Comments on: Another Ostensible Hero… http://thefatguy.com/2007/08/another-ostensible-hero/ Not-A-Pundit: Just a guy writing about food, music, books, and tractors Thu, 20 Nov 2008 16:49:47 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2 By: Phelps http://thefatguy.com/2007/08/another-ostensible-hero/#comment-307296 Phelps Wed, 05 Sep 2007 18:37:50 +0000 http://thefatguy.com/2007/08/another-ostensible-hero/#comment-307296 Hell, I wouldn't tell the Texas Monthly what time of day it is. They would misquote me whatever I said. Hell, I wouldn’t tell the Texas Monthly what time of day it is. They would misquote me whatever I said.

]]> By: The R Man http://thefatguy.com/2007/08/another-ostensible-hero/#comment-307176 The R Man Mon, 03 Sep 2007 20:07:26 +0000 http://thefatguy.com/2007/08/another-ostensible-hero/#comment-307176 Yep, gun-folk certainly need to watch what they say these days with regard to "controlling" anything, lest the legis-critters take the words and run with 'em. The R Man Yep, gun-folk certainly need to watch what they say these days with regard to “controlling” anything, lest the legis-critters take the words and run with ‘em.

The R Man

]]> By: TFG http://thefatguy.com/2007/08/another-ostensible-hero/#comment-307168 TFG Mon, 03 Sep 2007 14:07:26 +0000 http://thefatguy.com/2007/08/another-ostensible-hero/#comment-307168 Well, I tend to give him the benefit of the doubt on banning stuff, just because of the context of the discussion. One problem is that it will get twisted around by those with less than kind attitudes towards RKBA. However, I agree 100% that a gunner shouldn't ever be talking 'ban.' What galls me the most is the 'civilians' attitude. Too many of these guys get to thinking they're better than us 'civilians' because of their job. It's tiresome to me, and sets up an unnecessary adversarial relationship. Well, I tend to give him the benefit of the doubt on banning stuff, just because of the context of the discussion. One problem is that it will get twisted around by those with less than kind attitudes towards RKBA. However, I agree 100% that a gunner shouldn’t ever be talking ‘ban.’

What galls me the most is the ‘civilians’ attitude. Too many of these guys get to thinking they’re better than us ‘civilians’ because of their job. It’s tiresome to me, and sets up an unnecessary adversarial relationship.

]]> By: the pistolero http://thefatguy.com/2007/08/another-ostensible-hero/#comment-307158 the pistolero Mon, 03 Sep 2007 10:53:30 +0000 http://thefatguy.com/2007/08/another-ostensible-hero/#comment-307158 <blockquote>surely this guy was thinking of hunting and not talking about magazine bans.</blockquote> Even if that was the case, what would be the difference between what this guy said and what Jim Zumbo was getting at? Granted, Joaquin Jackson didn't go off calling them "terrorist magazines" -- but no matter the situation, I think that whenever the word "ban" gets trotted out in relation to boomsticks or related parts (whether it be magazines or full-auto sears), it can never be anything but bad.

surely this guy was thinking of hunting and not talking about magazine bans.

Even if that was the case, what would be the difference between what this guy said and what Jim Zumbo was getting at? Granted, Joaquin Jackson didn’t go off calling them “terrorist magazines” — but no matter the situation, I think that whenever the word “ban” gets trotted out in relation to boomsticks or related parts (whether it be magazines or full-auto sears), it can never be anything but bad.

]]> By: The R Man http://thefatguy.com/2007/08/another-ostensible-hero/#comment-307120 The R Man Sun, 02 Sep 2007 22:53:43 +0000 http://thefatguy.com/2007/08/another-ostensible-hero/#comment-307120 Y'know, it's odd, I really don't have a problem with Missouri's limit of 10 rounds in the magazine (for detachable magazines, I think built-in-magazines with more than that, like in an old Winchester 1873, are fine) for hunting deer, but I still think the 3-shot limit for all kinds of shotgun hunting is a little silly-surely this guy was thinking of hunting and not talking about magazine bans. I'm glad that the gunny-folk, however, are paying attention, as we need to, given the ramifications of what happens when, say, things like the 1994 "assault weapons ban" become law. Sorry, that was incoherent in extremis, but yeah, some "sporting" restrictions on capacity for hunting I guess don't bother me, and I don't see a constitutional crisis, but when The Man wants to limit the capacity of weapons I may have to use to shoot The Man if he dons his Jackboots to engage in some Jackbooted Thuggery, I smell a rat, maybe. The R Man Y’know, it’s odd, I really don’t have a problem with Missouri’s limit of 10 rounds in the magazine (for detachable magazines, I think built-in-magazines with more than that, like in an old Winchester 1873, are fine) for hunting deer, but I still think the 3-shot limit for all kinds of shotgun hunting is a little silly-surely this guy was thinking of hunting and not talking about magazine bans. I’m glad that the gunny-folk, however, are paying attention, as we need to, given the ramifications of what happens when, say, things like the 1994 “assault weapons ban” become law.

Sorry, that was incoherent in extremis, but yeah, some “sporting” restrictions on capacity for hunting I guess don’t bother me, and I don’t see a constitutional crisis, but when The Man wants to limit the capacity of weapons I may have to use to shoot The Man if he dons his Jackboots to engage in some Jackbooted Thuggery, I smell a rat, maybe.

The R Man

]]>