search
top

Condemning the Converted

I’m not sure this accusation hurled at MikeB is all that indicative of hypocrisy, any more than it would be hypocritical for someone who is anti-gun to suddenly take up shooting and become pro-gun. People can change their minds about things over time. That he once had a gun illegally also does not raise great alarm, since Mike used to live in NJ, having an illegal gun could be as trivial as owning a Marlin Model 60, which is an assault weapon in New Jersey. About half my collection is currently unlawful in the State of New Jersey, and completely unlawful in New York City.

There’s a lot of legitimate criticism that can be leveled at MikeB, but the fact that he once owned guns, even illegal guns, I don’t think is really damning, any more than if a shooter admitted that he was once afraid of guns and favored gun control.

14 Responses to “Condemning the Converted”

  1. Wolfwood says:

    Let’s not forget that just because he thinks he owned a weapon illegally doesn’t mean that he actually did. I’m sure plenty of people think that buying in a private transaction is black market and that you bought it illegally (which, depending on the state, may be true).

  2. Weer'd Beard says:

    +1 MikeB is a liar, so i have my doubts if this is a true admission, or just another whopper he cooked up.

    Still advocating stricter gun laws, and blathering about the “Flow” of guns from lawful citizens to criminals, meanwhile admitting those laws didn’t do jack to stop him IS quite hypocritical.

    Thanks for the Link, BTW!

  3. Sebastian says:

    I wouldn’t worry too much about it Weer’d. I’m not convinced the reaction isn’t what he seeks.

  4. Weer'd Beard says:

    Oh and also MikeB’s responce to any questioning of his past ownership is greeted with silence, and where possible deletion.

    I openly admit I cheered when the ’94 AWB passed, and thought people who carried were paranoid hicks.

    I have no shame of my past mistakes, but now I use my experiences to help others better understand the cause.

    MikeB’s actions are certainly a horse of a different color.

  5. Bob S. says:

    Sebastian,

    It isn’t just the illegal ownership that is the problem. It is the hypocrisy and double standards displayed continually by MikeB.

    He said he doesn’t allow personal attacks (unless they happen to be against people his dislikes) yet he attacked Weer’d for calling him on his illegal ownership.

    He’s told “stories” about his friend or himself being married to a former muslim and was called on the lie.

    If he is lying about some many things, this is something people should know in order to evaluate his motivates. Should we trust someone who says he only wants “minor inconveniences” or “reasonable restrictions” if they aren’t honest about many other things?

  6. I think my old .22LR single-action revolver might be legal in NJ. I don’t think anything else of mine is.

  7. This might not be an overly important issue as it ends up just being arguing on the Internet but alas it’s certainly a strike against MikeB.

    The fact he possibly owned guns at one point in time is a non-issue in my book but illegally owning them could mean many things. If he provided some explanation as to how those guns were illegally owned that would be one thing. But MikeB has pretty much stated that he won’t divulge further information on the subject leading us to speculate.

    Considering his past tendency to exaggerate or flat out lie I am going to agree with the camp that states he’s lying about this as well.

    Either way as I said this is arguing on the Internet. To me the only time it’s worth brining up anything MikeB says is when he’s lying about actual second amendment issues. When he possibly fabricates something about his life it’s just something to laugh at. If this is proved to be a lie then it’s another example to use to shoe he is a bold faced liar.

  8. Linoge says:

    Honestly, I could not give a flying squirrel’s left nut about whether or not MikeB converted from one side of the spectrum to the other – that is not what this issue boils down to for me. For me, it is actually quite simple.

    Regardless of what we think of certain laws, MikeB openly and freely admitted to illegally owning firearms in the past. This makes him a criminal. I think laws against recreational drugs are stupid, too, but if I break those laws, I am still a criminal. There are no “shades of grey” in this kind of situation.

    Then, MikeB has, in the past, repeatedly denied ever making that admission, and additionally has repeatedly denied ever illegally owning firearms. Regardless of the truth of the original claim, the former is a lie, and either the latter or the original claim is a lie. Again, there are no “shades of grey” here.

