As promised, here's part 2 of our Big Dear Shitferbrains Clearance Sale, in which we'll clean out some of the sludge that has been fermenting in our comments queue. For this one, we'll scoop out some messages from assorted Gun Fondling Angerbears; next time, we'll get to the Bergdullards who love the Troops so much that they wish one of them had never come home.
I always thought at least PART of the idea of Open Carry was to scare the hell out of the "Bad Guys". The fact that it also scares the hell out of everybody else is what's called collateral damage.
But actually, the "right to carry" includes the right to shoot in Stand Your Ground cases. It's how Florida and other states implement the death penalty without expensive trials and death row lethal injections. It's still a trial by jury though. A jury of one who is holding the smoking gun.
I wanted to credit him with doing that, with doing what was required without any drama. But in case I didn't make my point clearly enough, let me repeat: I don't like where he has sited his range.
&quot;Let&rsquo;s give Yr Editrix the last word, from the Sekrit Wonket Chatcave: <blockquote><b>Rebecca S:</b> he seems nice [...]</blockquote>...&quot; I got the same unironic impression. Compared to most of the gun enthusiasts that are regularly quoted in this feature, Mr. Varrieur does seem to be sane, reasonable and at least somewhat considerate. If his range and operating parameters have indeed passed muster in inspections by all relevant authorities, then legally that should be the end of discussion. (Discussion regarding the legal status, that is. Presumably this includes no need for enforcement action regarding how it is operated either.) So he seems to be on solid ground there.
<blockquote><b>Rebecca S:</b> [...] but really!</blockquote> Yeah, that&#039;s the real nub of the issue. Even if it is legal and deemed to be safe, it is still an outdoor firearms shooting range, in a backyard, in a neighborhood development. Really? There is no other place where he could have set this up, perhaps in a location where his neighbors won&#039;t have to hear the pop-pop-pop of small caliber fire right outside their windows for an hour each week?
Yes, Mr. Varrieur, you may have taken pains to make your range legal and reasonably safe (from a regulatory standpoint). Strictly from that standpoint you&#039;re fine; if I lived in the area I might even request to join you in some shooting sometime. But I would still object to having the range right in a backyard in the middle of the neighborhood, for God&#039;s sake. I would urge you to move it to someplace a little further away from your neighbors&#039; houses, and further away from any occupied dwelling for that matter, for the sake of everyone&#039;s sanity.
We tried limiting it to reducing ammo capacity - make it just a <em>little</em> bit harder for some nutso to spray fire everywhere without reloading. But we can&#039;t even get that through. I&#039;m sorry, but if you need 30 rounds in your Glock to defend your home you&#039;re either a lousy shot or you expect a very large home invasion force.
I always thought at least PART of the idea of Open Carry was to scare the hell out of the &quot;Bad Guys&quot;. The fact that it also scares the hell out of everybody else is what&#039;s called collateral damage.
<i>&quot;In fact, a citizen with a gun makes you more safe even than a police officer with a gun.&quot; </i>
In your dreams nut job. I would never feel safer if someone with a gun walked into a movie theatre or restaurant or down my street.
Threatening families is how right wingers spit on soldiers coming home.
Reasonably safe is how he chooses restaurants too. Why spend more at a place that <i>exceeds</i> sanitation standards?
And Christianist bakers from making ghey wedding cakes. Or employers from providing level-set health insurance for their eligible employees.
<i>&quot;Why is it that gun control extremest always are concerned about the penis size...&quot;</i>
I have never felt the need to own a gun.
But actually, the &quot;right to carry&quot; includes the right to shoot in Stand Your Ground cases. It&#039;s how Florida and other states implement the death penalty without expensive trials and death row lethal injections. It&#039;s still a trial by jury though. A jury of one who is holding the smoking gun.
Full automatic stupid really should be illegal. And I don&#039;t see nothing in the Constitution that says otherwise.
That first burst of gunfire is a sure sign of aggression, or carelessness, or malice. Often it&#039;s the first sign, which is the problem.
I wanted to credit him with doing that, with doing what was required without any drama. But in case I didn&#039;t make my point clearly enough, let me repeat: I don&#039;t like where he has sited his range.
&quot;Let&rsquo;s give Yr Editrix the last word, from the Sekrit Wonket Chatcave: <blockquote><b>Rebecca S:</b> he seems nice [...]</blockquote>...&quot; I got the same unironic impression. Compared to most of the gun enthusiasts that are regularly quoted in this feature, Mr. Varrieur does seem to be sane, reasonable and at least somewhat considerate. If his range and operating parameters have indeed passed muster in inspections by all relevant authorities, then legally that should be the end of discussion. (Discussion regarding the legal status, that is. Presumably this includes no need for enforcement action regarding how it is operated either.) So he seems to be on solid ground there.
<blockquote><b>Rebecca S:</b> [...] but really!</blockquote> Yeah, that&#039;s the real nub of the issue. Even if it is legal and deemed to be safe, it is still an outdoor firearms shooting range, in a backyard, in a neighborhood development. Really? There is no other place where he could have set this up, perhaps in a location where his neighbors won&#039;t have to hear the pop-pop-pop of small caliber fire right outside their windows for an hour each week?
Yes, Mr. Varrieur, you may have taken pains to make your range legal and reasonably safe (from a regulatory standpoint). Strictly from that standpoint you&#039;re fine; if I lived in the area I might even request to join you in some shooting sometime. But I would still object to having the range right in a backyard in the middle of the neighborhood, for God&#039;s sake. I would urge you to move it to someplace a little further away from your neighbors&#039; houses, and further away from any occupied dwelling for that matter, for the sake of everyone&#039;s sanity.
&quot;Original intent&quot; must surely limit it to smooth-bore muzzle-loading flintlock muskets, right?
Does that idiot Varrieur even realize that what he&#039;s doing is illegal in Singapore?
Eggzactly. Did these clowns all sleep through American History class?
Teenage boy+Penthouse=absolutely not
We tried limiting it to reducing ammo capacity - make it just a <em>little</em> bit harder for some nutso to spray fire everywhere without reloading. But we can&#039;t even get that through. I&#039;m sorry, but if you need 30 rounds in your Glock to defend your home you&#039;re either a lousy shot or you expect a very large home invasion force.