As a “liberal” on social issues, and an economic conservative, and a gun owner, I have trouble with both the NRA positions and outright “banners” who know as little about weapons, and responsibility, as Wayne La PIerre.
Hunting, “sport shooting”, yes-self defense, rightful and sensible. Giving guns to nuts, as in going outside that “well-regulated” edict, and claiming every nut should get a gun, also makes no sense at all.
NO law in the U.S., of the roughly 300 “gun laws” that actually exist, not the fanciful numbers NRA claims, is adequate to keep “nuts” from getting guns. Those declared mentally incompetent, and having been COMMITTED, or those who have displayed illegal tendencies, like having restraining orders against them, aren’t SUPPOSED to get guns, but, the real danger is the undeclared nut with generally , a handgun, NOT the much maligned, and basically useless for “regular purposes” poorly named “assault rifle”.
Most homicides and suicides are with HAND GUNS, though Hemmingway did the “gruesomes” with his shotgun. (Boy, do THEY ever make a mess!) It’s the concealable handgun where most of the “well-regulated” needs to be done. My state’s concealed carry permit process is quite adequate, and having to renew every 4 years is also a good idea, and it doesn’t infringe on any actual “rights” of sane, non-cirminal, citizens. It’s like getting your driver’s license, for a weapon that IS becoming as deadly as our cars.
Editorial cartoonists should make it a point to learn about their subject before they spew out ignorant blobs of phlegm like this. Trayvon didn’t have to run away from Zimmerman when he saw him. He also did not have to come back. As far as racism goes: of the two of them only Trayvon was heard using racial slurs that night.
Panel 1 has references to the NRA. See the button on his lapel. Panel 4 has references to the character liking to kill black teens. Panel 3 I will allow you is non partisan in that he says he likes hunting teens. We could argue the fact that the character has already been portrayed as a gun ower and that he is meant to represent a group as opposed to one individual. But I’ll just concede the point on that one.
So it’s actually panels 1, 2, 4, 5, and 6. Which would be the majority of the cartoon.
In the future, please try to make an argument that includes all the facts. Not just the ones you cherry pick in order to avoid seeing the strawman the cartoonist constructed.
I didn’t claim victimhood. I said I didn’t agree with the cartoon’s insinuation that all gun owners are racists. Actually I don’t own a gun.
And yes, a pin on a cartoon character is usually a device to identify a character with a certain group. There are numerous examples of this all over these political cartoon pages. I see no reason why this cartoon would be exempted from that assumption, other than that if we don’t, your argument looses some weight.
‘Brazen’? Wow. I haven’t been called that in years. Thanks. it makes me feel younger.
What’s funny is you’ve just made the point I was making. That Zimmerman is not all gun owners. Of course you did it in sort of a nutty way. But hey. As long as you’re agreeing with me, go nuts.
Nope. Still think Britt is making a wide accusation without a basis. Most of your arguments are semantics and hair splitting. If you aren’t a lawyer in real life, you would make a fine one. That’s not meant as an insult. Simiply an observation.
And it’s kind of funny that you would accuse anyone of engaging in hyperbolic rhetoric.
I will definitely concede that some of the pro Zimmerman comments were outrageous.
I appreciate the respect. Thank you. I don’t think you are absolutist as much as you are kind of an ‘argument shark’. You see blood and go for it. A number of people in my family are the same way. Nothing wrong with it. But it can be fun to stir the pot on occasion.
warjoski Premium Member almost 11 years ago
Zimmerman is one guy. One. Not all gun owners are racists.
rockngolfer almost 11 years ago
No such thing as meaningful dialogue when the Governor and the majority of the state legislature is from the same party.
Dtroutma almost 11 years ago
As a “liberal” on social issues, and an economic conservative, and a gun owner, I have trouble with both the NRA positions and outright “banners” who know as little about weapons, and responsibility, as Wayne La PIerre.
Hunting, “sport shooting”, yes-self defense, rightful and sensible. Giving guns to nuts, as in going outside that “well-regulated” edict, and claiming every nut should get a gun, also makes no sense at all.
NO law in the U.S., of the roughly 300 “gun laws” that actually exist, not the fanciful numbers NRA claims, is adequate to keep “nuts” from getting guns. Those declared mentally incompetent, and having been COMMITTED, or those who have displayed illegal tendencies, like having restraining orders against them, aren’t SUPPOSED to get guns, but, the real danger is the undeclared nut with generally , a handgun, NOT the much maligned, and basically useless for “regular purposes” poorly named “assault rifle”.
Most homicides and suicides are with HAND GUNS, though Hemmingway did the “gruesomes” with his shotgun. (Boy, do THEY ever make a mess!) It’s the concealable handgun where most of the “well-regulated” needs to be done. My state’s concealed carry permit process is quite adequate, and having to renew every 4 years is also a good idea, and it doesn’t infringe on any actual “rights” of sane, non-cirminal, citizens. It’s like getting your driver’s license, for a weapon that IS becoming as deadly as our cars.
SClark55 Premium Member almost 11 years ago
Libs who twist stories so they can call conservatives racists are the hateful ones. They don’t even know what we think. They disgust me.
Brutatowski almost 11 years ago
Editorial cartoonists should make it a point to learn about their subject before they spew out ignorant blobs of phlegm like this. Trayvon didn’t have to run away from Zimmerman when he saw him. He also did not have to come back. As far as racism goes: of the two of them only Trayvon was heard using racial slurs that night.
warjoski Premium Member almost 11 years ago
Panel 1 has references to the NRA. See the button on his lapel. Panel 4 has references to the character liking to kill black teens. Panel 3 I will allow you is non partisan in that he says he likes hunting teens. We could argue the fact that the character has already been portrayed as a gun ower and that he is meant to represent a group as opposed to one individual. But I’ll just concede the point on that one.
So it’s actually panels 1, 2, 4, 5, and 6. Which would be the majority of the cartoon.
In the future, please try to make an argument that includes all the facts. Not just the ones you cherry pick in order to avoid seeing the strawman the cartoonist constructed.
warjoski Premium Member almost 11 years ago
I didn’t claim victimhood. I said I didn’t agree with the cartoon’s insinuation that all gun owners are racists. Actually I don’t own a gun.
And yes, a pin on a cartoon character is usually a device to identify a character with a certain group. There are numerous examples of this all over these political cartoon pages. I see no reason why this cartoon would be exempted from that assumption, other than that if we don’t, your argument looses some weight.
‘Brazen’? Wow. I haven’t been called that in years. Thanks. it makes me feel younger.
What’s funny is you’ve just made the point I was making. That Zimmerman is not all gun owners. Of course you did it in sort of a nutty way. But hey. As long as you’re agreeing with me, go nuts.
warjoski Premium Member almost 11 years ago
Nope. Still think Britt is making a wide accusation without a basis. Most of your arguments are semantics and hair splitting. If you aren’t a lawyer in real life, you would make a fine one. That’s not meant as an insult. Simiply an observation.
And it’s kind of funny that you would accuse anyone of engaging in hyperbolic rhetoric.
But whatever. As i said before, go nuts.
rossevrymn almost 11 years ago
Infantile cartoonist, the libs have lost it.
warjoski Premium Member over 10 years ago
I will definitely concede that some of the pro Zimmerman comments were outrageous.
I appreciate the respect. Thank you. I don’t think you are absolutist as much as you are kind of an ‘argument shark’. You see blood and go for it. A number of people in my family are the same way. Nothing wrong with it. But it can be fun to stir the pot on occasion.