1 Feb
Will you Liberal Antis stop projecting so hard?
I have enough problems of my own without you Liberal Antis using psychological projection in your arguments?
R. Stanton Scott — Stan to those who may have ran into him is the latest in a very loooooonnng line who make this mistake.
Of course, Stan being the educated erudite person he is phrases it better then most:
I’ve spent time in very dangerous places, where we had to keep pretty much constant vigilance when out and about. I wonder about the mind set of someone who does this all the time, even in his own neighborhood.
Once again we see the meme that gun owners – especially those that carry concealed as often as we can — are always afraid.
What an utter crock of unprocessed equine fertilizer!
I and most of the CHL holders I’ve talked to, corresponded with, read online, etc are no more afraid then the average person who doesn’t carry.
What the people like Stan confuse is the difference between vigilance and fear.
Yes, people who carry tend to have a higher standard of awareness of their surroundings. Of course many people who are aware of risks and consequences of criminal activity also maintain heightened awareness – especially if they don’t carry.
Just because we are aware doesn’t mean we are afraid. That is your Liberal Anti bias and issues being projected onto the actions of others. Knock it off please — or prove it. Show the scientific studies, surveys or statistics that show Concealed Handgun License holders are more afraid then those that don’t carry.
Frankly I don’t think you can. Frankly I don’t think you will because it will destroy your prejudice against gun owners. And prejudice is the right word.
Whether or not the gentleman next to me in the pew, working in my kid’s school, or the guy eating wings next to me at the sports bar is armed would be nice to know in the event something takes place that makes the carrier want to use it. I especially want to know if wings guy is packing when he orders a beer. This is true whether or not I am armed.
Let’s make Stan’s bigotry evident by some simple word substitution.
Whether or not the gentleman next to me in the pew, working in my kid’s school, or the guy eating wings next to me at the sports bar is GAY would be nice to know in the event something takes place that makes the GAY want to use it.
Whether or not the gentleman next to me in the pew, working in my kid’s school, or the guy eating wings next to me at the sports bar is MUSLIMwould be nice to know in the event something takes place that makes the MUSLIM want to use it.
Stan feels that it is his right to know whether or not someone is gay (Can you say AIDS?) or Muslim (Islmo-Extremist Terrorism anyone?) or anything other then exactly what Stan is.
Never mind the statistics showing those gun owners who carry in public legally tend to be even more law abiding then the cops, more law abiding by huge margins then the average citizen….Stan feels it is his right to know whether or not Susie Soccermom has the means to effectively defend herself against rape. Isn’t that bigotry?
Isn’t that FEAR?
Please join the discussion.
Posted by R. Stanton Scott on 01.02.10 at 4:00 AM
Well, now. i frankly don’t know what to say about this. I wonder how you think you can post every tragic criminal attack you run across, discuss it in apocalyptic “Why I carry” terms, and then act all put out when readers get the idea that you carry a firearm because you worry about being attacked. Where in the world would they get this idea? Certainly not from the reasoned discorse here!
Especially reasoned discourse like substituting the word “gay” for armed in my sentence, as if the comparison makes any sense, or that it follows from this that “Stan feels that it is his right to know whether or not someone is gay (Can you say AIDS?) or Muslim (Islmo-Extremist Terrorism anyone?) or anything other then exactly what Stan is.”
Sorry, Bob. Gotta call BS on this one. Of course, it’s in the title, isn’t it?
Posted by AntiCitizenOne on 01.02.10 at 4:00 AM
Some people have a different threshold of fear than others – and everyone has their own opinions on each others’ threshold.
It’s when people like you never stop leaving us alone that’s the problem.
Have you EVER ran into a known CCW carrier in real life, and could you tell if they were “fearful all the time?”
Our medical school class president and vice president are both concealed carriers and I didn’t even know this fact because, well, I didn’t.
They didn’t fit your standard “profile” of “fearful” that I apparently was supposed to be looking for.
And neither did any of the other concealed carriers I found in our class as well. Richmond CAN be a dangerous place you know.
Posted by AntiCitizenOne on 01.02.10 at 4:00 AM
I guess we must be afraid all the time whenever we put on our seatbelts – after all, accidents happen pretty rarely in good neighborhoods, right?
Don’t mind the drunken couple somehow driving home from a house party…
Posted by Bob S. on 01.02.10 at 4:00 AM
Stan,
Once again you show the fact that you simply don’t get it. Whether it is because you can’t understand or simply choose not to, I don’t know.
Worry – 1. To feel uneasy or concerned about something; be troubled.
Fear – a. A feeling of agitation and anxiety caused by the presence or imminence of danger.
I am not worried all the time about being attacked. I have taken precaution so I can respond IF I’m attacked. The vast majority of my day is no different then yours. I work, I play, I enjoy life.
I’m not the one concerned about the person sitting next to me in theater being armed.
I’m not the one concerned about otherwise law abiding citizens suddenly going crazy and shooting up the place — as you appear to be.
I don’t live my life in fear. I recognize that bad things can happen because criminals want what I have, don’t want to work for what I have and can target people at random.
I have taken precautions to be able to respond IF something does happen.
But the majority of my day is just like yours. I work, I play, I enjoy myself. I carry a firearm to give myself 1 more option then you who do not carry have. That is it.
Tell me that when you notice some shady characters walking by you at the mall or the store that you don’t pay a little more attention to them? That is all I do. How are we different?
Except that I don’t worry about who else is walking around armed. That is fear.
Posted by Borepatch on 01.02.10 at 4:00 AM
Huh. Why would he want to live his life in Condition White?
Posted by Bob S. on 01.02.10 at 4:00 AM
Borepatch,
Perhaps he thinks that if he doesn’t see any problems, then the problems don’t exist. I don’t have a problem — and I think none of my other pro-rights readers also — with him walking around in Condition White.
(Stan – Condition White is Col. Cooper’s system of identification for those walking around oblivious to the surroundings.)
Some of us choose not to walk around with blinders on. I have realistically looked at the issue of crime. I know the chance of me needing a firearm is low on any given day. Of course, the criminals can’t be counted on not to choose me or my wife or my daughter or my house.
Of course statistically the odds of being a victim of violent crime over a lifetime is fairly high…about 2 to 1 for a 12 year old today.
Posted by Sarah on 01.02.10 at 4:00 AM
LOL – I’m more afraid of my own horrible cooking than I am of being attacked when I’m out and about. Violent criminals don’t announce their intentions before acting on them, so I choose to be prepared to defend myself. I have a good time when I’m out doing things in public. People who go out with me, like family members, know that I know what’s going on around me, but they also see me having a great time. My graduation dinner at Local Italian Restaurant was fantastic because most of the people with whom I’m closest were there. We had a great table, great food, and a great time together – but you’d better believe that my youngest brother and I were carrying.
Posted by mike w. on 01.02.10 at 4:00 AM
Notice how Mr. Scott simply dismisses Bob’s word substitution out of hand without y’know, actually refuting it.
Simply saying “your comparison is BS” does not make it so. That he cannot discuss it nor bother to provide a counterpoint speaks volumes as to the weakness of his position.
The man is fearful of CCW holders yet accuses us of paranoia. Now THAT is hilarity. Someone threatening to find you and punch you in the face is not hilarity, no matter how much Mr. Scott insists it is.
Posted by Linoge on 01.02.10 at 4:00 AM
To begin with, a word of caution, Bob S. – in briefly glancing at Stan’s weblog (something upon which I will not waste my time at again), it is quite apparent that he is going down the same exact path originally blazed by none other than MikeB himself. By that, I mean that he has found a “hot-button issue” – one that has been generating exceptional traffic and feedback for his otherwise back-water weblog – and he is going to mash the hell out of it until there is nothing left to mash. As with MikeB, he feeds and thrives off the attention, and he knows the only way to effectively guarantee that attention is to be as outlandish as possible.
In short, be careful of what you are creating.
