Police-Style Rifles

Ahab and Uncle point out that when a deranged police officer goes on a rampage, it’s a police-style rifle, not a high-powered baby killing assault rifle.

David Hardy notes that the silence from the anti-gun community over this whole incident is deafening.  Not surprising.   It would interfere with their narrative that all the specialized firearms training that they claim police officers get makes them immune from the same human failings as the rest of us, and thus they can be trusted with guns, while the rest of us cannot.

18 Responses to “Police-Style Rifles”

  1. Jadegold says:

    Once more, Dave Hardy demonstrates an aversion to facts. GunGuys, for example, has discussed the tragedy.

    The fact is this was a 20 year old kid. What the tragedy highlights is the fact better screening is needed for all law enforcement officers. In this case, the kid wasn’t psychologically screened–something that is done at many police and law enforcement agencies. Of course, this also would mean we need better screening for all gunowners.

  2. thirdpower says:

    Ah yes, Gonzo the “GunGuy”. That bastion of factual information on fully-auto AK’s purchased by civilians. He can’t even get his facts straight on state laws.
    “Oregon is among states that allow people with a permit to carry concealed weapons into public buildings.”

    “Since when does a teacher get to unilaterally decide — over state law”

    Now show us where the VPC, BC, or Coalition have brought it up.

    BTW. A 20yr old is not a “kid” except in hoplophobe-speak.

  3. Jadegold says:

    Again, “Gun Guys” is certainly more factual than any gunloon. And the fact is Dave Hardy has been proven wrong.

  4. Sebastian says:

    *chuckle* None of us really pay any attention to Gun Guys Jade.

  5. thirdpower says:

    JG is so cute when he’s wrong.

  6. Michael says:

    Can you really say that you’re shocked by this. I know that I am not by any means. It just goes to show us the anti’s have an agenda against private law abiding citizens owning guns.

  7. Sebastian says:

    We don’t pay any attention to Gun Guys because his rhetoric is just so over the top and factually questionable, it’s not even worth the time or energy. Even the Brady guys get a lot more respect from me than Gonzo, because at least Peter and Paul know how to intelligently message their issue, and understand enough about their opponents to exploit real weaknesses. Gonzo is just a joke.

  8. thirdpower says:

    A funny little bit of contradiction from Gonzo. He remarked on the IGOLD day by saying it wasn’t really “grassroots” because they provided busses from various locations. Yet he lauded Jessie Jackson’s “nationwide” protests even though the two largest turnouts, get this, bussed people in. And they still had less people.

    Lest we forget his turnaround on the NICS improvement act after he received his marching orders.

  9. Linoge says:

    I suppose it would be too much to ask for the simple intellectual and journalistic honesty of calling the firearm what it really is: a semi-automatic rifle. You could even throw in “modelled after the current M-16 rifle employed by the US military” if you really wanted to.

    But this yellow-journalism crap of assigning arbitrary monikers to firearms just to sway the hearts of those who are reading the articles (“Police-style rifle? Oh, then it must be ok for the police to use! Assault rifle!? Why would a civilian ever need an assault rifle!?”) is dishonesty of a rather high degree. William Randolph Hearst would be proud, and I am quite sure Michael Moore is.

    As an aside, “one does not a statistic make”. I notice Mr. Hardy did not mention the Gun Guys in his post (while someone did point them out in a later comment). Perhaps they are sufficiently low on the totem pole that they slipped under his radar? No wonder, considering how dishonest they can be.

  10. Jadegold says:

    It’s fine that you pay no attention to “Gun Guys,” Sebastian. But to claim the ‘anti-gun’ sites are silent on a particular issue when it’s clearly not the case–that’s called a ‘lie.’

    Unless, of course, you’re trying to make the argument you can’t read.

  11. SayUncle says:

    “GunGuys, for example, has discussed the tragedy.”

    Who cares? No one reads gonzo.

  12. Clint says:

    Fallacious argumentation: the arsenal of the troll.

    Sebastian never claimed that all the anti-gun sites are silent. He said, “David Hardy notes that the silence from the anti-gun community over this whole incident is deafening,” cited quote being linked to David hardy’s article which states, “We hear from the Brady Campaign, which might be expect to cite the case, or at least post a press release expressing their condolences… the sound of silence.” He continues in the next paragraph, “The same sound prevails at the Violence Policy Center. And at the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence.”

    Now, I suppose one could read into Sebastian’s statement that he was talking about ALL the anti-gun sites, meaning every MySpace account, Blogger, etc., etc. in the same way the European community refers to Americans as “gun-toting cowboys.” One could do so but it would be pure hyperbole. I mean, I would assume tht JadeGold does not tote a gun and I… well… I don’t own a cow!

    Therefore what JadeGold has presented is an Argument by Selective Reading. This is very common on message boards where weaker debators nip at the heels of more versed opponents. Jadegold’s repeated use of fallacious arguments and impotent posturing demonstrate he has nothing to really add to the conversation, but he gets a few clicks to his web site from posting here. If it were not for the platform that this site provides, he may become as obscure as the Gonzo himself.

    Were he truly interested in the discussion, he may come up with a reason the Brady bunch, the VPC and the Coalition have remained silent. His own silence on the issue shows he has no answer, or at least none that would satisfy his own position.

    Please note, I speak of him (her?) in third person as I have little time or patience for trolls. They generally just seek attention and the internet is their best (or only) medium for obtaining it. Just like any other parasite, if the host is no longer feeding it, it will move on in due time.

  13. Jadegold says:

    I see Clint is making the argument that “deafening silence” doesn’t mean silence at all. It really means ‘sort of’ or ‘kinda’ silent.

    Which, of course, is akin to being a little pregnant.

    The real logical fallacy here is one of False Dilemma:

    Dave Hardy and Quislings: The anti-gun sites are deafening silent on the the shooting in Wisconsin.

    JG and Truth: Not so–“Gun Guys’ discusses the shooting.

    Quislings: We can’t hear “Gun Guys”–Lalalalalalalalalala!

    Clint: JG is a bad person for mistaking “deafening silence” for..well, you know…actual silence. I will now discuss logical fallacies without having clue one as to what one is.

  14. I think that pointing to Gonzo and saying his “discussion” of the incident in question undermines Hardy’s point is giving Gonzo entirely too much credibility, but that’s just me. I mean, he’s like the village idiot on crack who wandered out in the woods and is just ranting away…we know he’s out there, but compared to the idiots who stayed in town and HAVE been silent (in this particular analogy those would be the three biggest anti-gun organizations in the country), do his rantings really amount to that much? Of course not. And where are these “facts” that Gonzo uses?
    “You keep using that word. I do not means what you think it means.”

  15. the above should have read…
    “You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.”

  16. Linoge says:

    Funny how the core issue of silence on the part of the three largest anti-rights communities out there has been buried (or at least partially smuged) by a pointless and idiotic semantical debate.

    Oh. Wait. That was the whole point of it… Silly me.

  17. Nomen Nescio says:

    seconded on the 20-year-olds are not kids note. i spent my 20th birthday in uniform, carrying an AK-47 in some cold, wet woodlands playing soldier. i may have been a stupid juvenile (i certainly was a late bloomer) but even i hadn’t been a “kid” for years by that point.