07.25.2012 09:28 PM

We get letters

From msccust@gmail.com:

What kind of a moron are you?
You typical stupid ignorant liberal asshole, wo someone is breaking into your
house and raping and you want to wait for the police to show up, when
in 1 hour? what kind of a stupid moron are you get a life and I can’t believe
the sun news network give you any time on the air
Asshole prick,

Website:
IP: 70.75.27.210

18 Comments

  1. Harry says:

    Wow, better to be silent and thought a fool, then open your mouth and prove it Warren! You have absolutely no concept of logical reasoning. If you ban handguns, then only criminals will continue to have them! Do you think they will obey the laws?? All you would be doing is disarming law abiding owners. You also demonstrated what a hypocrite you are, since YOU own a long gun, then they are fine, but those that own handguns, then that’s no ok, just because YOU don’t agree with it. Well many people think you shouldn’t be able to own a long gun, so why are they wrong?? Hypocrite!! Then you couldn’t answer the question to show what a hypocrite you are, when you were asked what is the difference between crooks breaking into your house and stealing your long guns and using them for crime, and stealing hand guns! Same thing! And all you could do was stammer, and stutter! The thing is, the Colorado shooter had a long gun that he committed most of the shooting with. How can you look at yourself in the mirror?? Do you think the shooter would have tried it, if he knew there were a couple of trained, licensed holders of concealed weapons in the theater?? Highly unlikely! And he probably would have killed and wounded far fewer people. You have NO CLUE what you are talking about!!!

    • Warren says:

      You’re an idiot. My only hope is you didn’t reproduce.

    • Joe says:

      So typical is the rhetoric auto-response from these idiots.

    • Np says:

      See, this is what makes my brain hurt. Clearly, you are familiar enough with Warren to know his arsenal of firearms. You also are familiar with his opinions and positions on things enough to call him a hypocrite. At the very least, you’re a regular visitor to this site. Yet, knowing what you know, and being angered by it as much as you are, you still decide to visit. Why? If this little website angers you to the point of lobbing adhominem attacks against a point of view that takes the form of grammatically incoherent babble, why do you visit here? I know Warren’s position on hand guns and I respectfully disagree. But I’ll be dammed if I’ll ever admit to being on the same side as someone like you. I don’t think banning handguns will make any difference in crime. However, I’m not so obtuse that I can’t see the practical difference between a British 303 and glock. If you pull one out, chances are, you’re on a firing range or you’re killing Nazis. If you pull the other one out, you are either a cop trying to stop a criminal or you’re the criminal.

      Warren called people who disagree with him “Fucking idiots”; a headline that was (intentionally or not) offensive. Not over the top offensive, but offensive none the less. But, this is his site and he was probably very angry about all the violence he’d been seeing. I’m prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt. If you cant, go away. Your weakening my position against a handgun ban and lowering the level of discourse. The above message from mr. 70.75.27.210 is childish, stupid, and just a little bit disturbing; regardless of your side on the issue. Period.

      TL:DR. It’s a complex issue. Come have some fun and debate it with us here on this blog. If you can’t take the difference of opinion, go away. Also, you missed the point of this post.

    • Kevin says:

      Harry, clearly you’ve been watching too many Hollywood movies.

      Do you really think someone getting shot at unexpectedly is going to be able to pull out his concealed handgun and aim it through smoke and darkness at the head of a guy to incapacitate him, and that it wouldn’t lead to a shootout creating more bloodshed?

      And to answer your rhetorical question, yes, the shooter would have still done it even if he knew there were armed patrons. He was fully clothed in body armour.

      Dumbass.

  2. John says:

    Well,

    To be honest I’m fine with a handgun ban, not because I hate gun owners. Recently had a roundtable discussion with some friends, of the 9there 3 are long gun owners, 2 are pistol owners and the other 4 are not firearms owners at all, though to be fair 2 own bows.

    To put some background on this I myself own a longarm, nothing fancy just a rifle I had passed down to me. So our discussion begins with the talk of Denver and the guy shooting up the place. The pistol owners immediately jump in and state that had everyone been armed, no one would’ve been harmed. The general question given the darkness, and the tear gas and the gunshots, can you really think having a large group of confined, scared armed people is a good idea? I”m thinking it would be more of a OK coral moment had everyone there been armed.

    Lets look for a second at the function of a pistol, while some pistol owners may use them to hunt (a population I doubt out numbers those whom use longarms) I’d say the majority of small arms are for recreational purposes if you don’t take into account criminal or law enforcement activities. If that is the case then I have to wonder why we feel it so necessary to have something that is so often used for ill, simply so we can enjoy using it for recreation. I’m all for a practical reason for small arms ownership, but I’ve yet to hear a good one, before anyone says “defense” keep in mind that we already have men and women with small arms (and long arms for that matter) who are paid to defend the population, those armed people are held to a much stricter standard then the average firearm owner in Canada.