    Those two facts, taken in and of themselves, thoroughly destroy whatever credibility MikeB may have ever thought he had, and by his own hand, at that. Why is a criminal clamoring for more laws intentionally and solely created to inconvenience and punish the law-abiding, if he, himself, has shown that he already does not obey the laws on the books? Why should we believe anything written by a person who would contradict himself on something so easily verifiable?

    Just those two points are more than sufficient for me, but the claim of hypocrisy is still valid, while having absolutely nothing to do with MikeB having a change of heart. Is it not hypocritical to castigate firearm-owners for breaking the law, when he broke the law himself (by his own admission)? Is it not hypocritical to question, denigrate, and impugn studies from such authoritative sources as the FBI and BATFE, yet believe, without even the shadow of a doubt, studies from the VPC and Brady Bunch? Is it not hypocritical to make a grandiose statement concerning no longer allowing personal attacks on your weblog, and deleting comments supposedly employing those personal attacks, but still leaving other comments that include personal attacks when they just happen to support your own biases?

    And even dispensing with all of that, is it not just plain dastardly for an admitted criminal to try and make law-abiding American citizens into criminals themselves just for daring to exercise their natural, Constitutionally-protected rights?

    MikeB may be lying about illegally owning firearms in his past (and I tend to believe he is), but that, in and of itself, is damning as well – the extent to which he lies, and the manner in which he does so, calls into question every single thing he has ever said or claimed. And that is something that deserves to be publicized, regardless of how or why he changed his mind aout certain topics.

  9. Hank Archer says:

    I’m willing to give Mike a pass here, at least until he provides more info. Part of the problem with gun laws is that it is very had not to do something “illegal” whether it’s driving past a school, bar, park, etc. going to the range with more than x rounds, owning something your father gave you after the laws changed and so forth. The laws are so arcane and convoluted that no matter how much you want to follow them it sometimes is actually impossible.

  10. Roberta X says:

    The guy is just into getting beat up on the Internet and I’m not all that willing to play. All my good leather is in storage anyhow.

  11. Weer'd Beard says:

    LOL for Roberta!

  12. B Smith says:

    MikeB is a troll, and I’ve yet to read anything of his that wasn’t a waste of time. Like any vehemently anti-gun nut, he’s not going to be persuaded, no matter how clear the argument, no matter how scintillating the logic… why waste the limited time we are allotted?

    @Roberta… call me? :-D

  13. Clint says:

    My 2 cents…

    “Either he lied about doing it or he lied about not doing it.”
    Not really. Sadly MOST people do not look at denying a lie to be, in fact, lying.

    And there is the problem. MB is not talking to us, he is talking to “most people.” Those who will give him a free pass. The fence sitters who visit these blogs and see all this gunny goodness and, Hey, maybe guns aren’t evil after all, and… WAIT! MB has a point… people cannot be trusted.

    Us gunnies believe that we should outlaw crime, not guns. MB thinks we should outlaw guns not crime.

    It is already illegals for criminals to get guns. We thinks these laws are good. MB does not.

    So when MB “says” that he owned illegal guns he is “demonstrating” that he, or anyone, can get a gun IF it is there for the taking.

    He is PROVING the laws are useless and therefore the only way to keep guns away from criminals is to remove the guns.

    So stop calling MB a hypocrite; it trivializes what he does.

    Because you see, MB is NOT being a hypocrite FOR THE MESSAGE HE IS SPREADING.

    This makes him far more dangerous.

  14. Clint says:

    Something I just thought of… the less MB confirms, the more we speculate, the more we speculate, the more likely we are to be wrong. If we make a mountain out of a molehill we look like idiots. And the more we fuss over this stuff the sillier we look. As we get upset we look angry and bitter. We are figuratively shooting ourselves in the foot!

    MB is playing us all for saps…

top