Bad Idea Jeans

Posted on August 7, 2012 at 11:53 am by Bob Cesca

A guy walks into your gun store.

He’s a neo-Nazi and a member of a white supremacist heavy metal band. He also has a minor criminal record. And he’s a former military psyops specialist.

Do you sell him a gun?

Yes! Of course you do! It’s perfectly legal! Who could ever guess he might use that gun to shoot people who he perceives to be evildoers — an act of domestic terrorism? No way. Not a chance.

Print Friendly
This entry was posted in Guns and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.
  • http://twitter.com/GodIsDead Gern Blandston

    WHY DO YOU HATE VETERANS ARGLEBLARGLE

    • 1933john

      Please define “ARGLEBLARGLE”. Does it refer to fornication with
      a combat boot?

  • zirgar

    Why, Michael Page sounds like a right good little Republican, if you ask me.

  • http://twitter.com/TyJuanOn Kari Hope

    Maybe we should make it a law that all gun sellers get a psych evaluation as well. What person in their right mind would sell a weapon with all these alarms going off. Evidently their to deaf, dumb, and blind.

  • http://cousinavi.wordpress.com cousinavi

    Wait a sec…I’m all for rational restrictions on what sort of weapons citizens might legally possess, AND also for rational thresholds to prevent bugfuck crazy spree killers dragging around more steel than the local armory.
    BUT, and I want to be clear, none of the labels you listed should, by themselves, prevent anyone from obtaining a gun.
    And are were really talking about making gun vendors take all of these things into account – running some sort of sliding scale / venn diagram to determine…what exactly?
    Former psyops specialist? So?
    Plays in a band?
    Racist?

    It’s not that I oppose some sort of logical system that would prevent just about everyone from ever touching a gun. I’m just not sure the criteria you seem to consider important is any way to go about it.

  • Lazarus Durden

    It’s funny we’re paternalistic about almost everything else except guns. I’ve worked in a night club, and you have a legal responsibility to cut off a patron if you suspect he’s drunk. Stay with me because it doesn’t seem to make sense at first. The point of that law is you can’t just keep selling a patron alcohol until they basically fall over dead from alcohol poisoning. Once they appear to be intoxicated they are cut off, and you have to escort them out. Of course you can’t just throw them out in the street you have to make sure if they want a cab you call one for them, and my club had a form we filled out to prove we did that.

    Also in TN if you serve alcohol you also have to provide food of some kind. You can get fined if you don’t. All of this is to be able to sell alcohol and place the burden, or responsibility, on the person serving alcohol. If you don’t follow these laws you will lose your liquor license. Not to mention the age restriction on purchasing alcohol.

    So why is it then with firearms it suddenly becomes “You can’t restrict ‘em! Constitution! Blah-blah-blah”? The GOP is so paternalistic now they want to camp out in a woman’s vagina and demand ID to vote, but filling out a form for the government to buy an SIG assault rifle, and submitting to a background check well that’s just a bridge too far!

    Utter insanity.

    • Brutlyhonest

      Didn’t TN also make it illegal to try to restrict people from taking their firearms into bars?

      • atlavely

        I think that was Ohio…
        Failed there.

      • http://drangedinaz.wordpress.com/ IrishGrrrl

        I think this idea has been tried and failed in several states. Actually, it’s a great idea because the majority of “spur of the moment” crimes committed with guns (i.e., manslaughter, armed robbery, etc) are done when the perp is drunk. That’s why there are so many videos of robberies where the perp is stumbling around running into doors and generally doing really stupid things….they’re drunk off their asses. The connection between booze and violent crime is so off the charts, it’s insane that every state in the union doesn’t have a law like this on the books. But there I go again, using logic.

      • Lazarus Durden

        The NRA recently spent big money in the 45th District to oust incumbent State Rep. Debra Young Maggart (R) of Hendersonville because she wouldn’t support an NRA backed piece of legislation that would make it legal to keep a firearm in your car at the workplace. The Tennessee Chamber of Commerce didn’t like the legislation because it meant they couldn’t keep people from bringing firearms onto their property.

        So the NRA spent big money in Hendersonville putting up billboards with Maggart and President Obama’s picture side by side with some stupid caption. The sad part is Maggart co-sponsored previous legislation to allow guns into TN state parks. Yeah people in Hendersonville weren’t happy, and there were a few people, Republicans, who were outspoken about dropping their NRA membership over it.

        Gotta love an organization that backs a candidate on a issue when they’ve never even set foot in the district. Even the TN old guard Republicans don’t like our state Tea Party because they’re all a bunch of jackasses. Case in point State Rep. Julia Hurley. She was an embarrassment and the one who beat out Maggart for the GOP nom looks to be more of the same.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/LeShan-Jones/100000478051440 LeShan Jones

    Even if I beleived the NRAs deffinition of the second amendment, I still think we need to regulate the hell out of these weapons.
    There will always be some meat-bag out there who will tell you how banning guns wont keep them out of the hands of criminals or prevent shooting tragedies. To that I reply; of course we wont end it, that’s not the point. The point is to lessen these incidents, and regulating firearms will do that (no one is talking about banning all guns, that is just an NRA strawman they invented to frighten their stupider members).

    Even if we began heavily regulating guns tommorow, the shear number of guns already in circulation would keep such incidents going for a long while.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/TN3TCQ6RTNDGBDRECO4SYAJWSU Paul

    so what are you implying?
    anyone belonging to a neo Nazi group shouldn’t be allowed to purchase a firearm?
    how about John Birch members?
    how about new black panthers?
    what about rappers? should Tupoc or Snoop Lion not have been allowed to purchase a firearm?what’s a “minor criminal record”? didn’t pay a traffic ticket had a warrant issued? went to jail as a result? how about if you verbally assaulted someone and called them really mean things? as far a the whole pysops thing… I mean really? the military vetted them and you didn’t even mention anything about dishonorable discharge.. so I don’t really know where you want to go with that one..
    maybe anyone seeking to purchase a firearm should have to prove they are not and never have been a member of any group you don’t approve of?
    I’m sure McCarthy would have loved to add communists to that list. is that America we live in? is that what the 2nd amendment means to you?

    how about we just take away all the guns, knives, any chemicals that might be mixed to create an explosive device. that’s going to include gasoline right? I mean what if nut bags start walking into theaters and chunking molotave cocktails ? where does this line of thought end? while we’re at it let’s add those breath thingies to every car made to make sure no one drives drunk. and all teachers should undergo extensive pyscological testing to make SURe there aren’t child molesters.

    What happened to freedom and liberty for all?
    are we a police state now?
    do we want to be?