    Continuing with the “defense” theme, why can we not own tasers? Yes, they can be lethal, but the margin is much smaller then the use of a pistol, and ifI were to be robbed I’d rather it be with a taser then a firearm. People also sometime circle to “if the government comes to carry away everything I own, I’m defenseless” the problem with that is that if your not willing to trust the government and society in general to look out for your best interests, then I’d call into question why you’d follow any laws at all, after all you cannot live your life in constant fear some sort of gestapo is going to kick in your door.

    To finally wrap up my point with our little discussion we had, as constantly cited by small arms supporters “Bad guys will still get their hands on small arms”. This is true, however contrary to popular belief not every street thug has the address for the local black market pistol retailer, much of which is stocked by legitimately acquired pistols which were stolen, remove those stolen pistols and you diminish the amount of pistols out there.

    In a perfect world we would never get angry or make poor decisions,we wouldn’t have to worry if a teenager gets shot by a over-zealous neighborhood watchmen, and we wouldn’t have to worry about folks breaking into Warrens house in the dead of night and merciliessly having their way with him, due largely to the fact he was awake, managed to get to his firearm, unlock it and load it before his would be violator managed to club him like a harp seal.

    In the end I just don’t see the problem with less easy access to firearms, reduce the supply and you’ll reduce the use, that goes for criminals too.

  3. Mike B says:

    The ignorant and laughable wording of that email from a handgun supporter proves to me that it is only a matter of time before stricter gun laws are implemented, cause their is no way morons like this will be able to mount a defence of their position/argument.

  4. Kelly says:

    I’ve always felt Libertarianism, followed to its extreme, leads to sociopathy. Harry, you’ve just confirmed it.

    • Robert Jago says:

      Harry isn’t a libertarian. A libertarian wouldn’t argue that our rights are contingent on being beneficial for society. They would assert that rights are a social good in and of themselves and that the state doesn’t have a right to infringe on them – even if it makes things safer. Think about the rights to privacy or assembly, or the protection from unreasonable search and seizure. These certainly can’t be defended on the grounds of ‘safety’ – undoubtedly if we didn’t have these rights, Canada would be even more of a disneyland. But some rights are more important than safety, or preventing people like WK from getting raped in their homes. What an image.

      Harry, is what we on the Libertarian side call a conservative or a populist – not that there’s a difference anymore. Nudnik up there thinks with his gonads or his gut, but never his brain. If it ‘feels’ right it must be true, and if you don’t agree with him, then you’re with the terrorists or child rapists or whatever the bleating of the day is. Say what you want about guns and that numbskull, but he ain’t a libertarian.

  5. mauser98 says:

    first, Rob Ford is a saint.
    Dear Warren: many illegal handguns are smuggled through First Nations reserves. Akwasane is a big one.
    http://news.nationalpost.com/2010/09/22/contraband-capital-the-akwesasne-mohawk-reserve-is-a-smuggling-conduit-police-say/

    get your disturbed lefty buddies Adam Vaughan, David Miller, Kyle Rae, Layton and a bunch more whackos together and blockade the reserves. oh ..that’s the OPP’s job !! how about Caledonia and your buddy McSquinty???? wow great job they did. you leftards must demand a search of said reserves to reduce illegal handguns. i am sure they will be handed over. lets see who see who the idiots are.

    i could sell tickets for that one
    from my cold dead hand

  6. mauser98 says:

    Why Do People Hate Liberals?

    ‘He’s a smug, condescending know-it-all who isn’t as smart as he thinks he is. His feints toward open-mindedness are transparently phony, he mistakes his opinion for common sense, and he’s preachy. ”

    http://thedailybanter.com/2012/07/why-do-people-hate-liberals/

    • Warren says:

      Not as much as the majority hate you.

    • Jason King says:

      Why Cant Mauser98 read?

      That was a quote about people’s perception of Aaron Sorkin.

      The main gist of the article is although the majority of Americans share liberal values, the liberal brand is perceived as a negative one.

      If Mauser98 had actually read the article he would have realized it was the complete opposite of what he meant.

      It Mauser98 actually read.

      • mauser98 says:

        i can read, did read the article. …….. you should learn to spell.
        the article is viral on conservative blogs for intense hypocricy
        King is a typical wacko lefty loon. totally devoid of humour. right over his head.

        • Jason King says:

          And Mauser98 is a typical humourless right wing gorm, totally incapable of reading and comprehending, yet too macho to admit so.

          • Jason King says:

            “you should learn to spell.” “intense hypocricy”

            Hoisted on your own petard there Maus

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*