Only in America people,
The gun in question: an AR-15 semi-automatic assault rifle.
awww, how cute….
I’d laugh if it wasn’t true…
July 14th, 2008 by delaware's most underappreciated writer · 280 Comments
Tags: Uncategorized
2008 Candidates
Only in America people,
The gun in question: an AR-15 semi-automatic assault rifle.
awww, how cute….
Tags: Uncategorized
280 responses so far ↓
1 mike w. // Jul 14, 2008 at 1:01 pm
And why does it matter what type of gun it was?
Did you even READ the article? Did it say anywhere that he was injured in a firearms related incident? NO - he had an injury and couldn’t organize the event. that’s all.
Your bias is showing, and you jumped the gun on this one.
2 Tom S. // Jul 14, 2008 at 1:26 pm
I’m with Mike on this one, the injury didn’t have anything to do with guns.
and just FYI AR-15s are rarely if ever used in crime and can be purchased at several locations across Delaware
3 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 1:32 pm
I didn’t jump anything, but all over the article when I saw it. I didn’t say anyf’ing thing about the injury. The article did.
You can be with Mike all you want. That’s your business and in a few states you can even be married if you want.
MY point is it is a CHURCH giving away a gun. If you are fine with it so be it. But goddamn, people were all over Barrack for his “clinging to guns and religion”
And hidey hooooo, lookie lookie, a freaking church in Ok is giving not just some sling shot, but a gun. Well AIN’T that Ironic?
I can see Jesus on the summit, handing out bread, wine and Ammo…How Christian.
4 mike w. // Jul 14, 2008 at 1:35 pm
Not only that Tom, but RIFLES of any type are almost never used in crime.
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/offenses/expanded_information/data/shrtable_07.html
Keep in mind an AR-15 is ONE type of rifle and I don’t even want to guess how many different rifle models have been produced since guns were invented. I
‘d be surprised if even one person per year is killed with an AR. Regardless, the numbers certainly aren’t supportive of the “Assault Weapons are DANGEROUS and must be banned” hysterics that you anti-gunners like to push.
5 mike w. // Jul 14, 2008 at 1:38 pm
OH MY GOD! THE SKY IS FALLING!!
The church is giving away a piece of property to someone who can legally own that property. So what? It’s a big deal because you don’t like the “icky” gun they’re giving away?
By the way, there are church pastors in this country with CCW permits who carry in church.
6 mike w. // Jul 14, 2008 at 1:47 pm
Haha, the gun you posted a picture of is a California neutered AR. Notice the weird looking hump type thing behind the trigger that she’s holding onto? That’s there because CA says you can’t have an “evil” pistol grip on the gun.
7 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 1:49 pm
The church is giving away a piece of property to someone who can legally own that property.
Yep, just some simple piece of property. Almost like an Ipod or a cell phone. So practical for a teen.
By the way, there are church pastors in this country with CCW permits who carry in church.
and that is very, very, very sad to hear. I’m sure Mohammed would be proud.
8 G Rex // Jul 14, 2008 at 1:49 pm
Run for the hills, it’s the Hello Kitty Militia! This picture cracks me up.
9 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 1:50 pm
It’s a big deal because you don’t like the “icky” gun they’re giving away?
it’s a big deal my friend because as someone who has been to church a few times in his life and is pretty sure he knows the message of Jesus and God. I just don’t see how you can dovetail a killing machine into a message of peace and tolerance.
10 mike w. // Jul 14, 2008 at 1:52 pm
A gun is a tool, no more no less.
11 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 1:53 pm
Haha, the gun you posted a picture of is a California neutered AR. Notice the weird looking hump type thing behind the trigger that she’s holding onto? That’s there because CA says you can’t have an “evil” pistol grip on the gun
oh so that isn’t one of those cool killing machines that can mow down a few dozen people with a few short bursts?
12 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 1:56 pm
I’d hate to buy some pansy gun that kills people and not look cool. I can see it now.
“What are you in for?”
“I killed some prick with a neutered AR-15″
“HAHAHAHAH HEY John! This loser killed some dude with his neutered Ar!”
sigh…
13 mike w. // Jul 14, 2008 at 1:59 pm
“Yep, just some simple piece of property. Almost like an Ipod or a cell phone. So practical for a teen. ”
Right, because they’re just handing the gun over to some kid. They’re giving it away, but it still has to be transferred to the “winner” via a FFL dealer, that winner has to go to the FFL, fill out the paperwork & background checks etc. In other words, he has to be legally able to buy the weapon.
Stop using BS emotional appeals insinuating that the church is handing out guns to kids like they would Ipods.
“and that is very, very, very sad to hear. I’m sure Mohammed would be proud.”
Why? Are you afraid of your pastor? Do you think he’s violent? If not why would you suddenly be afraid of him if you knew he carried a gun? That doesn’t change his demeanor any.
14 mike w. // Jul 14, 2008 at 2:01 pm
“oh so that isn’t one of those cool killing machines that can mow down a few dozen people with a few short bursts?”
Nope, none of the evil “assault weapons” you’re so afraid of are capable of burst fire or automatic fire. They all shoot one round pull of the trigger.
15 jason330 // Jul 14, 2008 at 2:05 pm
and just FYI AR-15s are rarely if ever used in crime and can be purchased at several locations across Delaware
Question: Have they been used in our criminal invasion of Iraq?
Just wondering.
16 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 2:10 pm
Right, because they’re just handing the gun over to some kid. They’re giving it away, but it still has to be transferred to the “winner” via a FFL dealer, that winner has to go to the FFL, fill out the paperwork & background checks etc. In other words, he has to be legally able to buy the weapon.
Stop using BS emotional appeals insinuating that the church is handing out guns to kids like they would Ipods.
oh, woops, I’m sorry, the proper paperwork was filed and would be filed by the church. My Bad, here I thought they were giving away a killing machine with out proper documentation. I take it back. They aren’t irresponsible at all.
You are the one that relagated it to a “piece of property” mikey. So an Ipod is a “piece of property”. the only difference I see is one can blow out your ear drums while the other one can blow out your ear drum, ear canal, ear tissue, brain matter, skull and I think keep going through a window to take out someone else…
17 Rebecca // Jul 14, 2008 at 2:11 pm
Mike,
You are just plain silly if you don’t see the irony in a church event centered on giving away guns.
As to gun-toting pastors, I’m sure there are some, just as there are pedophile priests and pastors who rob their flock blind. Any organized religion has it’s share of sinners and nuts. That doesn’t make them the role model for the rest of us.
