"Gun control deserves serious action.... "

[57Coastie]

.... says retired Gen. McChrystal.

http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/01/08/former-g ... t-schools/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Go get him, guys and gals -- red meat. Our former commander in Afghanistan.

I cannot find this story elsewhere on the web (yet?), so perhaps again just saying that MSNBC is part of the lying left-wing media will be adequate.

Jim

[SQLGeek]

Not even a general seems to get the difference between a select fire and a semi-auto rifle. Sigh.

[Heartland Patriot]

I am not going to join the MSNBC site merely for the purposes of commenting there. General McChrystal is WRONG, period. He may get a bigger "retirement" check than I do, but we are both honorably discharged veterans. If he wants to show his true colors by standing on YOUR side (and don't pretend otherwise), that is his business. I still have the right as an American to disagree with him. I have not used my semi-automatic rifles to harm another human being and hopefully it will remain that way for the rest of my days. I didn't commit that heinous crime in Newtown, Connecticut and I do not deserve to be penalized for it. I'm sorry that the little nutjob killed himself, but then again they wouldn't have blamed him anyway (reference the Aurora shooter). The political left is merely exploiting a tragedy to deprive ME of my legally-acquired property for political purposes and it will do NOTHING to increase the security of our schools (reference the Bath Township Massacre) or reduce violent crime (reference the stats at the FBI website). I know that some people see this as a little game for amusement, but I promise you, I am far from amused in the least.

[Abraham]

Taunting now, eh...?

[SQLGeek]

And on another note, I've been seeing a lot more rhetoric against all semi-automatic rifles as opposed to just "assault rifles". This troubles me, especially when I'm seeing fellow gun owners willing to throw the "black rifle" crowd under the bus because black rifles are "just for killing people". I get now why Andy calls them Fudds.

[57Coastie]

Taunting now, eh...?

You too, Abe?

Jim

[Purplehood]

I generally dislike making generalizations, but here I go...

After 24 years in the Military (both Marines and Army) I have not yet changed my opinion that the majority of Career Officers (Field Grade and above) are very liberal. The General is simply another example of that. They are simply a part of the overall elitist attitude that the unwashed masses are not worthy of the same "privileges" that they enjoy.

I am sure that there are exceptions, but I never came across them.

[The Annoyed Man]

"[W]hen the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised by an artful man, - who was governor of Pennsylvania, to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them; but that they should not do it openly, but weaken them, and let them sink gradually, by totally disusing and neglecting the militia." --George Mason, speech in the Virginia Ratifying Convention, 1788

It seems that one does not get to be a general officer without being a political animal.

[57Coastie]

I generally dislike making generalizations, but here I go...

After 24 years in the Military (both Marines and Army) I have not yet changed my opinion that the majority of Career Officers (Field Grade and above) are very liberal. The General is simply another example of that. They are simply a part of the overall elitist attitude that the unwashed masses are not worthy of the same "privileges" that they enjoy.

I am sure that there are exceptions, but I never came across them.

I honor and respect your long and dedicated service, truly, Purplehood. While I may be one of those you are talking about, I must say that my own 24+ years of service gave me just the opposite opinion. Until I came aboard this forum I had never encountered a group of persons more conservative and extreme right wing than the career military officer, of all grades up to and including flag. As you say, Purplehood, I am sure there are exceptions, but I never came across them. While I have not served in all the services, during my career I served with each of them save the Marines, While during one tour, living barely outside the gate at Quantico, many of my closest friends were senior-grade Marines. We never came to blows over politics, but we came close, and I never wanted to fight with a Marine.

I am not saying that either of us is right, or that either of us is wrong. I note that we both carefully used the word "opinion," to our mutual credit, I would say. I respect your opinion, but mine differs. Perhaps our respective observations as to this issue were affected by observing it from different perspectives.

My point on this when starting up this thread was actually to insure that all our members recognize that our ability to responsibly own and use firearms is under a attack now like we perhaps have not seen before. Our response to that attack may have to be done differently than by regurgitating our own talk to each other and that of the NRA, or, even worse, threatening insurrection, rebellion, seditious conspiracy, or advocating the overthrow of our government.

In the news today was another instance which confirms, to my mind, that the attack is growing, and our response could be fatal if not modified. It must by now be obvious to all that my legal position on the Second Amendment is not "any gun, any time, any place, regardless of other factors present at the time," but I must admit that I am becoming concerned about all the many broad statements coming out of Washington and elsewhere recently.

Ex-congresswoman Gabriell Gifford and her husband, Captain Mark Kelley, United States Navy (Ret.), a combat veteran navy pilot, are forming a group which appears to have as its major goal the raising of finances sufficient to be a real opposition to the NRA. Regardless of one's personal views on this, we could all be sorry some day for not adjusting our order of battle somewhat.

“As a Western woman and a Persian Gulf War combat veteran who have exercised our Second Amendment rights, we don’t want to take away your guns any more than we want to give up the two guns we have locked in a safe at home,” the couple write. “What we do want is what the majority of NRA members and other Americans want: responsible changes in our laws to require responsible gun ownership and reduce gun violence.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ ... story.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

As Abe suggested above, perhaps I was indeed taunting. If so it is only because I think this forum needs a little taunting. I will go so far as to say that I think the quoted comments of McChrystal, Gabby Gifford and Mark Kelley do not show signs of extremism, at least not until they and others are pressed into extremism by extremism on the other side.

Jim

[Heartland Patriot]

"[W]hen the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised by an artful man, - who was governor of Pennsylvania, to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them; but that they should not do it openly, but weaken them, and let them sink gradually, by totally disusing and neglecting the militia." --George Mason, speech in the Virginia Ratifying Convention, 1788

It seems that one does not get to be a general officer without being a political animal.

Taking what you've said, and what Purplehood said, into account I'll simply add this. I knew a couple of "full bird" Colonels whom I considered to be good leaders and who cared about the folks in their charge. Both were older men for their rank, so it had taken considerable time for them to make Colonel, and both by coincidence happened to be Special Operations MH-53 Pave Low helicopter pilots. I do not believe that either man had any real thought that they would make Brigadier General (lowest rung of the General officer ranks). Colonels were the highest ranking officers I ever talked to on a face-to-face basis. I've seen Generals, but never ever talked to one in person in 20 years in the USAF.

[57Coastie]

SNIP It seems that one does not get to be a general officer without being a political animal.

You are in trouble again, Chris. I believe that that is indeed generally the case.

Jim

[Andrew]

The General is simply trying to make amends for the activities and attitudes in his command outlined in "Rolling Stone" .
And who wants to be a major let alone a general? It's all wine, women, and song when you're a line officer! Then they take it away! Want you to fetch coffee and kiss patoot! And Administrate! (sounds like something you do for a week, once a month.)

[SQLGeek]

So Jim what do you propose? We find a different way to engage or learn to live with more restrictions on gun ownership? Something else perhaps?

[stroo]

Wasn't this the general who dishonored himself by insulting and belittling the President to a reporter from Rolling Stone? He also stopped giving our troops in Afghanistan artillery and air support unless they could verify that no civilians or civilian structures were going to be harmed, thereby endangering the lives of our troops.

Given these bad judgements, and apart from my general cynicism towards generals, I don't think I would trust his opinions on anything.