Bitter Better Dump Me Soon!

Or, if CNN is to be believed, I’m going to kill her any minute! Criminal Profiler Pat Brown says that having guns should be a “big red flag” that any guy they are dating is a potential psychopath.


Oh well, at least they didn’t mention that we also all have small penises, as long as they were dragging out the unfounded stereotypes. But someone who does criminal profiling for a living, should at least know that just because criminals have an interest in weapons, that doesn’t translate into an interest in weapons making one a criminal. It’s statements like these that made me reluctant to tell any dates that I owned guns and enjoyed shooting.

UPDATE: Turns out she has a blog. Perusing through, it seems she falls into the “reasonable restrictions” category:

While I personally believe in the right to own guns and the right to carry them to protect yourself, I also believe we have a responsibility as a society and as citizens to be serious about gun ownership. We should be required to have a background check, one which checks criminal, behavioral, and mental status. In other words, this should be a solid check so that people like Cho who exhibit frightening behavior and are on antidepressant meds aren’t considered citizens safe enough to be gun owners. The owner should also have to go through strong training in gun safety and sign a document that accepts full responsibility for the gun, that if the weapon is used by anyone other than the owner in a criminal act, the owner will also be liable for prosecution.

I know plenty of people who are on anti-depressants that are no danger to anybody. She should think about what she’s saying! Is someone who breaks into my house and steals a gun going to cause me to be responsible for his criminal acts? Or does she just mean knowingly transferring a firearm to someone else to commit a crime? In the former case, that’s just ridiculous, in the latter case, that’s already illegal. It’s doubly illegal for those of us in Pennsylvania, and a lot of other states.

UPDATE: If anyone has problems viewing the video, please say so in the comments. I’m aware of at least one person who can’t view it, and if there are others it would help troubleshoot the problem.

UPDATE: Pat Brown has responded in the comments.  In light of her clarifications, I think we can safely say she just misspoke, and didn’t intend to malign gun owners.

22 thoughts on “Bitter Better Dump Me Soon!”

  1. *snorts*

    Define large.
    Define a collection (is there a difference between collecting firearms and acquiring firearms?)

    Ironically, the abusive possessive asshole that I dated was into neither guns nor knives. He was however Italian and from Philly, so that’s probably what did it.

    Oh and my best friend from HS (who as far as I know hasn’t killed anyone yet, but that’s just based on the fact that he hasn’t a) told me or b) been caught if he has) had about 25 handguns. 4 riles and many shotguns while we were in High School (okay, so the handguns were in someone else’s name, but they were his when he turned 21 and he had access to them in the safe in the basement. THey were his grandfather’s who had passed away already. Silly grandfather not waiting to die until the grandson was 21 :))

    But hey, gotta make large sweeping generalizations.

  2. I couldn’t view it in your blog this morning. I was using Firefox, so I don’t know if that made a difference. I had to get the URL and paste it into the address bar.

  3. I shocked….totally and completely shocked, I tell you.

    You mean folks are STILL WATCHING CNN?????????


    That’s mind blowing……….

  4. Sooo if the criminal sells his guns he can then date her daughter. That makes him ‘safe’ to her. Hmmmm

  5. I guess I am a psychopath as well, but I according to Pat Brown I have alot of company. 100 million fellow Americans, who own firearms, and who must be psychopaths, who desire nothing but power over other people, and all of our military folks, who obviously join the military because they are psychopaths who enjoy the sense of power over others.

    Pat Brown has joined all the other anti-gunners in stating that she supports the 2nd Amendment and the right to keep and bear arms, while at the same time supporting all the gun controls that infringe that right and that have the sole purpose of destroying that right, just as the right has been destroyed in England, Australia, and other countries. The best way to destroy the right to keep and bear arms in America, is to state your support for the right and then go about destroying it. This seems to be the strategy in destroying many of our liberties we enjoy as Americans.

  6. CNN just goes to prove that there are also psychopaths who seem to take advantage of the 1st amendment rights, but hey! just try talking about reigning those in and watch’em go psycho-rabid.

  7. Help me folks, I not only own guns, but I own knives and bows and really heavy flashlights. I can’t stand the realization that I might pop off at any moment. Oh horrors, I’ve just realized that I own an attack cat. Suicide, that’s the answer. /_______ fill in just about anything that describes the situation. Sarc. for one.

  8. Wasn’t it just a few months ago when I got wailed on by the left during the Virginia Tech massacre for suggesting kids should carry guns to school to protect themselves? Sometime during the many interviews I did that week I said something to the effect that if we allowed concealed carry on campuses maybe someone would have taken Cho out. I am a big fan of concealed carry because I know criminals carry concealed weapons all the time and I would like to even the field with some honest citizens carrying a few themselves so criminals don’t think no one will shoot back. I think of how many lives would be saved if only someone in the school or company could defend against mass murderers instead of allowing these killers from mowing down a bunch of sitting ducks who are desperately try to hide behind furniture to save their lives.

    Now, after doing interviews on the Jesse Davis murder, those from the right are taking one statement out of context and going nuts about it. It seems they think that I believe any man who owns a gun is a danger to women. If I thought that, I guess I would be talking about my own father and my own son. They have guns for personal protection. For that matter, my daughter has guns for personal protection and I also own firearms for personal protection. I am all for gun ownership for personal protection. Clearly, I was not saying a man with a gun is a psychopath.

    Nor was I saying a man who might have a collection of guns is a psychopath. I know many of these men as well. They are hunters or lovers of antiques or do a lot of target shooting. What I was talking about during the Paula Zahn Show was the combination of psychopathic behavior and an obsession with weaponry as psychopath love weapons as it gives them a feeling of power and control. Psychopaths do indeed have a fascination with guns and knives and just because the rest of us might happen to own weapons or even have a number of them as a hobby doesn’t eliminate the fact that psychopaths may also be shopping at the gun store with us.

    Women must learn to differentiate between psychological healthy men and unpsychologically healthy men if they want to keep from getting into a dangerous life threatening situation. No one trait will be proof that an individual is a psychopath but add a bunch of traits together and this is a warning. A kind, honorable, honest man with a gun collection is not a psychopath or a danger to anyone but a lying, manipulative, arrogant creep who has a cache of twenty weapons is someone a woman wants to get the hell away from. A man who teaches history at the local junior high school and happens to have a collection of Asian swords is not someone a woman should be frightened of but a man who obsessively watches ninja flicks, brags about how he used to be in the CIA, can’t keep a job, calls women sluts and whores, and owns a huge collection of swords and daggers, now there is a guy a woman wants should avoid like the plague.

    Anyone who watched the actual Paula Zahn Show and paid attention to the whole conversation and intent would clearly know I was not labeling gun owners psychopaths. Unfortunately, when words are taken out of context and printed on the Internet, often the meaning of those words get misunderstood. I apologize to any gun owners (who aren’t psychopaths) who thought they were the target of my statements. I respect your constitutional rights to own firearms and would never want to see those taken away. I, like you, want to be sure I can protect myself and my family. I wouldn’t want it any other way.

    Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

  9. Ya know, folks, if you would stop picking out a piece of a sentence to focus on, a lot of your anger might dissipate.

    I didn’t say people on an antidepressant couldn’t own a gun. I said that Cho exhibiting scary behavior AND was the fact that he was on antidepressants should be a red flag to gun ownership. In other words, there should be a system that requires citizens to exhibit responsible behavior in order to receive a permit to own a gun. This is why felons aren’t supposed to have them. They have exhibited such concerning behavior that putting a gun in their hands (with our blessings) seems a bit ridiculous.

    Now, to the second misinterpretation about gun owners being held responsible for what happens with their guns. I said their gun is used in a crime the owner will also be liable for prosecution. Liable meaning “subject to the possibility” of prosecution. If it is proven the gun was stolen from a locked container or vehicle, this is obviously a different matter. The gun owner was acting responsibly by locking up his weapon and if he reports it stolen, then he is not liable. However, if he leaves his weapons all over the house and his kid “borrows” them to shoot up a school, I am sorry, but I think he ought to go down with the kid, at least as aiding and abetting. Owning a weapon is not the same thing as owning a plant. A firearm is designed to kill beings and we who own them ought to recognize that this is their purpose. Therefore, while we should have the right to own a gun to protect ourselves, we also should be required to be responsible to be the only one who pulls the trigger under the proper situation of defending one’s life or the life of another. I don’t think this is unreasonable. My guns are locked up or on me and, barring break-in and theft of the lockbox, no one is going to be touching them.

    Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

  10. Thanks for the comments. I’ve posted your first comment as a separate post, which is making its way around the blogosphere now. It would appear that we misunderstood you. I’m hoping everyone picks up the comments, and we get this cleared up.

  11. Well Ms. Brown,
    After I read your first response I thought that I had misunderstood your position. But, after reading your second response I realized that I was right.

    Many anti-gunners claim that they support the right to keep and bear arms but they support “reasonable regulation.” That seems to be your position. If you indeed support the 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms than you really need to research the issue better because you are wrong in many respects in regards to the 2nd Amendment. I don’t know much about you or your views or where you are from, but my guess is you are from some anti-gun urban area or some anti-gun state. Just a guess, I may very well be wrong.

    Let me go over why you hold views that are contrary to the 2nd Amendment. You stated “there should be a system that requires citizens to exhibit responsible behavior in order to receive a permit to own a gun.” I live in a state where a person does not need a permit to own a fiream. Requiring a permit or license to own a firearm turns the right into a privalege. This is unconstitutional to require someone to get a permit to own a firearm. If you believe someone needs a permit to own a firearm then you are anti-gun and might as well be working for Sarah Brady herself.

    You also stated that if a “gun is used in a crime the owner will also be liable for prosecution.” You basically state that a firearm owner must store a firearm locked up and if he doesn’t and his firearm is stolen and he doesn’t report it stolen then he may be held responsible for the acts of criminals. This is a very anti-gun position. I have the right to store my firearms in my home unlocked and readily accessible for use. For the government to require otherwise is an infringement of the right to keep and bear arms. Responsible firearms owner should keep their firearms inaccessible to unauthorized users who live in their homes, but what you stated goes quite a bit above that. You are anti-gun and you don’t understand what the difference is between a right and a privalege. Perhaps you support civilians owning firearms, but you don’t support the right to keep and bear arms; at least not any more than Sarah Brady herself.

  12. It looks to me like she’s from Minneapolis, which might be an anti-gun city, but not an anti-gun state, and they have preemption. I think it’s a stretch to call her anti-gun. Ms. Brown and I would certainly have our disagreements, as I have disagreements with many of you, but I generally reserve anti-gun for people who hate them and would just rather see them made illegal, or so heavily restricted that for all practical purpose, it’s not worth the bother. I think it’s pretty clear she may accept more restrictions than you or I would, but most people would fall into that category, even most gun owners.

Comments are closed.