      • DrDick says:

        If you need s semiautomatic with a high capacity clip to hunt, I would be eternally grateful if you did not do your hunting up here in Montana. Our cattle industry could not withstand the carnage and I worry about our children’s safety.

    • DrDick says:

      Sorry to have to tell you this, but modern conservatism is a form of insanity. Just look at the House Republicans. So, yes, these whackaloons are the true face of American conservatism.

    • There is not a single word or reference to “midlanders,” and the work you are putting into trying to change the subject to identity politics just advertises how scared you are.

      You should be. This isn’t 1994.

  5. bradP says:

    Why we need gun control –

    Any argument here, or just some armchair psychology attempting to wrangle 80M people into the easily hateable “poor white guys losing status and acting out” category?

    He says this:

    basically, we’re looking at middle-aged and older white men without college degrees versus almost everybody else

    Based on a study that shows at least 30% of women and minorities “Prioritize gun rights over gun control.”

    Plus a majority of the 18 to 29 age group – the group most hit by disenfranchizement and unemployment – support gun control.

    When you get into more restrictive forms of gun control, like banning handguns, a strong majority of democrats are opposed.

    None of his points seem to add up, and I would like to here about his confrontations with armed hot heads.

    This is a terrible piece that doesn’t answer the question it purports to, and that last block-quoted paragraph is some of the worst “Here is why we should hate people who feel this way and not take them seriously” crap that I have seen. (it is interesting to see how the two sides portray each other as either spiritually disturbed and evil or psychologically disturbed and evil, however)

    I wonder how many responsible gun owners the folks on here know versus the number of paranoid lunatics.

    • Manta says:

      “I wonder how many responsible gun owners the folks on here know versus the number of paranoid lunatics.”

      How can you tell the difference?
      For instance, is Dick Cheney a responsible gun owner or a paranoid lunatic?

    • Malaclypse says:

      I wonder how many responsible gun owners the folks on here know versus the number of paranoid lunatics.

      I know two. One is, in fact, a paranoid lunatic, and while the other is a perfectly reasonable fellow, his hobby of using black powder to make his own bullets has a non-trivial chance of ending in tragedy.

      • BigHank53 says:

        ….he’s reloading cartridges with black powder? That may not be as bad as it sounds; early cartridge loaders were designed for black powder, with calibers like the .45 Long Colt, the .45-70, and the .44 pistol. If he’s putting black powder into a modern necked high-velocity rifle cartridge…yeah, it’s just a matter of time before he makes a bomb.

        • Malaclypse says:

          My experience with the black powder was helping him move about a decade ago, seeing his workbench, and telling him that the moment he started moving the bench, I was leaving. Couldn’t tell you what type of cartridges the powder was going into.

          • BigHank53 says:

            If he still has the same number of fingers he had ten years ago he’s probably been coloring inside the lines. People who get off on seeing things go boom either force themselves to follow the rules or get an up-close and personal lesson in chemistry and physics.

            I wouldn’t touch someone’s reloading bench either, and there’s no way I’d move a box of somebody else’s propellants. Or drive the truck they’re in.

    • DrDick says:

      I know quite a few of each. Most of my friends own guns, as do I (this is Montana) and they are responsible cun owners. There are also a whole lot of whackaloons with enough weapons to arm a small army up here. Not coincidentally, most of them are libertarians, white supremacists, militia members, and other far right lunatics. They are often all of the above.

    • mark f says:

      I know one guy who’s been a hunter his whole life and has a collection of various firearms. He moved from Mass. to Colorado to work on a ranch maybe 10 years ago, and last I heard he lives in Wyoming. From what I remember he was always very responsible and cautious with his weapons. He was also cautious and thorough when he told me and our other inexperienced friends how to shoot & hold when not shooting. My friend still came an inch away from taking his head off with a shotgun, though.

      Everyone else I know who owns a gun is (1) a fucking moron, and (2) thinks that it’s just a matter of time before the blahs or the Feds or aliens (illegal or space) burst through their front door.

    • witless chum says:

      I am one, Brad, and know a couple others well. I’ve got three long guns (a singled shot 12 gauge, a bolt action Lee Enfield and a semiauto .22) I inherited from my dad and that I hang onto for some combination of sentimentality and innumerate feelings that I’m better off armed. Along with a vague desire to take up deer hunting again, because venison is yummy.

      The two other gun owners I feel I know well are both kinda paranoid about crime for no particular reason, given where they live and the fact that they are not involved in the drug trade. One, in particular, is gullible as fuck about the threat of terrorism and wondered about whether Obama was a Muslim, though I think he ended up voting for him because he wants his pension and his 401K protected from Republican insanity more than he wants the ni-clang president to not be a Kenyan Muslim. (Yeah, he’s pretty racist, too.) The UAW is fucking magic, by the by. The other one is less paranoid, I think, but still significantly paranoid about Obama taking his guns.

      I also grew up in the U.P. of Michigan where gun ownership is just assumed of everyone. So, no, I don’t have a particularly high opinion of gun owners as a group.

  6. jhe says:

    I am not wise in the ways of onlime PR, but anyone get the sense that Dahney might be a paid shill? Complete sentences, careful formatting, yet unaware that she is actually in the secret clubhouse of the Dread Pirate Loomis.

    I’m kind of curious how these things work.

  7. Lacking Moral Fiber aka Useless Muthfucka frmly Nemesis says:

    Wonder how many death threats the Bamz family/kids receive? May be cause for some protection. Plus, our country affords protection to its leaders. Has for some time.

    Whatever. Im not gonna try to debate gun murder fetishists. Most of their yammering is just deflection away from true honest dialogue about gun violence.

    And mark my word, there will be many state legislatures that pass more forgiving gun laws in the wake of Sandy Hook.

    But of course, Sandy Hook was faked because no tears thats why.

  8. Ohio Dan says:

    Hey Dr. Dick, Where in the constitution and more specifically the second amendment does it mention the right to keep and bear arms does it mention hunting.

    Also the threat to ban Dagney because of her statement on Loomis and funeral pyres is followed by “DR.Dick” stating Dagney is “Fucked up”

    The left once was the bastion of Free Speach (1st amendment right.” Now, not so much.

    • Uncle Kvetch says:

      And the right used to include people who could spell “free speech” correctly and knew what it meant. And yet here we are.

    • DrDick says:

      The Second Amendment actually links the right to bear arms to a “well regulated militia.” Saying that Dagney is an idiot and a loon in no way infringes on his free speech rights, nor does the threat to ban him. Freedom of speech does not protect you from criticism for that speech. Likewise, freedom of speech only applies to government restrictions, not private ones. I have every right to throw you out of my house if you say something I find offensive. The same standard applies to a private blog. I should congratulate you here, as you have managed to make Dagney look like a sane, rational supergenius.

  9. Negatory says:

    I don’t think I’ve seen such masturbatory, 2-minute-hate style preaching to the choir in comment thread since I stopped reading Red State.

    Congratulations, guys, on being just as morally bankrupt and childishly insane as those you choose to lay your blanket generalizations upon, if not moreso.

    Enjoy the name-calling and laying false suppositions about me that will inevitably occur, I have no intention of coming back to this site (ever) and reading them.

    P.S. In one breath, many of you accuse those who disagree with your personal philosophy as paranoid ‘loonies’… Yet many of those same people have repeatedly made baseless accusations of certain posters being “NRA shills.”

    Who’re the paranoid ones again?

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.