My Gunt Rant in Response to a Former FB 'Friend'
A former FB friend (yes, I just unfriended him) posted a rambling diatribe about right to own multiple firearms, touting his military service and injuries, etc. His post was accompanied by photos of his guns, including one of what I assume is his young (10-12) daughter holding up a rifle with a multi-round clip in it, grinning from ear to ear. I posted the following:
"Attention gun owners - YOU ARE NOT UNDER ATTACK. Your need to post photos of you with your guns, your children with your guns, or your grandchildren posing with your numerous pieces of weaponry is a little self-aggrandizing and somewhat disturbing. The 2nd Amendment (as ratified by the States) says, "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." The Supreme Court in its decisions in 2008 and 2010 stated 'the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess a firearm, unconnected to service in a militia and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.' Hear that? TRADITONALLY LAWFUL PURPOSES. If you want to collect firearms 'just because' and never use them against someone other than in self defense, then you are no more a threat to me than Grandma down the street who collects cow creamers or pink doilies. However, and here's a big HOWEVER ... because your firearm collection in the hands of a nutcase could be used against me at some point in the future, it is your freaking responsibility to keep your 'collection' out of the hands of said nutcases. So if you want to play with YOUR collection on YOUR property and can guarantee that YOUR collection doesn't affect me in ANY way, then go for it. I will assume that your firearms will have locks on the triggers and all rifles will be in locked gun cases or gun safes, unless of course you are operating them or posing for the aforesaid photos with the grandbabies. BUT, if you get your jollies from collecting assault rifles with large magazines which serve no purpose other than to make you feel 'important' or to compensate for some inadequacy on your part, then this does not apply to you. You don't need a gazillion-shot clip to make you a special snowflake, nor do you need it to provide food for your family. You are a danger to this country and its citizens, and all your blustering about 2nd Amendment rights or serving in the military doesn't make you right."
I am losing FB 'friends' faster than Mitt Romney post-election. 
= new reply since forum marked as read
I, too, have been disgusted with the gratuitous posing with weapons as though they're toys, or even some new form of fashion accessory.
I especially enjoyed "I am losing FB 'friends' faster than Mitt Romney post-election."
Just this very evening I've been having a FB argument with a "friend" who will probably become a "former friend" soon. But I'm also getting some seriously fun, supportive comments from some of my REAL FB friends.
Excellent post!
are sending them over in droves aren't they? Pity is, none of them have anything new to say and just keep repeating NRA/Gungeon talking points. The right-wing thinks that they "win" arguments by talking louder and more often that their opponents.
That's why they lose elections, and are on the verge of losing even more. They will also lose this "gunz are gud because I sed so" legislative battle as well. Public opinion has turned, and they are skeered...
I'm too tired to worry about making this post DU3 compliant, but do you know what's up with the many pro-gun newbies obviously joining to post NRA talking points?
I realize there are already many DUers who are against gun control, but why are so many joining since Newtown? Do they really think they're going to change anyone's mind here on DU?
It's like one of us going to FR to post pro-choice arguments.
Waste of time, it seems.
Interesting about the recruitment efforts. Didn't think of that possibility.
and spends his every waking hour figuring out how he can break into your garage.
That's why.
It wasn't paranoia - it was preparedness.
Living in the city, I have access to very competent city and county law-enforcement agencies that I trust to keep the peace, and our murder rates have been declining over the past few years despite what some would call lax gun regulations. But when I venture out into the middle of nowhere as I am sometimes inclined to do, with the nearest thing resembling a town being half an hour's drive away, some measure of preparedness is in order. You might consider a 30-round magazine "overkill," and for all I know, you could be right. But very few military experts that I know of, if asked, have ever felt that a shotgun would be adequate preparation if they found themselves isolated from civilization and facing uncertain odds. I have to trust that they know of which they speak.
But granted, I see where you're coming from. It's all good. 
special? God bless your little NRA heart for coming all the way over here from "Gunz R' Us" to educate we poor, stupid, Democrats.
Exactly where in the 2nd Amendment does it say that you "can buy a weapon with a high capacity magazine" as a "right?" Here's a hint -- it doesn't, and when the legislation is passed to regulate that "right" let's talk again.
Y'all come back. Heah?...
Well done. 
Probably didn't make a dent in his thick head, but well done anyway.
