"Have Glock, Will Travel" Article in the NY Times [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : "Have Glock, Will Travel" Article in the NY Times


dooga
10-25-2011, 18:49
I thought I would share an article that someone tweeted me (since they know I shoot) that is an op-ed from yesterday's New York Times titled Have Glock, Will Travel (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/25/opinion/bruni-have-glock-will-travel.html) by Frank Bruni. Here's a taste of what you'll read if you can stomach the slant:

"Imagine how apoplectic they’d be if, on certain other matters, Washington forced their states to yield to others’ values the way this bill, H.R. 822, would compel New York, Massachusetts and Connecticut to honor more permissive gun-control regulations from the South and West. As it happens these three Northeastern states all perform same-sex marriages, which more conservative states do not have to recognize."

Let me know what you guys thing. Gah! Oh, and here's his final shot:

"H.R. 822, now in the House Judiciary Committee, makes a mockery of our diverse values and strategies for public safety. If it were enacted, off to New York the South Dakotan tourist could go, 9-millimeter Glock in tow.

That’s not liberty. More like lunacy."

cowboy1964
10-25-2011, 19:07
Yeah, those South Dakotan's are just WAITING to get to New York so they can suddenly decide to turn into a criminal and start shooting people.

Talk about lunacy. Common sense and rational thought is not a hallmark of leftists.

cowboy1964
10-25-2011, 19:10
Oh, and same-sex marriage isn't a Constitionally protected right. Keeping and bearing arms IS. If the states forget that then the feds need to enforce it.

glockman513
10-25-2011, 19:57
Goofball.

LApm9
10-25-2011, 20:11
Is he for "States Rights" all of the sudden?

Does he think that my town should be able to build a new school building, or for that matter hire a new principal, without approval from Washington, DC?????

mrsurfboard
10-25-2011, 20:17
New York Times = Left Wing Fish Wrap

Glenn E. Meyer
10-25-2011, 20:38
NY Times lives in the Manhattan Island bubble. They don't realize that more than 40 states have shall issue laws - which is pretty convincing knowledge that the country has spoken on this issue.

They are delusional on gun rights.

Toorop
10-25-2011, 21:25
Oh, and same-sex marriage isn't a Constitionally protected right. Keeping and bearing arms IS. If the states forget that then the feds need to enforce it.

It is a religious issue. If your religion says you have to marry the person you are having sex with, then you need to marry them and some states are preventing you from the free exercise of your religion.

Toorop
10-25-2011, 21:28
Oh, and same-sex marriage isn't a Constitionally protected right. Keeping and bearing arms IS. If the states forget that then the feds need to enforce it.

And lets not forget the opposite is true regarding immigration. If the Feds choose not to enforce immigration law, then the states should not be taking it into their own hands.

The only obvious solution is the solution that gives everyone freedom. Allow people to carry 24/7 in the USA with no restrictions and no off limits places except when the property owner says guns are not allowed. Meaning giving signs legal weight. Allow everyone to own anything from a pistol to a stinger missile to a fighter jet to a stealth bomber.

And recognize gay marriages across the nation. This way everyone is happy.

Lior
10-25-2011, 23:14
Perhaps the average New York Times reader feels himself or herself to be morally superior to South Dakotans, given the tone of the tweeted article?

About stealth bombers - I think arms as stated in the 2nd Amendment refers to the individual equipment capable and suitable for being carried and used by an infantryman, from flintlocks and cutlasses to M249s.

Hour13
10-25-2011, 23:50
New York... Great place to live, if you're a criminal. I mean, can you imagine it?

You're Bob. Bob likes to rob.

Bob lives in NYC, where the law abiding(potential targets) citizens are GUARANTEED to be unarmed.

What a sweet gig.

happyguy
10-26-2011, 01:33
It is a religious issue. If your religion says you have to marry the person you are having sex with, then you need to marry them and some states are preventing you from the free exercise of your religion.

Some religions say you should be put to death for having sex with a person you are not married to...

Regards,
Happyguy :)

Sbh87
10-26-2011, 03:06
New York Times = Left Wing Fish Wrap

Very very true. Just another sheep not having a real *********g clue about anything and just spewing liberal BS because it's what he is programmed to do.