You’re Probably an Anti-Gun Extremist If …

Our opponents seem to be channeling Jeff Foxworthy. Well, two can play at this game. Let’s give it a go. You’re probably an anti-gun extremist if …

  1. You think the Second Amendment was written to protect state militia’s rather than the individuals who compromised them. Lately you’ve changed your tune, and grudgingly accepted it protects your right to have a gun in your home, but only because the activist wing-nut Supreme Court made it the law of the land.
  2. You wet your pants at the idea that gun manufacturers are responding to market demand by making guns in different colors.
  3. You a .410 inch hole in a target is acceptable, but a .50 caliber hole is just insanity, because you know nothing about exterior ballistics or firearms.
  4. You think criminals are deterred by background checks. When evidence shows they can get around it, you say the solution is we need another law criminals won’t follow.
  5. You argue that an assault rifle is distinguishable from a hunting rifle because you’re ignorant and don’t know the definition of either. Because the assault rifle looks scary, clearly it’s different.
  6. You think firearms training should be required, but outlawed.
  7. You call anyone who disagrees with you  an “insurrectionist,” “mentally ill,” “extremist,” or in need of a “good therapist.”
  8. You argue that the main purpose of a silencer is exactly what you’ve seen in movies, and believe it actually makes a gun silent.
  9. You think children are anyone under 21, and shouldn’t be able to say gun, let along touch one.
  10. You don’t believe there’s any such thing as a justifiable homicide if it involves a gun.
  11. You think a citizen’s paramilitary militia is a body of completely psychotic and deranged individuals rather than people who are concerned about government following the constitution and who like to play army in the woods.
  12. You don’t believe in “due process” for fundamental constitutional rights, at least if the amendment that protects it starts with a “2.”
  13. You believe any flawed science and statistical analysis anyone puts in front of you because you know nothing of science and statistics and the analyses confirms your biases.
  14. You are unconcerned about the rash of home invasions by jackbooted government agents using military tactics to serve warrants on non-violent offenders.
  15. You label pro-gun advocates as people who are unconcerned about criminal access to guns because pro-gun advocates don’t accept you’re solutions actually work.

And unlike Mr. Odinson, I have provided links to show our opponents actually do believe those things. I was going to link to the 50 Caliber Terror website, but I notice, like most of the rest of the gun control movement, it’s become defunct.

Related posts (automatically generated):

  1. Things a Gun Shop Employee Never Wants to Hear
  2. You wouldn’t expect a law professor …
  3. More on Snuffy

14 thoughts on “You’re Probably an Anti-Gun Extremist If …”

  3. There’s that old saying, “Don’t feed the trolls”. These anti groups are just trolls.

  4. Most of the sites like ’50caliberterror’ are gone as they were part of the Freedom States Alliance (FSA) which folded into SUPGV.

  5. You may be an anti-gun extremist if you come up with a ridiculous theory, with no support even from left-wing psychiatrists, that guns are a substitute penis–and, based on this, demand that their guns be confiscated (because men or women with small penises automatically forfeit their constitutional rights.

    You may be an anti-gun extremist if you hold the view not only that there is no constitutional right to keep and bear arms, but additionally hold the view that by merely touching a gun, you sacrifice all other rights as well. (Brady II would have subjected gun owners to regular house inspections).

    You may be an anti-gun extremist if you call a person a “hero” who hid under a desk, so that a mass murderer would shoot others instead of him.

    You may be an anti-gun extremist if you regularly slander gun owners and call for their deaths.

    And the biggest one of all…

    You may be an anti-gun extremist if you get 19 comments, and one is by a Brady Bunch leader, two are by a well-known troll who is guilty of stolen valor, three are by yourself, and 13 are by pro-gunners who linked to your site from gun blogs that made fun of your stupidity.

  7. Kenno, why do you accuse that troll of stolen valor? I ask because I have had some run-ins with that particular character in the past over the extent of his service to the nation, and what you say wouldn’t surprise me in the least.

  8. I had to laugh at Japete’s comment:

    “And isn’t it interesting that the pro gun extremists started commenting in concert with what you wrote?”

    ZombiesOMG!!! The RightWingNuts disagree with you!!! And they agree with each other!!! And they make comments!!!! Reasoned comments, the HORROR!!! Those devious BASTARDS!!!!

    From her blog profile, she’s in education. I weep for any students exposed to her.

  10. Colin: see the site whoisjadegold.blogspot.com. Basically, he claims to have graduated from a “federal military academy,” yet there is no academy that has both his supposed major (naval architecture/engineering) and minor (law). Also he claims to have served in two foreign wars, when the only war he could possibly have served in was the First Gulf War.

  11. Thanks for that info. I’d heard he was a Merchant Marine grad, which doesn’t exactly square with his claims of being a combat vet in exchanges with me. He’s such a pompous, self-righteous windbag. Got all pissed off when I started calling him Guy Cabot, and especially when I switched to Guy KKKabot (as he definitely has a bit of an elitist, racist streak, not to mention the racist roots of the gun control he loves). But he has no problem outing our gracious host here, among others. Loser.

  12. Kenno, there is a federal Merchant Marine Academy (Kings Point) that would have those majors, as well as at least 1 state run school (SUNY Maritime).

  13. 1. You think the Second Amendment was written to protect state militia’s rather than the individuals who compromised them.

    Should read comprised, not compromised.

  14. And to be even more pedantic. A component (individuals) does not comprise of the whole (militias). The militias comprise of the individuals.

Comments are closed.