18 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 2:11 pm
jason,
The pink ones? I doubt it. They aren’t cool apparently
19 mike w. // Jul 14, 2008 at 2:12 pm
“Question: Have they been used in our criminal invasion of Iraq?
Just wondering.”
Yes and no. The rifle our troops use is the M16. The AR-15 is the semi-automatic civilian version of the military weapon.
Also, it wasn’t a criminal invasion. Congress authorized the president to use military force. Furthermore it can easily be argued that Saddam’s wanton violation of UN weapons resolutions (13 times btw) What good are UN resolutions if they’re not backed up by force and there are no real consequences for breaking them?
20 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 2:13 pm
Stop using BS emotional appeals insinuating that the church is handing out guns to kids like they would Ipods.
oh and you are right, apparently handing out an Ipod with the video ability could promote porn or something worse like listening to Creed. Better to stick with the gun. Much safer
21 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 2:14 pm
don’t get sucked in Jas…..
don’t do it 
22 mike w. // Jul 14, 2008 at 2:15 pm
“As to gun-toting pastors, I’m sure there are some, just as there are pedophile priests and pastors who rob their flock blind. Any organized religion has it’s share of sinners and nuts. That doesn’t make them the role model for the rest of us.
”
Nice comparision there Rebecca, comparing law-abiding citizens who also happen to be pastors, and who believe in having the ability to defend themselves (and their flock) to robbers and pedophiles is disgusting. Really classy… really.
23 mike w. // Jul 14, 2008 at 2:18 pm
“oh and you are right, apparently handing out an Ipod with the video ability could promote porn or something worse like listening to Creed. Better to stick with the gun. Much safer”
Well the gun certainly doesn’t promote killing, death, and indiscriminate violence.
24 liberalgeek // Jul 14, 2008 at 2:21 pm
Nor does it promote turning the other cheek…
25 Disbelief // Jul 14, 2008 at 2:24 pm
I’d like to see her other cheek.
26 mike w. // Jul 14, 2008 at 2:24 pm
Liberal Geek - And who’s doing that? Law abiding gun owners aren’t committing crimes, and they aren’t turning the other cheek. It’s not their repsonsibility to give up their rights because violent criminals won’t behave like decent human beings.
27 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 2:33 pm
go ahead Mike, stand strong my brother!
defend a church giving away a gun similar to the one we are using in the Iraq war. YOU GO man!
But let’s be honest, the Muslim faith is the one that promotes violence
28 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 2:37 pm
Well the gun certainly doesn’t promote killing, death, and indiscriminate violence.
what exactly does the AR-15, a selective-fire prototype submitted for consideration as a military infantry rifle later adopted as the M16
promote then?
29 mike w. // Jul 14, 2008 at 2:47 pm
“what exactly does the AR-15, a selective-fire prototype submitted for consideration as a military infantry rifle later adopted as the M16
promote then?”
You are telling me that a gun promotes violence all by itself? You’ve got to be kidding me? Do spoons promote obesity?
How about things like marksmanship, responsibility, safe gun handling, fun, personal achievement etc. CULTURE promotes violence. The “gun culture” (I.E. that of us gun owners) does not promote violence. The “thug culture” is responsible for that.
30 Sebastian // Jul 14, 2008 at 2:48 pm
AR-15 is the general vernacular for the semi-automatic variant of the M16/M4. It’s actually trademarked by Colt, so it’s kind of like people using the term “Xerox” machine to mean a copier.
Yes, AR was short for Armalite, which designed the AR-10 and AR-15 prototypes. Once they were accepted by the US military, the trademark was adopted by Colt for the civilian market. There are precious few prototypes for the AR-15 and AR-10 in the hands of collectors that are capable of automatic fire, and those are very tightly controlled by the federal government.
31 Snowflakes in Hell » Taunting the Progressives // Jul 14, 2008 at 2:54 pm
[...] Gun Blog points out another instance where Progressive Democrats for Delaware is crapping on gun owners in the First State. It’s rather pointless arguing with folks on the Internet, especially [...]
32 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 2:55 pm
You are telling me that a gun promotes violence all by itself? You’ve got to be kidding me? Do spoons promote obesity?
you think you are clever with these analogies don’t you. You got done that one smiled and hit enter didn’t ya? The fact remains that a spoon from 200 yards out cant blow a hole threw a watermelon.
So in an attempt to make yourself look wise you are doing the opposite. Comparing a Spoon to a gun has to be your best one yet.
The church A CHRISTIAN Church gave out this instrument of death. Not just some piece of property Mike. They choose a gun. Try to minize the object as some stand alone piece of property like a sofa or a spoon. But it is a gun mike. A GUN that is used by our military. It wasn’t some vintage pistol. Some old school collectors item. It wasn’t an Ipod, a gold plated bible. It wasn’t a cell phone, tickets to a concert.
33 Al Mascitti // Jul 14, 2008 at 2:57 pm
Troll attack! Troll attack!
The only way to kill trolls is starve them to death.
34 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 3:03 pm
no all, trolls are killed with guns. especially ones blessed by the church
35 jason330 // Jul 14, 2008 at 3:07 pm
Donviti -
Has hit a wingnut gusher with this one.
36 mike w. // Jul 14, 2008 at 3:08 pm
“The fact remains that a spoon from 200 yards out cant blow a hole throw a watermelon.
So in an attempt to make yourself look wise you are doing the opposite. Comparing a Spoon to a gun has to be your best one yet.”
Actually the analogy works perfectly. The gun can’t blow a hole through a watermelon without a person loading the gun, lining up the sights, and pulling the trigger.
A gun is merely an object, capable of nothing without direct manipulation by a human. In that context a spoon is exactly the same. The spoon is merely an object. It is no more responsible for shoveling excessive amounts of food into your mouth and causing obesity than the gun is for putting a hole in the watermelon.
Both are objects DTB. Both cannot act on their own nor control the mind of their user to compel them to act irresponsibly.
37 liberalgeek // Jul 14, 2008 at 3:20 pm
Mike - my point is that a Christian church should be promoting non-violence and turning the other cheek. Sure, I know that guns aren’t violent, the people using them are. That said, if there was a march of 1000 priests down the street or 100 armed priests, one would be a hell of a lot more intimidating.
I just wonder what the response from the wingnuts would be if there were a mosque in Iraq handing out AR-15’s after Friday prayers your innate right to bear arms would be questioned.
You made the point last week that your right to bear arms was a right the presupposes the Constitution. If this is the case, then Iraqis have the same right. Why do you suppose that we are confiscating their guns? Certainly the guns aren’t bad, it’s the people using them in bad ways.
