“First they came for the semiautomatic rifles…”

Such was my thought when I read this:

Bushmasters and similar weapons…hold no allure for me…Ban those guns. Neuter them. I’m fine with it. I can hunt with my shotguns and my deer gun (although I’ve grown tired of hunting), and I can protect myself from miscreants with my trusty .38.

So, in other words, “I got mine, fuck the rest of you people.” Protect yourself from miscreants with that trusty .38? Sure you will…unless you need more than five or six rounds, then you’ll be up Shit Creek, won’t you, Sparky? You’ll deserve it too, you craven sellout.

And then I thought of the words of now-inactive gun blogger Geek With a .45:

“If you own a duck gun or a deer rifle, and see nothing wrong with the ‘Assault Weapons Ban’, I remind you that the Second Amendment is of sober and serious purpose that is not about your trivial right to entertain yourself with sports shooting.

“When they come for your duck gun, my battle rifle and I won’t be there to help you, because at that point, I either won’t have a battle rifle, or it’s shards will have been buried with me.”

“And if that came to pass because you were sitting on your ass, you won’t deserve any help either.”

Even less so, of course, if you were actively campaigning for a gun ban…

(h/t David Codrea)

Advertisements

Tags:

6 Responses to ““First they came for the semiautomatic rifles…””

  1. james Says:

    Like many progressives, they only support the rights that they themselves use.
    You either support the entire Constitution, or the whole thing falls apart piecemeal.

  2. That Guy Says:

    he is a Quizling or a useful idiot for the leftists.

  3. AeroDillo Says:

    The sad lesson here (and one that our side has been deathly slow to learn) is simple: not everybody who owns a gun is one of ours. Witness on various gun boards the assorted posts of “Well, I’m an NRA member and I agree with stricter gun control” or “This wouldn’t affect me at all – I don’t like black rifles” or “I believe in the right of Americans to hunt”.

    A while back I got into an argument with a Fudd on the subject. It ended abruptly when I told him that if he helped push through another AWB as one of Feinstein’s little Vichy, I’d turn around and do everything I could to curtail his hunting rights, shut down his skeet range, and make certain that while he might enjoy the shooting sports with his children now, the tradition would die with him because he wouldn’t be allowed to transfer his high-end shotguns to his children (no transfers without background checks, subject!).

    To which he asked in utter incredulity…

    “Why would you do that to a fellow gun owner?”

    I swear the Fudds are going to be the end of the Second Amendment. Moreso even than the barking moonbats in CA and MA and every other third-world shithole masquerading as a state in the union. Much like cancer is more dangerous than a hungry predator – the predator you know. You see it. You’ve got a chance to fight it. And if the predator moves on you, you GIVE IT THE FIGHT IT WANTS.

    …whereas cancer will destroy you passively, without firing a shot, without a single harsh word, without needing to do so much as lift a finger.

    Funny thing is…I’ve heard lots of Fudds call for an end to these military-style assault weapons with shoulder-things that go up and the hundred-round terrorist clips. I do not recall ever hearing a black-rifle enthusiast calling for an to end duck and deer hunting.

    Cancer. I think our side has it. We need better friends.

    • southtexaspistolero Says:

      Damned if you didn’t nail the ever-loving shit out of that one, dude.

    • Tom O'B Says:

      which guns does he have?
      the bolt action assault rifle of 1914?
      the multiple round shotgun that the Germans protested in the same war?
      the lever action assault rifle of 1864?

  4. TriggerFinger Says:

    There’s one more thing to remember.

    Yes, some gun owners are not on our side. Some are all too willing to sell out those whose tastes run to modern sporting firearms. When you’re talking to a friend or an acquaintance who you know hunts or target shoots, or maybe did once and has gotten out of it, that’s one thing.

    But when I see something written up in the newspaper, an editorial or an opinion piece or a letter to the editor… my first thought isn’t quisling. My first thought is liar.

    It’s easy to make a claim about what you own, or how long you have been an NRA member, or the number of points on the antlers of your first deer… if all you have to do is write it down or type it out.

    The antis have mastered the rhetorical technique of claiming to be one of the enemy in order to undermine them in public. False-flag operations are their bread and butter. They are paid to be deceptive little liars and their intent is to divide us against ourselves.

    Don’t let them.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: