search
top

Dishonest Turds

That’s what I’d call Joe Biden, Obama and his panel. See this Tweet from Larry Keene of NSSF. Apparently they promised no media, and when NRA and NSSF showed up, there were cameras and media. You know, if you follow certain theories floating around out there, that can work two ways, Joe.

These Kabuki rituals are tiresome. I’d would be nice if we were the kind of country that valued honest interaction, and it was considered socially acceptable to drop a fresh deuce right there on the conference table, in response to what American gun owners thought of the Administration’s ideas. We used to be a country whose lawmakers would challenge each other to duels, and fist fights on the House floor were commonplace.

22 Responses to “Dishonest Turds”

  1. Trevor Shepherd says:

    Follow my thought here for a moment because it does pertain to firearms and the proposed bans: Obama will fight like hell on the upcoming debt ceiling negotiations. He will fight with the Republicans like a cornered cat, and he’ll fight hard right up to the last possible moment when it will seem like the whole nation will go into default. Then, he will declare to the Republicans that they’ve finally beat him at his own game, they’ve bested the best, they’ve won. He’ll cave in to the Republicans on some trivial point at the very last moment and make them think that they won and he lost. All the Republicans will need to do now is take their bill to the House floor for a vote and pass it to cement their “victory over Obama.” And then, right before the vote, the Democrats and their Republican allies will slip the gun control measures into some obscure paragraph of the debt ceiling bill and watch with glee as the Republicans vote to pass the bill, with glee. Then the Democrat Senate will “deem that the House passed the bill” and away we go with new gun control. Mark my words, that is how they will do it. Mark my words.

    • the dude says:

      That… is plausible and terrifying. I’m a little more worried about executive orders, but that’s kinda like worrying about what color dildo the guy behind you is holding- we’re getting screwed no matter what. Guess it’ll be time for some boating accidents in a few years, eh?

      On another note, duels and fistfights in congress would probably get more people watching C-span, and thus educated AND entertained. I know I would.

      • Sebastian says:

        A kind of sad thought is that if we settled these things by a Joe Biden, James J. Baker cage match, I’d almost find that preferable to the pace of this. At least it would be over quickly.

  2. Chas says:

    We are too poorly armed in this “national conversation” on guns. Really, what weapons we have determines where we sit at the conversation table. Our side doesn’t have any saber to rattle. Maybe a pocket knife, with a legal-length blade, nonautomatic type. Our modern muskets don’t carry the weight that they used to. Our .gov has flying death machines that can eat us for breakfast. We have been by and large disarmed, as the .gov has made enormous increases in weaponry. If they start rounding us up for the death camps, there will be an Apache helicopter providing them with cover, or maybe a Predator drone. We get nothing.
    As an American, I want a machine gun that shoots bullets as big as a fire hose. I get a puny AR, if I can keep it, but they are trying hard to take even that.

    • The politicians may not realize this, but many of the folks serving realize that Iraq and Afghanistan were not cakewalks despite application of overwhelming military advantages.

    • Akatsukami says:

      “Hey Rube”
      “Irish Republican Army”
      “Forest Brethren”

      Google is your friend.

      • Andy B. says:

        Ah, the ‘RA and the Miska Brolis. Finally, someone who knows who to study! :-)

        Labas, and Tiocfaidh A’r La’ — Oglaigh na hEireann Abu!

    • Harold says:

      Indeed, you’re being an Eeyore at best by assuming, if it comes to this, that we’ll play by the other sides rules. Our adversaries in the GWOT didn’t, and last time I checked we’re losing in Afghanistan.

    • Sebastian says:

      I don’t think automatic fire is all that useful for the individual solider. In fact, I would not underestimate the damage determined and skilled men could do with a Bolt-Action M1903.

      • Andy B. says:

        IMO the primary use of full-auto fire in individual weapons is for fire suppression, to enable squad maneuvering. If you really are an “individual soldier,” the best weapon probably is the best sniper weapon, fired from a long, long range.