Speaking more specifically to this particular post, as Bob said in his most-recent post (before I could get home and write up this comment
), according to Stan’s rationale, anyone who wears a seatbelt every time they drive or ride in a vehicle is living in fear. Anyone who keeps a fire extinguisher in their kitchen and checks on its charge periodically is living in fear. Anyone who has life/medical/property insurance is living in fear. Anyone who has a home inspector look at a residence before purchasing it is living in fear.
Obviously, as anyone who has even a tenuous grasp on reality realizes, none of those statements are, in any way, accurate, and thus the basis for Stan’s entire argument comes crumbling down about his ears. Just as automobile accidents, kitchen fires, accidents, and not-to-code construction do happen, so too does crime happen, at any time, in any location, and those individuals who are willing to be complacent victims will have to excuse those of us who do not share their sentiments.
As for the validity of the word-substitution adequately exposing the real depth of Stan’s inherent bigotry, I would offer for him to answer my little question concerning discriminating against rights, but we all know how useless that would be – as Borepatch so completely pointed out in a previous comment thread, Stan refuses to use the correct words to describe conversational topics, and thus any conversation revolving around those topics is doomed to incessant miscommunication, obfuscation, and misunderstandings.
Suffice to say, Stan has no more right knowing whether or not I am armed than he has a right to know whether or not Better Half and I are married, what kind of ethnic backgrounds our families have, or what religion I ascribe to. But again with that oh-so-troublesome word… at least for him. Really, aside from addressing the “big lie” phenomena, there is little-to-no point in debating issues such as these with an indivdual who militantly refuses to understand even the underlying concepts of the debate in question.
Posted by Bob S. on 01.02.10 at 4:00 AM
Linoge,
I don’t mind people finding an issue and using it to drive up their hit counts. We do that.
What we don’t do is mash on the issue ONLY for hit counts. We care about the issue and we work to understand it.
I’ll debate Stan all the time until he proves he is just another hit count troll like our resident TrollB302000.
If Stan does come to understand the issue and see it our way, great (I give that much less then a 1% chance).
If Stan proves to be just another troll, it provides more evidence that the antis aren’t interested in honestly debating the issue.
I mean, look at MikeB302000. He has time to crank out post after post but not to “debate” the issue.
His posts are starting to look very similar, have you noticed? They go something like this:
On {Insert Date} a criminal committed {insert crime here} with a firearm resulting in {death or wounding – pick one) of the {criminal or law abiding gun owner – pick one}.
This shows that
a.) Because criminals can get guns — we need to restrict the rights of everyone
Or
B.) Because law abiding gun owners defended themselves or their property– and I don’t think that is FAIR (whining voice) — we need to restrict the rights of everyone.
Posted by mike w. on 01.02.10 at 4:00 AM
I think Stan already is another MikeB. Look as his idea of “discussion.” He makes an ignorant, bigoted post, then his post gets logically refuted in the comments and his bigotry exposed. He offers no constructive counterpoints, actively avoids answering even the most basic questions, and generally does everything possible to avoid having a reasonable discussion.
Just look at his comment sections. (and the comment threads here) He’s completely abandoned them without engaging in more than a shred of discussion / debate. Instead he puts up a new post with the same old crap. He’ll run away from that post too, unable & unwilling to defend his bigotry and factual inaccuracies
In short he’s an intellectual lightweight who can’t back up the claims he makes in his posts.
Posted by Linoge on 01.02.10 at 4:00 AM
Fair enough, Bob, though I am of the opinion that Mike W. is pretty accurate. In reality, the line was crossed the first time he admitted to be arguing from the position of personal opinion rather than anything even approximating or resembling facts.
But, hey, if you want to bat him around a little more, more power to you – I just wanted to offer up the word of warning, for what little it is worth.
As for Sparky, I have not visited his particular corner of the cortex in a while, and have little intention to – as you mentioned, his repetition became mind-numbing in very short order, as was his complete dismissal of any facts contrary to his personal opinions… which, brings us right smack dab back to Stan
.
Posted by Weer'd Beard on 01.02.10 at 4:00 AM
I’m with Linoge and MikeW….and like you and MikeW, I want to bat him around a bit more. But I suspect he’ll get pretty boring pretty fast.