38 Rob K // Jul 14, 2008 at 3:28 pm
DTB, have you read Luke 22:36? He said to them, “But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.
Jesus ordered his followers to obtain a weapon if they didn’t already have one. So if you’re a follower of Jesus, have you followed His instruction? Do you have a weapon?
39 Sebastian // Jul 14, 2008 at 3:28 pm
Umm… the AR-15 is the most popular target rifle in competition today. I know of a number of churches that have shooting teams, and know a few Rabbis who shoot. There’s nothing in the Judeo-Christian tradition that says there’s anything wrong with shooting at paper targets. There’s not even anything that says you’re not allowed to defend yourself, should that become necessary. So other than your desire to feel superior to these people who’s cultural values you either don’t understand or abhor, what is your real argument?
40 Rob K // Jul 14, 2008 at 3:35 pm
liberalgeek, I find it disgusting that our forces are disarming Iraqi civilians. If the US really wanted to win Iraq, we’d give every man and woman in Iraq over the age of 16 a good month of militia training and issue each one a rifle.
And I for one would not feel intimidated by 10,000 armed priests marching (and I’m not catholic either).
41 Sebastian // Jul 14, 2008 at 3:40 pm
Rob,
I could be wrong on this, but my understanding was that families were permitted to keep one firearm, and a reasonable amount of ammunition, for self-protection.
42 G Rex // Jul 14, 2008 at 3:45 pm
What if Barry’s old church gave out gangsta rap CDs to kids? ’cause I heard that gangsta rap was invented by The Man to get the brothas to kill each other.
43 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 3:50 pm
uh oh, we just quoted the bible over here…
things are going to get messy.
I’m a big fan of it, you can pretty much pull any quote out of it to make your point.
44 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 3:52 pm
I forgot, guns were invented to shoot clay disks…not kill.
My bad, this whole thread was a waste of time. I see the light now.
45 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 3:52 pm
g,
that was funny, you are coming around my man
46 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 3:53 pm
sebastion,
I could be wrong on this, Repeat that 100 times before you comment over here and it will save you a bunch of time making yourself look foolish
47 Sebastian // Jul 14, 2008 at 3:56 pm
Swords were invented to be used as weapons too, but fencing is no less a sport because of that. The same thing could be said about bows and archery. In fact, there would seem to be a long history of sports developing out of martial implements.
48 Sebastian // Jul 14, 2008 at 4:01 pm
Well, not to get sidetracked on that issue, but I had heard the CPA had tried to implement that rule, but had no idea whether it was current practice. This NYT article would indicate it is:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/17/world/middleeast/17iraq.html
“To qualify, Sunni fighters would have to turn in their heavy weapons — anything beyond rifles and pistols — within 10 days. The offer applies to Mosul and the surrounding region, Nineveh Province, a troubled area inhabited by Sunni Arabs and Kurds.”
49 G Rex // Jul 14, 2008 at 4:12 pm
Well duh, Sebastian. Wasn’t there some English king who outlawed soccer because young men were out on the pitch instead of practicing their archery? Talk about tyranny!
50 mike w. // Jul 14, 2008 at 4:14 pm
So DTB, are you going to address anything Sebastian has said or just resort to petty attacks like the one above? You seem to be doing far more of the latter than the former.
“The church A CHRISTIAN Church gave out this instrument of death.”
Instrument of death huh?….. So I guess you’d be just as outraged if they’d given away a set of steak knives or some aluminum baseball bats. Both could just as likely be “instruments of death” as a gun.
51 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 4:20 pm
mike,
why were guns created?
52 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 4:22 pm
I like how you call me DTB by the way. I mean seriously, It’s a title that I wear very proudly. I would prefer though if you could put Mr. DTB in front of that from now on.
53 Rob K // Jul 14, 2008 at 4:23 pm
Hey DTB, you started talking about Jesus first. If you’re going to imply He’d be against something, bring some evidence.
54 chris // Jul 14, 2008 at 4:24 pm
you are aware that it wasnt until the KKK started firebombing black churches that the laws prohibiting guns in churches started to be developed… the white buddies of the KKK that were passing the laws didnt want their friends to be shot by the blacks that they were bombing…
in fact up until that time, a bunch of the states had laws on the books that required people to appear at the church armed if they were able… now they were not enforced, but the did exist
55 Robb Allen // Jul 14, 2008 at 4:28 pm
Why were guns created? Because people couldn’t throw rocks at 2000 fps.
Guns are not designed to kill. They are designed to launch a projectile. You could make a bullet out of foam rubber and regardless of the design of the gun, you’re pretty much going to get welts. Same goes with loading up a shotgun with rock salt - Nasty wound, but you’ll live.
The bullet design is what is specifically formulated to kill or wound. In fact, the M-16’s primary round, the 5.56mm / .223 caliber was designed specifically to wound soldiers rather than kill. So, maybe you want to revise your statement to “The church A CHRISTIAN Church gave out this instrument of wounding.”?
56 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 4:34 pm
robb,
you aren’t mike, but I’ll bite anyway.
So, why were guns created? and you say “They are designed to launch a projectile”
do you realize how ridiculous that sounds? Go ahead say it…you know what it was made for my friend and it wasn’t for “launching a projectile”
come on my man, oh wait here goes another “shot” get it? shot?
Why were were projectile launchers created? LOL i giggled when I said projectile launcher
57 Robb Allen // Jul 14, 2008 at 4:40 pm
Oh, another thing. You make the common mistake of confusing the tool with the intent. Cops carry guns so that they can project superior force if needed, not so they can kill indiscriminately. Was the gun ‘designed’ for them differently than the one I bought?
My mother would not be able to overpower even a weakling of a man. Chemotherapy plays hell on your body. But she can still pull a trigger, and that can help equalize the odds and make an attacker think twice. Are you insinuating that my mother is a killer, who’s only purpose in buying a firearm is to murder?
Do you imply that I, Sebastian, or Mike are killers simply because we own firearms? If death is their only purpose, then most of my guns are defective as they’ve never achieved their goals (one most certainly has since it was used in WWII).
However, reading your last comment, I see you’re not interested in conversation, nor do you possess the ability to open your mind.
Here’s an answer, though. You’re not open minded, but others who read this conversation will notice who is calm and forthright and those who have no argument but snark and insults.
Projectiles can be launched for numerous reasons. I shot at the range yesterday and put lots and lots of holes in targets. Some people shoot steel silhouettes, others clay pigeons. Some people hunt. Some try extreme long distance.
In fact, there are over 2 billion bullets expended every year in the US alone. If the gun’s primary purpose is to kill, then you’d see a culling of most of the population within a year.