        I had a contraband selector for my M-14 in the Army, but never an opportunity to try it with live ammo — only blanks in the night, then run like hell before the cadre came to see who was able to fire full auto. I believe selectors never were issued to most troops, as the M-14 was said to by uncontrollable. I’m sure that was true.

        • Harold says:

          As Jeff Cooper related in one or more books, if you’re an individual soldier, i.e. all by yourself, one of the best ways to be effective and survive is to “shoot and scoot”. He related the story of a British seaman in WWI who was rescued and captured by a damaged German ship, a cruiser I think, and this would probably be after the Battle of Jutland.

          It holed up in something like a fjord for repairs, and he managed to escape with a Mauser 189x. The terrain provided plenty of concealment but precious little cover from the ships guns, so he’d fire one shot at the work crews and the scoot. The Germans would fire … wherever, it’s very hard to detect where one supersonic bullet is coming from, failed to stop him, and eventually had to give up.

          Or so I remember the story; in any event, it fits right into the Scout rifle concept, or a not too heavy sniper rifle, if you’ve got suitable terrain and other circumstances. The idea is to encourage survivable combat, vs. staying in place and ripping through assault or battle rifle magazines.

    • Jethro says:

      It’s also worth considering that it’s an entirely different matter when your own industrial base is rebelling.

      We’re the folk that make their drones in the first place too.

    • J says:

      Having been on the other end of that equation I can tell you that most of our high dollar systems are not all that great at fighting an insurgency. At the end of the day, a determined insurgency with talented leadership and the support of some of the populace can easily overcome the asymmetries in equipment, arms and logistics.

      Of course, you are assuming that our military will engage in combat operations CONUS. I do not believe that to be true.

      I won’t provide TTPs on the Interwebs but conventional military formations have a very wide variety of weaknesses that can be exploited. Your fears are not unfounded but I assure you that there are plenty of insurgents in Iraq, A’Stan, the Philippines and other garden spots that will die of old age. If the crap hits the fan here, the same will be true for us.

  3. None says:

    Rule 1: Assume the other side is lying each and every time.
    Rule 2: Make your plans based on being lied to each and every time.

  4. Name says:

    The NRA should have known better than to even acknowledge Biden in the first place.

    • BigHayden says:

      They were damned either way. If they would have ignored the whole farce commission, they would’ve been portraited in the media as “not wanting to be a part of the solution” and could therefore be ignored. They did the best they could with the hand they were dealt.

      • Andy B. says:

        As I suggested last night, I don’t see the media handing the NRA any laurels this morning, for “cooperating,” so perhaps it would have been better to send a militant message. Our squishes are going to squish anyway, and the hardliners need encouragement.

        • Sebastian says:

          It’s kabuki theater. If you don’t participate, you end up looking like the obstinate party. Neither side wants to appear that way, so they agree to the kabuki. Both sides come to the table, go through the ritual, and then each side spins it to their respective constituencies in the way that benefits them. It’s oddly one of those things that benefits both parties to do, and it happens because neither side wants to look unreasonable, and both benefit more from the ritual than they would without it.

          • Andy B. says:

            “If you don’t participate, you end up looking like the obstinate party.”

            Maybe the surprise factor of looking obstinate for a change would have had some value. :-)

  5. countertop says:

    Do we know which “sportsmen” groups participated? They had a meeting seperate from the NRA.

    • Bitter says:

      According to this story:

      Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies
      BlueWater Strategies
      Bull Moose Sportsmen’s Alliance Action Fund
      Ducks Unlimited
      Outdoor Industry Association
      Pheasants Forever
      Teddy Roosevelt Conservation Partnership
      Wildlife Management Institute
      Defense Small Arms Advisory Council
      Firearms Import/Export Roundtable
      Independent Firearm Owners Association
      National Rifle Association of America
      National Shooting Sports Foundation
      National Association of Arms Shows

  6. jerry says:

    Indeed, fist fights and duels were not unheard of. One senator was even treated to a severe caning for comments better left unsaid.

top