Democrat Hypocrisy / one example: Gun Laws

There are many Democrats wanting to outlaw guns. There are many Democrats who own guns and do not want to outlaw them. Gun control and gun outlawry are two seperate issues. I have not read the article, but, while "you people" are trying to lump all Democrats into one, there are too many of them to be able to do that.

Re: Democrat Hypocrisy / one example: Gun Laws


Have you considered the possibility that Miles voted against the bill not because he wanted "to outlaw guns", but because he thought the existing laws were sufficient?

Wouldn't that be an obvious conclusion, given that

- the new, stronger law (that he opposed) is not yet in effect
- Miles was nevertheless able to defend himself
- no charges have been filed against Miles

???

Re: Democrat Hypocrisy / one example: Gun Laws

I hadn't heard that Rudy Giuliani was no longer a republican. but really okie that's neither here nor there. What I always find interesting about your posts is they are totally lacking in reason such as "liberal celebrities" seems to be a buzzword for you to have a psychotic break. In some obscure sort of way I can agree with you. but in reality, if I had been the mayor of New York City I would have been pretty damn restrictive about guns myself. Had I been mayor of Farmington New Mexico I wouldn't even consider gun control laws as a relevant issue. All really a matter of perspective for me in that one's environment does have a bearing on issues. You know like the arsrnic in the ground water out here in the west (from mining) just wasn't an issue to G W Bush (he signed an executive order eliminating arsenic clean-up because it wasn't a national issue) I would guess Okie that living in OklaDamnHoma there aren't too many gun control laws for you to be aroused about but if you lived say in Connecticut and hunters wanted to use a 30-06 for deer hunting in densely populated areas you might have a different opinion whether or not you were a "liberal celebrity' or just another redneck jerkoff. I am a gun owner Okie and have been all my life but you and your ilk cjhsa offering irrational rants about "liberals" and gun control really just make our gun ownership more and more tenious because you consistently come across as being nuts and dangerous.

No, he opposes the castle doctrine, yet claimed the same right for himself, though it'w not clear he was actually in danger from the person stealing that copper wire from his construction site. I have no trouble agreeing that he's a hypocrite.

With the new Texas law it will be (kind of) legal to kill people who mistakenly come to the door, before it was illegal.

What oe said: Miles thought that the old law was good enough.

I would surmise that I don't know if he is a hypocrite or not (inadequate information provided) however, I would not be at all surprised to find that he was indeed a hypocrite (he is an elected politician) The premise of Okies that I disagree with is his consistent bundling of "liberal" = evil. What we do know is that this politician is an elected democrat (hardly defines one as a "liberal." I personally know of many democrats that are far far far from being "liberals" and as I noted above Rudy is a republican who supports restrictive gun control laws (he is not the only one) Okie continues to post bullshit which support his own myopic understanding of the world he lives in.

The article said that he saw two men trying to steal the copper, and after confronting them one of the men threw a pocketknife at him.

<shrugs>

Also, if Miles wasn't arrested for claiming castle doctrine right - even though the new law that was supposedly necessary to allow for that is not yet effective - it would seem as if the existing laws were sufficient in this case. Or that the Texas police is doing a sloppy job when it comes to arresting people who are breaking the law.

Either way, claiming that Miles falls into the category of "liberal celebrities and politicians that want to outlaw guns" doesn't really seem to hold water. Or at least it would be kind of hard to draw that conclusion merely from the facts provided in the article.

Sorry, OE. I misread the article to say he pulled a pocket knife, not threw it. Still, once the knife was thrown, can we assume he was throwing down on an unarmed man with a coil of copper wire in his hand? This is still okay with me, but I might wish he hadn't opposed legislation that would have given the same rights to the rest of the people residing in Texas.

Walter, I doubt it would be legal to off someone who comes to the door. The typical castle doctrines (haven't read the one in Texas) does not require the householder to flee a housebreaker from one room to another, and finally abandon the house to their assailant. That has been a requirement in some states. In other words, you could be required to flee, gun in hand, till further flight is physically impossible.

I'll agree that equating liberal, and or Democrate with favoring further gun control is an error, as are most other generalizations.

Okie, you'd probably consider me a liberal, but don't for one second think that you'd make it more than few steps inside my house with malfeasance on your mind without staring down the barrel of a 12 gauge.

As a card-carrying Librul Demon-crat, and a secret member of the Communist Party (Ooops ! ! !), who believes in forced abortions, forced homosexual marriages, and a free welfare-queen ride for as many promiscuous teen-aged Latina illegal immigrants as we can fit into Tuscon, Phoenix and Los Angeles--i'm gonna shoot the first conservative son-of-a-bytch who gets in my way.

So far Roger, I guess you are the only one that gets it.