Are you going to try to argue your point or do you have no valid data to back you up and have to result to childish attacks?
58 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 4:43 pm
yawn…You make the common mistake of confusing the tool with the intent.
No i don’t. It’s not a mistake.
59 Robb Allen // Jul 14, 2008 at 4:44 pm
Yes it is.
60 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 4:44 pm
Are you insinuating that my mother is a killer
can I insert a mom joke?
Jas? Geek? to soon?
61 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 4:45 pm
Do you imply that I, Sebastian, or Mike are killers simply because we own firearms? If death is their only purpose, then most of my guns are defective as they’ve never achieved their goals (one most certainly has since it was used in WWII).
do you guys have like some secret cult you belong to where you chant this stuff in your sleep? It really is amazing. I applaud how well organized you are.
62 Robb Allen // Jul 14, 2008 at 4:46 pm
Prove me wrong then, Delaware. Show me the logical steps how I’m wrong. I posit that without human intervention, any tool cannot perform any task. I also posit that a firearm in my hands poses no danger to you at all insofar as you do not initiate force against me. I also state, as fact, that just having a firearm does not *cause* you to do anything. A man will not rob a bank simply because he owns a gun. Therefore the intent of the person is what is important, not the tool itself.
You confuse the two.
But I bet you can’t prove me wrong.
63 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 4:47 pm
if a tree falls in the woods does it make a sound?
if man fly upside down, do he have crack up?
if man can debate well, is he a master debator?
64 Robb Allen // Jul 14, 2008 at 4:47 pm
Do you practice insults and avoiding answering questions that challenge your belief in your sleep?
Prove me wrong. If our views are simplistic and full of error, then you should be able to indicate how ownership of a particular object causes a person to perform certain acts.
65 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 4:48 pm
I also posit that a firearm in my hands poses no danger to you at all insofar as you do not initiate force against me.
so why do you need it at all then?
66 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 4:48 pm
why carry around a “projectile launcher” (I still giggled) if your intent isn’t to kill or hurt someone else?
67 kaveman1 // Jul 14, 2008 at 4:48 pm
DTB asks
why were guns created?
The very first guns were cannons and they were built to smash castle walls so the swordsmen and pikemen could get inside. Only later were they shrunk down to hand held weapons in order to defeat the armored knight.
And I realize you know nothing about weapons, but Robb’s statement about the M-16 ammo being designed to wound rather than kill is absolutely correct. The idea is to drain your enemies resources. A wounded soldier can no longer actively fight but still requires food, water, medicine, transport and a paycheck. A dead soldier is a sack of meat, cut your losses, move on.
I guess in your mind, the church should give away bibles were genocide is advocated along with pedophilia and incest.
Very Christian indeed!
68 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 4:51 pm
Do you practice insults and avoiding answering questions that challenge your belief in your sleep?
now that was funny. I could replace your name with any of the half dozen 2A authoritarians that have graced the best site in the state and not known the difference.
69 Sailorcurt // Jul 14, 2008 at 4:54 pm
Are you going to try to argue your point or do you have no valid data to back you up and have to result to childish attacks?
He seems to be way too invested in the childish attacks to engage in any actual…you know…debate.
I mean, it’s so much easier to be cutesy and obtuse than to actually make and support a point.
70 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 4:54 pm
I guess in your mind, the church should give away bibles were genocide is advocated along with pedophilia and incest.
you don’t want in on my mind bro. That is a different topic all together
let’s stick to “projectile launching” shall we.
did you know that delaware has some great projectile launching each year the first weekend in November?
71 kaveman1 // Jul 14, 2008 at 4:57 pm
“I also posit that a firearm in my hands poses no danger to you at all insofar as you do not initiate force against me.
so why do you need it at all then?”
Are you saying that on this planet, people do not initiate force against others unjustly?
Is that what you’re really saying?
72 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 5:00 pm
I mean, it’s so much easier to be cutesy and obtuse than to actually make and support a point.
I KNOW. When you can’t get a bunch of “2a’ers” to tell you that guns were made to kill, or to admit that a church giving an assualt weapon could be wrong and not convey a very Christian philosophy why bother?
So far, guns have been compared with spoons, cars, fire extenguishers, steak knives and I’m not sure what else.
Seriously? why bother arguing a rock is a rock when someone wants to call it “ancient representation of compressed minerals”
you guys are a hoot. It doesn’t get any better. What’s great is I’m doing this on my own. Even my back up isn’t coming to my rescue unlikeyou all that obviously “circled the wagons and sounded the alarm”
hheeeeeeehaaawwwww go get em boys. Use your “projectile launchers”
It’s the attack of the Keyboard Commando’s!!!!! Run!
73 thirdpower // Jul 14, 2008 at 5:03 pm
When you can’t get a bunch of “2a’ers” to tell you that guns were made to kill, that a church giving away gun that is being used in Iraq could be wrong why bother?
*Sigh* No, no it’s not.
You’re a sad little person, aren’t you?
74 Robb Allen // Jul 14, 2008 at 5:05 pm
So, you admit then that you have no proof of your statements?
You imply that guns are designed to kill. I provide some facts regarding the wounding nature of the one rifle you were discussing. I also indicated that very few people have ever been killed by the gun itself, but rather a bullet or other projectile. I even show that you can load nonlethal rounds into practically any firearm and render its ability to kill to nothing.
So, I’m proving your statement is wrong. And the best you can do is insult.
Typical.
75 Robb Allen // Jul 14, 2008 at 5:06 pm
(that should read)
“wounding nature of the one rifle *round*”
76 Robb Allen // Jul 14, 2008 at 5:12 pm
Another factual mistake by DTB - the gun that was to be given away by the church is NOT used in Iraq. It LOOKS like the gun used in Iraq, but it doesn’t have the selective fire and can only shoot one round per pull of the trigger.
Putting stickers on your car won’t make it NASCAR ready. Shoving your wedding tackle between your legs doesn’t make you a woman. Looking like a weapon used by the military doesn’t make it a weapon used by the military.
77 G Rex // Jul 14, 2008 at 5:18 pm
“did you know that Delaware has some great projectile launching each year the first weekend in November?”
Hah! Ted Kennedy’s car has smashed more pumpkins than my Illudium Q-38 Pumpkin Modulator!
78 kaveman1 // Jul 14, 2008 at 5:18 pm
So DTB, why don’t you unlighten us all by explaining the difference between the AK-47, the SAR-1 and the WASR-10.
Hint, same as the difference between an M16 and the AR-15.
Can you please provide one shread of evidence that AR-15’s are being used in Iraq?
