« Anyone have a need for a historian or programmer? | Main | Canada may scrap registration of long guns »
Washington Post notices ammo shortage
Story here. Stuck record quote of the day:
"The high sales have alarmed some anti-gun groups. Josh Sugarmann of the Violence Policy Center said he worries about a revival of the anti-government militia movement of the Clinton era.
"This is a pattern that is repeating itself, and it is a pattern that has tremendous risk attached to it," Sugarmann said."
8 Comments | Leave a comment
Self-fulfilling prophecy Sugarman. Beat us down and we damn well beat back.
Sugarmann's tactic is to play on people's misunderstandings and ignorance.
Of course, everyone acknowledges that there is a "resistance to tyranny" purpose to the second amendment ... but only a few understand that our friend Sugarmann will foment this "Insurrectionist's Amendment" argument as far as he can in order to vilify gun owners and minimize the rights guaranteed by the 2A.
I remember one conversation I had with an anti-gunner, when the legislature was debating a shall-issue carry law.
I asked if he really afraid of me shooting him.
He answered "yes".
He seemed to think that "then don't climb in my window in the middle of the night" was somehow an unfair response.
If Sugarman is really so worried about government tyranny resulting in insurrection, he could consider no longer advocating tyrannical government actions...
The "Clinton era militia movement" was a non-event anyway. Although the media tried to make the "militia movement" sound scary, ultimately they didn't do anything, there were no breaches of the peace, no attacks, no violence toward others, in short nothing. This is just more fearmongering from Sugarman.
I like to ask the question, "How many guns do I have to put in this room before YOU shoot ME?"
They usually answer with some flip, "I don't know what are you going to do to me?"
Exactly. It has NOTHING to do with the object, but everything do with the intent of the PERSON. The number of guns doesn't matter. So long as you have just ONE you can defend yourself.
The "tremendous risk" is only a risk to the person who buys "too many" guns or "too much" ammo. At some magical tipping point, it becomes an "arsenal" or a "cache" of "weapons" - or even worse, "military-style" or "high-powered" weapons.
That's when you get the visit from BATFE, who will first shoot your dog, because we all know Snuffy and Pookie present such a significant threat to the guys wearing full body armor and carrying full-auto M-4s and MP-5s. Then, if you do not immediately lie down with your hands behind your back, they'll shoot you, ala Randy Weaver's wife.
The only question is what is that number that is "too much." I recall a news story from maybe a year or two ago in which the talking bobble head on the news used the "arsenal" word to describe, as I recall, seven, or maybe twelve, guns taken from a raid on a guy's house. But then again, it was in either NY or NJ, can't remember which. Up there, if you have more than one or two guns, you're a gun nut and it's a scary arsenal.
When the people are afraid of the government you have tyranny and when the government is afraid of the people you have freedom!
Hey, it only has risk for politicians who ignore the Constitution and abuse the sovereign people, (as in "We, The People..."), right? And how many of those are out there, really?
(crickets chirping)
Hey, I'm not threatenin'..., I'm just sayin'...