Capitol Hill Blue Forums Political Issues Guns When Gun Control Freaks Go Wild:-)

Nothing wrong with "differing, numan. Nothing wrong with you emigrating from a place with which you are unhappy. Nothing wrong with you not owning a firearm. It is good that you are willing to make choices that you have a right to make. I respect your right to not exercise your right to own and use a firearm.

Hopefully, you are willing to allow me the same right to choose. Seems fair.:-)
Yours in full control of my inner fascist,
Issodhos

Assuming for the moment that free choice is not an illusion foisted upon you by your inner fascist.

"Gun control freaks" has only been used once, and it is basically a spoof on the use of derogatory terms used against those who choose to privately own and use firearms. I thought it was time to "give back" round about the time a thread went up in this forum entitled "Gun nuts accessories to murder?" when the killings at Virginia Tech took place. None of you had any problem with that thread title. Add to that the routine attempts to marginalize a gun owner by saying that he is compensating for sexual inadequacies, seeking an "extention", 'looking for trouble" and other things the "haters" (sorry, couldn't help myself:-)) in the forum and elsewhere write, I will forgive myself for the "gun-control freaks" spoof.:-)

Once again, I happy to support your right to not exercise the right to privately own and use firearms. Try to not deny me that choice.
Yours in hopes of getting along,
Issodhos

Could you provide an illustration of "derogatory terms used against those who choose to privately own and use firearms." To my understanding there are more elements than that required before those terms have been applied.

issodhos, whether a phrase is used once or a hundred times, if it's inaccurate, it's inaccurate. In my case, it's inaccurate and I spoke up.

As for the use of "gun nut" - I am not in the habit of using derogatory remarks about gun users, but in my view the man at Virginia Tech was a disturbed armed man, which is not all that far from "gun nut," impolite as it may be. The same is true of the shooter at the Omaha mall, and those at Columbine and Red Lake and DeKalb and École Polytechnique and Erfurt and, yes, the man in Pittsburgh. I'll stop here, although I could easily go further.

However, should I at any time use that phrase in reference to responsible gun owners, particularly my friends on this site, you would be right to correct me. Catching me may be a problem.

As for allowing you your rights - we interpret the 2nd Amendment differently and always will. My voting for stricter gun control is, in my view, not an infringement of your rights. You will of course disagree. That discussion is for another time and place.

Oh, I am not apologizing for its usage, Mellowicious. And I am not interested in any post-parsing and fine tuning of terms previously used in other threads over the past few years.

But, I do promise you that I will continue to support your rights, whether they are freedom of expression, due process, privacy, or the right to privately own and use firearms.

By the way, the 2nd amendment is merely a restriction against the federal government infringing on a pre-existing right. I certainly do not rely on it as a basis for the right to privately own and use firearms.:-)
Yours,
Issodhos

There is a search function going back at least a year, Ardy. Avail yourself of it if you wish.
Yours,
Issodhos

Onus is on you, iss. You brought it up, you provide the evidence. Otherwise, it's just an empty claim.

In Isshodos's defence i do remember that thread title. was it the title of an article?

however, making fun in general of gun enthusiasts really is the exception here, as far as i can recall.

one swallow does not make a blo.. erm summer

but i could indeed be wrong.

Actual gun nuts are fair game, as are all crazies.

oh, Schlack, c'mon - you got something against non-violent crazies?