79 Sailorcurt // Jul 14, 2008 at 5:50 pm
I’ve been trying to post a detailed response but am having no luck. Do you have a length limit on comments?
80 Sailorcurt // Jul 14, 2008 at 5:51 pm
I guess so…let me try breaking it up into sections.
Part 1:
In answer to the direct question (which DTB will either ignore or ineffectually attempt to ridicule), As Robb said, guns were invented to expel a projectile at a high rate of speed in a controlled direction. This force can be harnessed for any number of purposes and can be used as effectively to prevent “killing” as to cause it.
Arguably, firearms were designed as weapons (arguably, because the first use of propellants used in firearms was for entertainment…i.e. fireworks), but any weapon can be used either defensively or offensively. The very characteristics that make firearms effective offensive weapons, make them effective defensive weapons (and, according to some, are used for the latter much more often than the former).
Not to mention the basic fact that they can also be used for sport and recreation…which was the activity in question in this case.
I find it interesting that the gun was being given away as a part of a shooting competition…a very normal occurrence…that happened to be sponsored by a church…yet those who oppose the action insist upon characterizing it as simply a church giving away a gun.
The Boy Scouts sponsor shooting competitions, 4H sponsors shooting competitions, schools sponsor shooting competitions but a Church? Perish the thought.
81 Sailorcurt // Jul 14, 2008 at 5:51 pm
Part 2:
Since others have brought up the Christian aspect of it, I feel it appropriate to respond:
Christ DID exhort his Disciples to buy an “assault weapon”. The Sword was the “assault weapon” of the day.
Reading the entire story in context, it becomes apparent that His point was that He was soon going to be departing for His Heavenly home…while He had been on earth, His disciples had wanted for nothing. Money, food, protection, etc were provided for them. He was basically telling them “I’m not going to be around for much longer so you’d better be prepared to take care of yourselves.” Among the preparations to be made was the obtaining of at least a minimal number of weapons with which to effect their self defense.
Regarding the command to “turn the other cheek”: You are aware that the slapping of a cheek is an insult, not a deadly threat? He was not condemning self-defense in that passage, He was saying don’t respond to insults with anger or violence. There is significant difference between not responding to an insult with anger, and refusing to defend the life that is a gift from God.
Some would contend that Christians have a responsibility to defend their own lives and those of the innocent from violent predators by whatever means necessary.
And that doesn’t even address the the obvious question that the “Christians must be non-violent” argument elicits: Does that mean that Christians are precluded from careers in Law Enforcement or the Military? How can a Police Officer uphold a Christian faith that views all violence as sinful?
An interesting argument indeed…but it, unfortunately, has nothing at all to do with the story in question. Punching holes in a piece of paper from 100 yards away is not an act of violence by any stretch of the imagination.
82 Sebastian // Jul 14, 2008 at 5:51 pm
Robb is correct that guns are designed to hurl small objects at great speeds. That is the basic definition of a “gun”. But it is such that they are highly effective at severely damaging living tissue, which makes them useful for hunting, self-defense, and yes, murder.
So yes, I carry a “gun” or “projectile launcher” (analogous terms, btw) because it turns out that hurling a chunk of copper and load at 1200 feet per second is remarkably effective at disrupting the biological functions of an attacker to a sufficient degree to make him stop attacking.
I mean, if you want to argue all killing is equally evil, by all means, go ahead. But I think most people accept that someone who kills in defense of his or her own life has committed no moral wrong.
83 Sailorcurt // Jul 14, 2008 at 5:52 pm
And Part 3:
Shooting is a viable, enjoyable, educational sport and is an excellent sport for the young as it requires no particular strength, agility or physical prowess. It is also the ultimate in equal opportunity sports for the same reason…women and girls are at no disadvantage and regularly win in co-ed competitions.
Finally, according to a study conducted by the US DOJ*, children who are exposed to firearms in a supervised, structured environment are significantly less likely to commit crimes of any type, and violent crimes in particular, than children who are exposed to firearms illegally…and even less likely than children who are not exposed to firearms at all.
With that in mind…is the Church’s purpose better served by ignoring this data and embracing a hysterical fear of an inanimate object, or by encouraging responsible and safe activities in this regard?
*I couldn’t find a link to the actual study, but Here is a link to a paper that discusses it and cites it in footnotes.
84 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 5:52 pm
It LOOKS like the gun used in Iraq, but it doesn’t have the selective fire and can only shoot one round per pull of the trigger.
my bad I mistaked it for a Gun that kills people…whoops
85 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 5:54 pm
you guys are so cute defending guns.
86 Robb Allen // Jul 14, 2008 at 5:55 pm
And you’re fairly weak looking not being able to counter us.
87 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 6:03 pm
I’m still trying to get someone to tell me why guns, aka “projectile launchers” were created?
I see a lot of words above that explains rights to own but I really don’t give to shits about you wanting to own a gun. I find it amusing the lengths you go to say it is your birthright as if when the bible was written one of the commandments has your right to own guns.
Quite honestly I’m not even sure what you are arguing against at this point.
My whole point is that here we have a church, giving away a gun. I find it ironic.
Because, now read slowly ladies, because as far as I know there are tons of other things a church could give away to teens. BUT the church choose to give away an instrument that was created to “launch projectiles” at other living things and kill them.
Not an Ipod, a cell phone, a gift card or a trip to six flags.
Now, the nutroots have rallied and have converged on this humble little blog to muddy the waters and defend this. Fine, but not one of you nuts will admit guns were made to kill.
You guys go OUT of your way to not say it in fact. You use analogies of spoons for god’s sake. You call guns, “projectile launchers” Holy shit, It is amazing actually but at the same time it’s not.
My god and my Jesus aint handing out guns to get new blood (pun intended) ready to uphold his word. My god is benevolent. My church, I think, doesn’t try to recruit with weapons that can kill I could be wrong though. Catholocism is taking a beating these days.
So I posted it this cute little story. The fact that you ladies swarmed over here to defend something, I’m not really sure what though proves my point rather well I think that people who are so fervent about gun ownership are nuts.
You guys are over sensitive. You can’t admit a gun was made to kill people? You don’t see a gun as a violent instrument? You don’t know the meaning of comprimise because if you give up any inch then god knows what you’d have to give up next.
OH MY GOD…someone just said guns kill….ATTACK. Not a shocking response from someone so adamant about wanting to own a gun.
88 Robb Allen // Jul 14, 2008 at 6:13 pm
You church does recruit with weapons that can kill. You pray by folding your hands. Your hands can easily kill. You have potluck dinners in which you could poison food (or Kool Aid a la Jim Jones). You could over-baptize and drown people.
No, I don’t see the gun as a violent instrument any more than I see a penis as a rape tool. Sure, it can be used that way and many men do, but that doesn’t mean penis = forced sex. More people are stabbed than shot (and 80% of gunshot victims survive) yet I still do not view the knife as anything malevolent.
Compromise? I’ll compromise right now. I want practically no laws on the books concerning guns. There are 20,000 laws currently there.
Which 10,000 are you willing to give up in the name of compromise?
89 Mike Matthews // Jul 14, 2008 at 6:15 pm
How did DL attract all these fuckin’ gun nuts?
90 Robb Allen // Jul 14, 2008 at 6:20 pm
By opening his mouth on something he knows nothing about.
Would you like to try to logically dismantle our arguments?
Prove to me that in and of itself, a gun is a violent mechanism that has a sole purpose of killing. You’ll need to show that nobody uses them for self defense, target practice, skeet shooting, etc. You’ll need to indicate how many deaths are caused by each of the 270,000,000 firearms in the US today.
I’d suggest you try to do it calmly and rationally, but so far that doesn’t seem to be feasible with people who think metal and plastic have mystical powers to do evil on their own.
91 Robb Allen // Jul 14, 2008 at 6:25 pm
Oh, by the way Mike Matthews, I’m sorry we’re in here interrupting your echo chamber.
Would you prefer that dissenting opinions not show up and upset your worldviews?
You’ll notice us “fucking gun nuts” haven’t resorted to snide insults to get our points across. You guys…. not so much.
92 Sailorcurt // Jul 14, 2008 at 6:30 pm
You guys go OUT of your way to not say it in fact.
And you go out of your way to avoid any points that you can’t counter…which would be…um…all of them.
You use sarcasm, hyperbole, insults and innuendo to avoid, avoid avoid. You don’t directly address anything…because you can’t.
We answered your question: No…firearms were NOT designed specifically to kill.
If a gun was “designed to kill”, when it only makes a hole in a piece of paper, did it malfunction?
If a gun was “designed to kill”, when someone successfully uses it to fend off a violent attack but doesn’t fire a shot…did they misuse it?
If a gun was “designed to kill” why do Police Officers carry them? Is the purpose of the Police to kill?
A gun is a tool that was designed to propel an object at a high rate of speed in a controlled direction…nothing more, nothing less.
It can be used to kill (or attempt to kill) or it can be used to make holes in paper. Or to break clay targets. Or to put food on the table. Or to stop a violent attack. Or to effect a peaceful arrest of a violent criminal. Or simply to hang on the wall and look pretty. It can be used by criminals for aggression, or by the law abiding for defense. It is a tool. Period.
You can irrationally try to assign all the evil intents to it you want but that doesn’t change it one iota from the inanimate chunk of wood (or plastic) and metal that it is.
And you STILL mischaracterized a shooting competition sponsored by a church at which a rifle was to be given away as “a Church giving away a gun.” Where I come from, mischaracterizing something in an effort to generate an inaccurate impression is known by another name. We call it “a lie”.
93 Von Cracker // Jul 14, 2008 at 6:34 pm
Shit, I can make a gun become a perfect paperweight but that wouldn’t make use of its elementary purpose….which we all know was to start the 100 meter dash…
94 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 6:36 pm
guns were made to kill people…say it…go ahead…
they weren’t made to shoot clay pigeons
they weren’t made to mix tang with
they weren’t made to eat your cereal with
they were made to kill
Kill prey, people whatever…kill…not tickle, kill.
sure a gun can be USED as a coffee stirrer or a bong. BUT they are made to kill.
why does that hurt your feelings when I say that? Is something that is made to kill another living thing bad? Because I say it is made to kill you guys go all apeshit
95 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 6:42 pm
when people go to war, how come they don’t pick up spoons and formulate a plan to attack with that?
96 Sticks 'n Twigs // Jul 14, 2008 at 6:42 pm
In answer to the question: Do spoons promote obesity?
Answer: Yes. Portion size has every thing to do w/obesity.
Back to you………for your next moronic arguement.
97 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 6:44 pm
here I will help you out a little.
Weapon:
1 : something (as a club, knife, or gun) used to injure, defeat, or destroy
98 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 6:45 pm
and here
Assault
2a a threat or attempt to inflict offensive physical contact or bodily harm on a person (as by lifting a fist in a threatening manner) that puts the person in immediate danger of or in apprehension of such harm or contact
99 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 6:46 pm
hmmm add those together and wow..lookie lookie
100 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 6:49 pm
A gun is a tool that was designed to propel an object at a high rate of speed in a controlled direction…nothing more, nothing less.
HAHAHAHAHAHA oh that is funny.
101 Sailorcurt // Jul 14, 2008 at 6:50 pm
I can’t hear you…I’m busy repeating myself over and over again and ignoring anything that I can’t rebut.
102 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 6:50 pm
If a gun was “designed to kill” why do Police Officers carry them? Is the purpose of the Police to kill?
really? I mean really? you didn’t make the Varsity team for the 2A debate team did you? I mean really?
Why don’t you ask me if a spoon makes people fat too….
103 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 6:51 pm
sail,
that was good. I din’t think surface pukes knew how to listen either
104 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 6:57 pm
Prove to me that in and of itself, a gun is a violent mechanism that has a sole purpose of killing
that is a horrible arguement brother . that’s like asking me to prove a shoe was solely designed to walk in…
I gun was made to kill, so however you want to weild THAT power to kill is your choice. Cops wear their guns for several reasons, no? So why are you trying to argue something that makes no sense to argue.
GUNS KILL. If I ask 100 people to list the 5 top things guns do, what the hell do you think is going to be number one?
I can see it now on Family Feud
“We asked 100 people, “What are guns made to do”
Guns, uhhhh….they uhhhhh
oohhh., wait….They propel objects at high rates of speed?
Let me see…They propel objects at high rates of speed
X
ohhhh, wait, I know, I know!
They act as a deterrent to tyranny and oppression
X
Wait, I got it…I got it…
Guns are made to be given away as prizes at churches!
YES that’s it!
woohoooo
que the winning music
que jumping family that has to split 10k between 5 people before taxes…
105 Robb Allen // Jul 14, 2008 at 7:15 pm
It’s “queue”, not “que”.
So, is a shotgun loaded with salt rock or rubber pellets designed to kill or not? Because you keep saying over and over that guns kill.
270,000,000 guns in the US and all they can do is kill, yet somehow the population survives.
