Politics: Where we struggle to kneel in the muck.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Yes. I let retards vote. I don't know why you keep thinking I'm trying to limit your rights.

Actually, Hank, I don't believe you have any limits.

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally posted by Say_hello_for_me
Yes, watching citizens fulfill their constitutional and state-granted rights must be scary to liberal politicians.

Between this and dismissing the murder charges against Muhammad, this was certainly a banner week for Virginia gun nuts.

As a Californian, I'm all for my state's citizens exercising their legislatively granted rights. Sadly, my Attorney General does not always see that as a matter of principle, as you and I do. Neither does my governor.

[Adder]

Originally posted by Say_hello_for_me
But carrying a gun is not, in and of itself, suspicious.

Perhaps not to you...

Stuff like, "it was scary" (paraphrase, I think), etc....

You must really be a macho American if a gang of angry people with guns is not at all scary to you.

[Say_hello_for_me]

Originally posted by Adder
Perhaps not to you...

Uhm, perhaps not to most people in the state of VA, if they made it lawful to carry certain guns openly without permit, and some concealed with permit.

And, I hate to tell you this, but people could always call the police for a suspicious person (and even mention the person has a weapon, as that is relevant information).

But the law isn't about that. Its about telling government employees to call the police. Mandating that government employees call the police. For people engaging in a lawful activity. In a county with one of the lowest comparable crime rates in the nation.

Don't get me wrong, I guess I can see why Democrats get spooked by people carrying guns. Its not like there are a whole lotta law-abiding Democratic gun owners. In fact, that is such a funny term I think I'm going to reuse it.

He(ya ain't guarding the door, so whatchu got a gun for)llo

[Say_hello_for_me]

Originally posted by Adder
You must really be a macho American if a gang of angry people with guns is not at all scary to you.

You must be a lil skirt if a gang of smily Republicans acting lawfully scares you.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by Say_hello_for_me
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...-2004Oct1.html

Gotta admit, this is sorta funny in context. Fairfax county VA, home of the NRA. Falls Church (local) gov't drafts a policy that municipal employees should call the police whenever someone walks into a gov't building carrying a firearm. Nothing more req'd.

THe thing is, Virginia has an open-carry law for some types of guns, and a concealed carry law (which I favor, at least in comparison). So 30 gun-types go to the next city council meeting openly carrying guns. Good times ensue!

They make a point, not strong, but a point. Their point is, they agree that gov't employees and all others should call the police whenever they see something that they believe is truly suspicious (which I agree with, its way better than waiting for crimes to occur, and locals are often the best judge of what is suspicious). But carrying a gun is not, in and of itself, suspicious.

Virginians seem to think that Northern Virginia is not really part of the rest of the state (and the rest of the state is pretty hard-core old school conservative and law-abiding I'd add). So I'm sure the rest of the state is getting a good kick out of the Falls Church city council being quoted in this article. Stuff like, "it was scary" (paraphrase, I think), etc....

Yes, watching citizens fulfill their constitutional and state-granted rights must be scary to liberal politicians. I know some of y'all won't see the humor in this, but I thought it was pretty funny.

Hello

Just to be clear here, you're saying you are opposed to the government gathering information about the activities of citizens where the government has no reason to suspect them of unlawful behavior?

Good, so am I; I consider laws like this invasive and unconstitutional. I expect you'll stand with us against the Patriot Act. (Feel free to bring your gun).

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by Adder
You must really be a macho American if a gang of angry people with guns is not at all scary to you.

Actually, I think this is more a regional thing. Suburbanites of all stripes, R's included, tend to be afraid of guns. Where I grew up, if you wanted to see 30 people with guns you just had to look in the parking lot of the nearest VFW post and you'd see the drunks heading back to their trucks with gunracks, half of them with unsecured guns just sitting there.

But since we all knew none of those guys could shoot straight, it really wasn't scary at all.

[Say_hello_for_me]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
Just to be clear here, you're saying you are opposed to the government gathering information about the activities of citizens where the government has no reason to suspect them of unlawful behavior?

Good, so am I; I consider laws like this invasive and unconstitutional. I expect you'll stand with us against the Patriot Act. (Feel free to bring your gun).

Believe it or not, I thought some aspects (as I understand them) of the Patriot Act were the obvious response to the issue. If the government has "no reason" (which I read as no specific reason not based solely any one or more of race, creed, color or national origin), than the G should not be doing one thing to single out an individual. Its funny sometimes that some of y'all Democrats are sometimes at least party Right.

As examples of what I oppose:
The LA roundup of two years ago, based solely on national origin of illegal immigrants. Don't get me wrong, I'm not opposed to rounding up and deporting illegal immigrants (or registering them, or anything but ignoring them and pretending they don't exist). I'm against rounding up and deporting (in the LA region's case, jailing) illegal immigrants solely because they were from Iran or Syria. Thankfully, the public reacted with scorn and the Bush administration called it a mere misunderstanding (which I'll believe when I see elephphants fly... one of the reasons I fucking hate John Ashcroft).

