Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
These groups/magazines used to be run for the benefit of the sportsman now they are run for the benefit of the arms manufacturers themselves. Might as well just be sales brochures
Yeah people take 2A rights seriously and don't like it when people suggest that those rights should be restricted.
I can remember when liberals felt that way about the 1A.
The libs are not smart enough to realize that as the 2A rights greatly decrease, their 1A rights will start to erode.
Gee, you must be dumber than "The libs", as a "lib" I understand the fallacy of the slippery slope and I suspect many other liberals do too.
Otherwise known as the NRA. I suspect they were behind this.
This is like accusing Mr. Rogers of child abuse and canceling his television show.
The NRA is a pressure group for gun manufacturers and the article said the manufacturers were behind the guy's dismissal. Even if the NRA didn't "pull the trigger" on the guy, they certainly would have if they could have.
Right, because the NRA is a non-profit "focused on safety, education and responsibility" but actually they are just a big fucking lobbyist for gun manufacturers.
The NRA is a pressure group for gun manufacturers and the article said the manufacturers were behind the guy's dismissal. Even if the NRA didn't "pull the trigger" on the guy, they certainly would have if they could have.
Right, because the NRA is a non-profit "focused on safety, education and responsibility" but actually they are just a big fucking lobbyist for gun manufacturers.
Everybody is a lobbyist. You pool your money to try to get legislation that favors your agenda. The only time low information lefties scream "lobbyist" is when they don't like the agenda.
Or, when dealing with a fundamental right specifically protected by the constitution, is the legislation justified by a compelling state interest - something that is necessary or crucial for the state to function - and is it the least restructive means to meet that interest.The fact is, wrote Mr. Metcalf, who has taught history at Cornell and Yale, all constitutional rights are regulated, always have been, and need to be.
True.
As the Heller Court reaffirmed:
Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Courts opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.
Although our rights are inalienable they are not absolute, and are subject to reasonable restrictions by government, including the rights enshrined in the Second Amendment to argue otherwise is ignorant idiocy.
Consequently, the question is not whether Second Amendment rights might be subject to restrictions as clearly they may but which restrictions are appropriate and which are not.
And that determination is made in the same manner as other Constitutional rights: is there a rational basis for the restriction, is the restriction predicated on objective, documented facts and evidence, and does the restriction pursue a legitimate legislative end.
you want a real laugh at the hypocritical douchbaggery of the left.
Thread A - A&E was perfectly within their rights to fire Phil Robertson. He made statements that were not in line with the Views of the station
Thread B - OMG, lunatic gun fanatics fire the editor of a magazine for expressing an opposing view.
These groups/magazines used to be run for the benefit of the sportsman now they are run for the benefit of the arms manufacturers themselves. Might as well just be sales brochures
It's not surprising that NTPP doesn't grok a way of life in which everyone doesn't think exactly the same way.
your analogy there is totally wrong. but nice spin attemptyou want a real laugh at the hypocritical douchbaggery of the left.
Thread A - A&E was perfectly within their rights to fire Phil Robertson. He made statements that were not in line with the Views of the station
Thread B - OMG, lunatic gun fanatics fire the editor of a magazine for expressing an opposing view.
You have absolutely failed to understand what my post is about and what the NYT article is addressing.
To carry out your ignorant analogy: Duck hunters everywhere would turn against Phil Robertson for changing the lacquer finish on a duck call from high gloss to a matte.
Read the fucking article or STFU.
These groups/magazines used to be run for the benefit of the sportsman now they are run for the benefit of the arms manufacturers themselves. Might as well just be sales brochures
Yup. It's gotten ridiculous. I remember "Guns and Ammo" magazine in our house when I was a kid! I grew up in a house of hunters, freezers full of venison in the basement, and every kind of gun imaginable because my dad was a gunsmith.
Metcalf is to guns and hunting periodicals what Frommer is to travel. It's bizarre how far reaching the NRA is now. Well, here's another example:
NRA Releases Shooting Practice Game for Kids Aged Four and Up
NRA Releases Shooting Practice Game for Kids Aged Four and Up - US News and World Report
It's not surprising that NTPP doesn't grok a way of life in which everyone doesn't think exactly the same way.
What is grokking? Sounds like noises that come from inside your house, not mine.
A fact that liberals refuse to believe:remember, well regulated militia meant NOT regulated by the federal government. so that is another twist you gun grabbing morons can drop from your arguments
Not sure why or how any of this has meaning.
I guess anti-gun loons will grasp at anything.
Meet the Paula Deen of the gun control battle. Bahahahaha.....Love it. When they start throwing guys like this under the bus, you KNOW they are in deep kimchee with their fucking stupid 2nd Amendment illiteracy:
Banished for Questioning the Gospel of Guns
Mr. Metcalf was fired after a nuanced column in Guns & Ammo.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/05/b...he-gospel-of-guns.html?hpw&rref=business&_r=0
"""BARRY, Ill. The byline of Dick Metcalf, one of the countrys pre-eminent gun journalists, has gone missing. It has been removed from Guns & Ammo magazine, where his widely-read column once ran on the back page. He no longer stars on a popular television show about firearms. Gun companies have stopped flying him around the world and sending him the latest weapons to review.
In late October, Mr. Metcalf wrote a column that the magazine titled Lets Talk Limits, which debated gun laws. The fact is, wrote Mr. Metcalf, who has taught history at Cornell and Yale, all constitutional rights are regulated, always have been, and need to be."""
Oooops! Now he's toast.
I do not see how one guy getting fired = " they arer in deep kimchee "
I presume you mean those who read the entire second amendment and do not surgically excise the second part of it which clearly protects the rights of individual citizens not elites ( such as militia )
This is not just "one guy". "One guy" doesn't make the top fold of the Sunday NYT because he's for gun control. And this "guy" isn't. I presume you did not bother to read the article and the section about gun manufacturers.
Yeah people take 2A rights seriously and don't like it when people suggest that those rights should be restricted.
I can remember when liberals felt that way about the 1A.
This guy isn't just another gun control advocate, Bozo. Read the article.
I'm all for gun ownership and generally find most restrictions to be useless gestures but I will be damned if I will ever be able to identify with the fetishistic attitude some people have with their firearms.
