The Sickness of N.J. Gun Laws
9 minutes ago
"It's so transparent what the governor's doing, what his motives are. I don't think I've ever seen anything quite so political."That's Senator Burzynski, a Republican--and he's one of the people whose projects were NOT cut! Wouldn't you think a simple phone call would have avoided that kind of humiliation?
"That, to me, is so insulting. I don't think I have ever, ever felt so embarrassed,"
"I don’t really believe that a human being who feels [things] should have the option at their fingertips."Uh, OK.
"Hunting, I get that – let’s protect hunting. But . . . "Now, class, when someone says such a stupid thing, it tells us three things about her. The first is that, obviously, she thinks the gun control debate is about hunters vs. educated people from cities. That in turn tells us that she doesn't understand the most basic principles of the debate and is therefore unqualified to comment. The third thing we learn, because a celebrity told us she "gets" something, is that she doesn't get it. I know it probably seems less than generous, but could we just stop and consider what Jodie Foster's qualification to judge these matters might be? What is her expertise when it comes to guns? Is she a shooter? Collector? Competitor? Police officer? Soldier?
"Ms. Foster started her career at the age of two. She received an Academy Award nomination in the "Best Supporting Actress" category in 1976 for Taxi Driver. In 1980, she graduated as the best of her class from the College Lycée Français and began to study English Literature at Yale University, from where she graduated magna cum laude in 1985. She received two Oscars before she was thirty, her first for her part as Sarah Tobias in The Accused (1988) and the second one for her performance as Clarice Starling in The Silence of the Lambs (1991)."You have to admit, if she'd expressed an opinion about acting, that would be damned impressive. Besides, that last bit was kind of funny--
I am endlessly amused at the people who publish information about themselves on a gigantic, global, world-spanning digital information network and then act offended because someone dares to comment on it. Standing in the middle of Yankee Stadium during the season opener carrying a sign with your martial arts claims in flashing lights would be a far more private affair than posting them on the internet. It's the internet, for the love of Pete. It has no purpose whatsoever except to distribute information to the greatest number of people across the widest geographic area possible. MY face is posted here as well, you know, along with my very unimpressive sparring videos. I post as Don Gwinn on every forum I visit with the exception of Bladeforums.com and Glocktalk, where I am still called Gwinnydapooh. I've got nothing to hide.
As for Julio Garcia, Alonzo Jones, and all the rest, if they've got something they want to keep private, fine. Just keep it private. Don't post it on the internet. When you do, it's up for discussion. Period.
Subject only to the police power, the right of the individual citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
"Unless the Illinois Legislature passes a law to the contrary, the right of the individual citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."