I don't oppose specific targeted inquiries based on subject matter though, even without any other tie to an individual. I don't have a problem with the government searching library records and seeing who is checking out Mein Kampf, Pogroms for Dummies, or anything by Al Franken (ok, that's hyperbole), and identifying some (hopefully combination of more than one) things as "suspicious".

I've taught entire classes on "suspicion" before, and there is oftent a legitimate basis for an individual to have individualized alarm. Its way better than teaching classes on "plugging bullet holes" or "scraping bodies off the pavement after someone jumps 100 stories from a burning building".

Hello

[Say_hello_for_me]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
Actually, I think this is more a regional thing. Suburbanites of all stripes, R's included, tend to be afraid of guns. Where I grew up, if you wanted to see 30 people with guns you just had to look in the parking lot of the nearest VFW post and you'd see the drunks heading back to their trucks with gunracks, half of them with unsecured guns just sitting there.

But since we all knew none of those guys could shoot straight, it really wasn't scary at all.

Pretty much exactly right. West side of Chicago or Southeast DC, I'm ducking. Despite my position, I'll note that I don't currently carry or even own/possess a gun, and don't plan to in the future. Never did particularly like being around em.

You are right about the suburbanites too (generally speaking), even in VA. Personally, I think a happy compromise would be a permitted concealed-carry law everywhere. And I think the U.S. government ought to encourage some citizens to obtain the permits and carry weapons. Particularly, veterans without criminal or mental history flags. But I myself would probably do a double take if I saw a couple walking their dog wit .45s strapped to their waists. Not opposed to them having or carrying them, but psychologically I think I'd be more comfy if they just weren't advertising and flaunting them. And if I'm not perfectly psychologically comfy with it, I guarantee that 98% of Americans who are not as Right as me aren't either. As an example, what are these people in Falls Church gonna do when 30 young black guys (hopefully lawyers) go walking down Route 7 carrying guns? Or, for that matter, what are these people anywhere else in Virginia outside the DC 'burbs gonna do. I'd bet the open-carry law would be gone within 6 months if it happened in 4 or 5 times in rural areas. All in all, sort of an interesting topic occurring in NoVa these days.

Hello

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally posted by Say_hello_for_me
And, I hate to tell you this, but people could always call the police for a suspicious person (and even mention the person has a weapon, as that is relevant information).

It's funny that you want to eliminate one of the objective factors showing dangerousness, in favor of a whole mess of subjective ones. Can you at least allow us to call the cops if we see a person with an unholstered sidearm?

BTW, there are some lawyers in San Francisco that owe their lives to a "man with a gun" call. If the 911 responders had been quicker, perhaps all of their colleagues would be alive today.

Don't get me wrong, I guess I can see why Democrats get spooked by people carrying guns. Its not like there are a whole lotta law-abiding Democratic gun owners.

I wonder if Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris would have grown up to be Ds, or Rs?

There are Democratic gun owners on this board. No idea whether they qualify as "law-abiding"; personally speaking some of the sex I had in my red-state college was a Class 3 felony at the time.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
I wonder if Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris would have grown up to be Ds, or Rs?

Michael Moore didn't blame them for much in that movie, so I'd bet they were Dems.

sex I had in my red-state college was a Class 3 felony at the time.

That still illegal in California too, isn't it?

god, I remember spring term at OSU. Every morning, you looking at your bacon, bemoaning the vagaries of young love and wondering if it was "her."

[SlaveNoMore]

Atticus Grinch
If the 911 responders had been quicker, perhaps all of their colleagues would be alive today.

I hope to god you aren't trying to say here what I think you're saying.

[Say_hello_for_me]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
It's funny that you want to eliminate one of the objective factors showing dangerousness, in favor of a whole mess of subjective ones. Can you at least allow us to call the cops if we see a person with an unholstered sidearm?

BTW, there are some lawyers in San Francisco that owe their lives to a "man with a gun" call. If the 911 responders had been quicker, perhaps all of their colleagues would be alive today.

Its funny that your justification for objective factors which trump constitutional rights would just as easily allow calls for a "black man walking freely" or a "person in drag" call type. And sure for the "unholstered" sidearm, as somebody better damn well have a good reason to be handling a gun in public.

As for the San Francisco types, if liberals had allowed the deceased to carry guns, perhaps the deceased wouldn't be deceased. Ironic that.

As it is, the police are busy pretty much wherever there are Democrats, so ya can't really count on them too much, promises of Democratic politicians notwithstanding. And are ya sure it wasn't a Shots Fired or Person Shot call that they owe their lives too? It sounds like you might have some knowledge of whatever situation you are talking about.

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
I wonder if Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris would have grown up to be Ds, or Rs?

Hard to say. Given their disposition towards lawlessness, what do you think the statistics would say?

[SlaveNoMore]

Now we know how Kerry - according to some of you - "won" last week's debate.

He cheated

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Now we know how Kerry - according to some of you - "won" last week's debate.

He cheated

See you at the inauguration, Slave.