It’s *almost* like you’re wrong and just can’t admit that a gun has never killed another being of its own volition. Because if you did that, you’re poor little protected world would come crashing down and facts might just leak into your fortress of ignorance.
106 Sebastian // Jul 14, 2008 at 7:45 pm
Do an image search on google for Anschutz Model 54. Is that a gun designed to kill? Or is it a precision instrument designed to very precisely fire projectiles? There are numerous guns that no one would buy for the purpose of killing. Look up Bennelli MP-90. I could be here all night listing guns that are not in any way, shape or form “designed for killing”.
Guns technology may have developed for military applications, but this isn’t the 16th century. Guns can kill. They are very effective at doing so. But the vast majority of them are used for sport or self-protection.
107 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 8:07 pm
OMG you guys found 2 examples of a gun that won’t kill people…
shocking…
I bet I can find more guns that kill then you can find that don’t
108 Sebastian // Jul 14, 2008 at 8:29 pm
Those guns are quite capable of killing someone, but they are not “designed” for that purpose. What about a trap gun? A nice over under? Designed to kill? Both are very common. Both represent an entire class of firearms. I can even name classes of AR-15s that are “designed” specifically for the purpose of being fabulous target rifles. But what makes that different from an AR-15 that’s supposedly designed to kill? Because it looks blacker? Has a heavier trigger? Lacks a free floating barrel?
109 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 8:51 pm
beats the shit out of me, I just know that guns were orignally made to kill…
I rest my case
110 mike w. // Jul 14, 2008 at 9:00 pm
“beats the shit out of me, I just know that guns were orignally made to kill…”
Which means what exactly? Why would it matter if they were “made to kill?” My hands can nurture a child or kill him. Alcohol & Cars weren’t made to kill, but combine both with an irresponsible human and you can produce death. The lethality of ANYTHING, from bare hands to guns is entirely dependent upon the intent of the user.
There are a whole multitude of things that weren’t designed to kill that kill plenty of people every year. Water and buckets. Neither are designed to kill but kids die every year drowning in buckets. Bathtubs were designed for bathing, but people die in those every year. Cars? not designed to kill but plenty of people end up in fatal car accidents every year.
So you see, whether guns were designed to kill or not is entirely irrelevant.
111 mike w. // Jul 14, 2008 at 9:05 pm
BTW, check this out
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2008/jun/17/denver-stocks-up-on-pepper-weapon/
Looks alot like an “evil AR-15 assault rifle” except for orange furniture that is easily changed. It is a “gun” since it fires a projectile, yet it is not at all “designed to kill”
I assume by “rest my case” you mean “I concede that I’m wrong.”
112 mike w. // Jul 14, 2008 at 9:11 pm
“I also state, as fact, that just having a firearm does not *cause* you to do anything.”
To be fair Rob I’ve been around enough hot-headed liberals to know that the presence of a gun very well could cause them to hurt someone. Of course that’s not the guns fault, it’s because they can’t control their emotions, specifically anger.
113 veroferitas // Jul 14, 2008 at 9:14 pm
My children (13 and 15) go to the range on a regular basis. No deaths.
I have carried a pistol day and night for 2 tours in the middle east. No deaths caused directly by that pistol.
Guns are useful for recreation, defense and killing if necessary. Many uses.
Just like cars are for recreation, transportation, or drowning campaign volunteers during adulterous liasons if you are a Kennedy. Many uses.
114 pandora // Jul 14, 2008 at 9:14 pm
Zzzz…
115 mike w. // Jul 14, 2008 at 9:15 pm
“did you know that Delaware has some great projectile launching each year the first weekend in November?”
Pumpkin Chunkin - you know DTB, getting hit with one of those heavy orange projectiles could certainly kill you, and catapults were designed and often used in warfare for that very purpose. Better ban Pumpkin Chunkin.
116 Sebastian // Jul 14, 2008 at 9:16 pm
I tend to think it’s roughly analogous to suggesting that knives are designed to kill. Knives can be used to kill, but they can also be used for other things. No doubt man honed the technology with killing high on his mind, as was the case with firearms.
I also won’t deny that the shooting sports, much like archery and fencing, have either martial origins, or hunting origins.
117 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 9:18 pm
you guys really need to keep your shit straight, b/c at this point I don’t think any of you are on the same page
118 Disbelief // Jul 14, 2008 at 9:23 pm
Because of the acceleration, they freeze the pumpkins now so they won’t blow to pieces. Hate to get hit with one of those. Be liked getting whacked in the head with one of Hillary’s thighs, only warmer.
119 mike w. // Jul 14, 2008 at 9:24 pm
“How did DL attract all these fuckin’ gun nuts?”
Because DTB / Don Viti was a huge asshole and bad-mouthed a dead marine. He said something that 99.9% of the population would consider him an asshole for saying and I felt compelled to call him out on it.
Of course it only took a few comments on his post before he was disavowing his words. So you can thank DTB / Don Viti for being himself.
120 RAH // Jul 14, 2008 at 9:30 pm
DTB,
Easier to type that than your whole handle. I see than a pink rifle excited your fancy. You find it an ironic juxtaposing rifle give away and a church. Personally I do not find that ironic at all. Seems right to me.
I skimmed the article and apparently they sponsor shooting competitions. If they are giving away one of the few Hello Kitty modified rifles they are trying to attract girls into the shooting sports. I think that is great that girls are treated the same as boys and some rifles are designed with them in mind. Girls like pink, they get magenta cell phones. They like color. Guys often do not.
Girls that know how to shoot are less likely to be victimized. Then can learn how to shoot handguns and to carry one concealed and if they ever get attacked they may have a chance.
By the way I find your handle very hilarious and ironic Delaware’s Toughest Blogger. How funny when you cannot use logic and reason only ridicule and hyperbole.
Well maybe you are scared of a pink rifle in a girl’s hand.
121 mike w. // Jul 14, 2008 at 9:34 pm
Hey DTB - Getting back to “guns are designed to kill”
what about the weapon that immediately preceded the gun, the english longbow? Or if we go way, way, back spears (and other types of pointy sticks) All of these weapons are created to incapacitate an attacker, and it just so happens doing so usually means killing that person. Firearms are simply the evolution of human weaponry, but ALL weapons, from pointy stick to firearms were created with the same purpose in mind. To kill. That’s been the point of all weaponry designed since the stone age.
122 liberalgeek // Jul 14, 2008 at 9:37 pm
Well, yes. But they weren’t really mass-produced. I suspect that’s why we didn’t have as many drive-by arrowings in the middle ages. (I don’t know if that is a word, but damn it, it should be).
123 Brian // Jul 14, 2008 at 9:40 pm
Hello Kitty!
124 mike w. // Jul 14, 2008 at 9:40 pm
Pointy sticks & spears weren’t “mass produced?”
Oh, and there were plenty of archers in armies.
125 Art Downs // Jul 14, 2008 at 9:51 pm
Some years ago, the GOP Central Committee in Carroll County MD had a raffle that had a Glock pistol as first prize.
A bereaved mother whose kid was killed by a pistol was protesting. She was a ‘new age’ mom with facial piercings and tattoos and I asked her if her lack of parenting skills may have contributed to the tragedy.
Her son was visiting a family with an even younger boy. The younger one suggested that they could break into the home of a police officer and get his gun. Most parents teach their kids not to invade the homes of others. Parental failure #1.
They found the unloaded pistol that was minus the magazine. Further searching found the magazine in another drawer and finally they found the ammunition. Then they loaded the magazine and pulled back the slide, putting a round into the chamber. They then removed and unloaded the magazine. The younger boy then replaced the magazine, pointed it at the Price boy, pulled the trigger, and fired the fatal shot.
I had access to firearms at a very early age and knew how to load and fire one. I was also taught never to treat a gun as a toy, to treat every firearm as if it were loaded, and to never point one at someone or something that I did not intend to shoot.
The parent filed suits that claimed that the design of the pistol was defective since it did not have a loaded chamber indicator. Would either boy have known what information such an indicator conveyed?
The lawsuit went nowhere and an effort to provide firearms safety training in schools was defeated in the General Assembly.
126 veroferitas // Jul 14, 2008 at 9:55 pm
Designed to kill (specifically the AR-15/M-16)
“Defense Secretary Robert McNamara presented wounding ability as a reason for adoption of the M16 over the M14 as a question of battlefield efficiency - that it is better to wound an adversary than kill him, as wounded must be tended to by their comrades, taking them out of the fight and demoralizing them in the process.”
Edward Clinton Ezell “The Great Rifle Controversy: Search for the Ultimate Infantry Weapon from World War II Through Vietnam and Beyond”
127 straightarrow // Jul 14, 2008 at 9:57 pm
My God! I have never seen anyone cling so tenaciously to stupidity as DTB does.
His entire response is truly amazing for its lack of substance. I read all these comments thinking at some point he would say something intelligent.
I was wrong, he never did.
He did say “It’s a big deal because you don’t like the “icky” gun they’re giving away?
it’s a big deal my friend because as someone who has been to church a few times in his life and is pretty sure he knows the message of Jesus and God. I just don’t see how you can dovetail a killing machine into a message of peace and tolerance”
Which is also entirely wrong. He has just shit on the second most precious gift God and Jesus gave him, life. He has decided that this penultimate gift is unworthy of protection or defense. Directly calling God and Jesus liars, because they said innocent life was to be defended. They said it in many places and in many guises, but DTB knows They were wrong.
He is allowed to be a hysterical panty-wetter and an intellectual zero, but he shouldn’t insist that others should be as weak and immoral as is he.
128 liberalgeek // Jul 14, 2008 at 9:59 pm
Yeah, Donviti! That’s why Jesus took out two dozen Romans before those son’s of bitches took him alive! It was like an episode of Cops! gone bad. He could swing some battle axes, I tell ya.
129 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 9:59 pm
LG,
I could see it now in the headlines.
“Downtown Wilmington suffers 9th drive by arrowing”
in the article one witness says. We heard the car drive by, then a bunch of hoodlems stick these cross bow things out the windows and next thing you know it’s arrows flying all over.
130 liberalgeek // Jul 14, 2008 at 10:01 pm
veroferitas - My Dad was in the military in the 60’s and he told me that the way that they used to sell the M16 was that it would remove an arm if it struck the arm at any point. I suppose that’s what the goal was, injury.
131 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 10:02 pm
LG,
I can see those headlines:
Breaking News from the Jersusalem Times!!!
Jesus goes down in blaze of glory. Speaking it tongues it was later deciphered some 2000 years later that he was actually saying, “Man has the right to bear arms and vote…but not drive a car…that, that is a privelege”
132 pandora // Jul 14, 2008 at 10:02 pm
Now that’s spin! Oh, and it’s pantie, not panty. Maybe instead of blogging you should get out and meet some girls.
133 veroferitas // Jul 14, 2008 at 10:03 pm
A gun is designed to render your opponent combat ineffective. That can be dead, incapacitated, driven off or pissing his pants in fear.
Dead is not the only option, and when guns are used for defense the third option is by far the most common.
134 Delaware's Toughest Blogger // Jul 14, 2008 at 10:06 pm
Which is also entirely wrong. He has just shit on the second most precious gift God and Jesus gave him, life. He has decided that this penultimate gift is unworthy of protection or defense. Directly calling God and Jesus liars, because they said innocent life was to be defended. They said it in many places and in many guises, but DTB knows They were wrong.
what if I don’t believe in Dejesus? suppose he really was born to some delusional whore that was raped at 14 and instead of embarrassing her family she made up a story that an angel told her she never had sex?
I personally am more a fan of the Spaghetti Monster. As an Italian, Pasta is near and dear to my heart
135 BugSpray // Jul 14, 2008 at 10:08 pm
if I may intrude… An electric chair was designed to kill, even though it’s the electricity that accomplishes the deed. Ditto for the hangman’s noose and gas chamber.
DBT’s “ancient representation of compressed minerals” was not a killing instrument but through man’s manipulation it developed a sharp edge that was good for scraping meat from animal hides. It was also found efficient at inflicting lethal wounds with a lot less effort. Further evolution brought a plethora of sharp edged instruments. Swords, paring knives, scalpels, and shaving razors for example. while all of these can kill, few were designed with that purpose in mind.
Same with the evolution of firearms. When first used to propel objects at high velocity, killing was not the designed objective it was entertainment. Even when used as a weapon early in its development, killing was a side effect. The noise and smoke it produced was primarily meant to frighten and demoralize the enemy. DBT is correct that some guns are designed with killing as it main purpose. However, they are used to hunt animals, not humans. But they would also extinguish human life. (The British discovered that around 1776) But his blanket assertion all firearms are designed to kill is as false as saying everyone in Delaware is a conservative protestant.
Target pistols, signal guns and stun guns all propel objects at high speed and can kill but that is not their designed funtion. To argue otherwise is to display a bit of ignorance.
136 veroferitas // Jul 14, 2008 at 10:08 pm
Liberalgeek,
I’m an Army officer and have qualified with an M-16A2 and M-4.
The light 5.56 round will not generally blow off limbs. It is effective