Jeanne Marie Laskas buys a gun

[lseries]

This seems like the best section for this post. If the moderators disagree, they can move it (like they wouldn't even without this paragraph ).

Jeanne Marie Laskas, who used to write a column in the Washington Post Magazine on Sundays, seems to have bought a gun. See

http://www.gq.com/news-politics/big-issues/201209/gun-shopping-gq-september-2012

This is all part of her latest book, to be released next month, which you can read about at

http://www.jeannemarielaskas.com/

Given the tone of the articles I read in the Post magazine, the GQ article wasn't as bad and biased as I expected.

 

[gmhowell]

Interesting article. Towards the end, she falls into some silly thinking, but it's clear that her cognitive dissonance is starting to take its toll on her.

 

[...]

This seems like the best section for this post. If the moderators disagree, they can move it (like they wouldn't even without this paragraph ).

Jeanne Marie Laskas, who used to write a column in the Washington Post Magazine on Sundays, seems to have bought a gun. See

http://www.gq.com/news-politics/big-issues/201209/gun-shopping-gq-september-2012

This is all part of her latest book, to be released next month, which you can read about at

http://www.jeannemarielaskas.com/

Given the tone of the articles I read in the Post magazine, the GQ article wasn't as bad and biased as I expected.

omg, what a democrat.

 

[Al's Snackbar]

What are the odds that Glock has been sold back to a dealer?

 

[Dogabutila]

I dont even understand the article. It's just so disjointed it doesn't have a coherent theme...

 

[GNLaFrance]

Effete eastern liberal trying to appear broad-minded and generous while writing about the icky-poo guns.

 

[Speaker2Wolves]

Good article.

She touched on one of the things that has always bothered me about the gun debate. Namely that conservative, pro-gun, NRA members talk about how illogical the anti-gun position is without the ability to recognize their own flawed arguments.

IMHO, too many gun owners are too quick to debate the 2A without talking about what a tremendous responsibility is entailed in carrying a deadly weapon. Estimating the caliber from an entrance wound in a victim without ever once wondering who the person was, or whether and how she could have avoided becoming a victim? Doesn't put us in a good light.

And how rational is it to think that owning hunting rifles, even semi-auto ARs, keeps us safe from invasion? Everyone in Afghanistan owned fully automatic AK's. Didn't seem to stop us from invading them. Yeah, sign up for all the combat carbine training you want, none of it is going to do you a damn bit of good when faced with mobile artillery and close air support.

You'd be better off learning how to build IEDs.

Unfortunately, many of us can't see how illogical these arguments are, and how they make us look just as stupid as any "blood in the streets" liberal.

 

[BenL]

Estimating the caliber from an entrance wound in a victim without ever once wondering who the person was, or whether and how she could have avoided becoming a victim?

Sort of like asking a rape victim why such short skirts?

The article is lefty ********. She wasn't looking for an education so much as ammunition for her predisposed ideas. There are several telltale signs.

Even after being corrected early on, she insisted on referring to modern sporting rifles as "assault weapons".

 

[Speaker2Wolves]

Even after being corrected early on, she insisted on referring to modern sporting rifles as "assault weapons".

Yeah, gee, almost as stupid as insisting there's no such thing as an assault rifle.

We need to educate people about the origins and applications of weapons, not just bridle at the terms used.

 

[virtus]

And how rational is it to think that owning hunting rifles, even semi-auto ARs, keeps us safe from invasion? Everyone in Afghanistan owned fully automatic AK's. Didn't seem to stop us from invading them. Yeah, sign up for all the combat carbine training you want, none of it is going to do you a damn bit of good when faced with mobile artillery and close air support.

Have we suppressed all resistance in Afghanistan? When did that happen? Seems to me like they are still putting up a fight.

Also, the Russians didn't have a very good time over there (we should have learned from their mistakes).

Terrible example.

 

[Harabec Weathers]

Have we suppressed all resistance in Afghanistan? When did that happen? Seems to me like they are still putting up a fight.

Also, the Russians didn't have a very good time over there (we should have learned from their mistakes).

Terrible example.

This, combined with the fact that one of the big reasons they use IEDs so much is that they (and most other third-world combatants) generally can't hit the broad side of a barn with small arms. Instead of actually aiming, they just "Insha'Allah" that their bullets will hit their targets.

Now take in contrast the example of the United States firearms culture, where marksmanship is generally highly valued. Add that to IEDs and I'd say someone's in for trouble.

That said, any talk of foreign invasion of the United States is irrelevant as long as the United States military exists. We provide most of the military logistics for the rest of the world combined. If every single other nation on Earth joined together against the United States in a conventional war, the United States would still win. Of course, that's a whole other can of worms, and we're getting off-topic, so I'll leave it at that.


Back to the article: as some others have commented already, it was difficult to tell what the final conclusions of the author were, if any. Having myself grown up in a highly liberal environment, I feel like I can identify *somewhat* with her continued use of terms like "assault rifles", etc., and having trouble making sense of these new-to-her viewpoints that she's discovered. Overcoming decades of libtard brainwashing is, needless to say, very difficult. As for me, my difficulties usually surface when I'm trying to defend the 2A in debates, where I often find myself thinking too much about ad hominem arguments that have been disproven time and again, but for which I cannot remember the specific evidence that blows them out of the water.

 

[Bob A]

Good article. She's beginning to get it, I think.

I would have made the point, regarding hunters, that the armed forces are the big winners in a culture that supports hunters. It's not so much having a virtual militia, as it is having a large pool of people experienced with firearms to draw on when you really need them.

I remember Laskas from the days when I used to read the Post. I'm pleased that she's in PA, not DC, and is open to challenging new concepts.

A long time ago, when I first started accumulating firearms, I invited a college buddy to go shooting. He turned me down flat. I asked why; he was afraid that he'd find it enjoyable.

Let's keep our preconceived notions, and never ever cross the street to the Other Side - what if we found out we liked it there?

 

[Dogabutila]

Good article.

She touched on one of the things that has always bothered me about the gun debate. Namely that conservative, pro-gun, NRA members talk about how illogical the anti-gun position is without the ability to recognize their own flawed arguments.

IMHO, too many gun owners are too quick to debate the 2A without talking about what a tremendous responsibility is entailed in carrying a deadly weapon. Estimating the caliber from an entrance wound in a victim without ever once wondering who the person was, or whether and how she could have avoided becoming a victim? Doesn't put us in a good light.

And how rational is it to think that owning hunting rifles, even semi-auto ARs, keeps us safe from invasion? Everyone in Afghanistan owned fully automatic AK's. Didn't seem to stop us from invading them. Yeah, sign up for all the combat carbine training you want, none of it is going to do you a damn bit of good when faced with mobile artillery and close air support.

You'd be better off learning how to build IEDs.

Unfortunately, many of us can't see how illogical these arguments are, and how they make us look just as stupid as any "blood in the streets" liberal.

What are they going to do, level every major city?

 

[Jstevens56]

only thing I want to know is why the pictures in the slideshow look like they're from the 80's.

 

[Half-cocked]

And how rational is it to think that owning hunting rifles, even semi-auto ARs, keeps us safe from invasion? Everyone in Afghanistan owned fully automatic AK's. Didn't seem to stop us from invading them.

Right... because Iraq and Afghanistan are clearly pacified, and under complete U.S. control, and our troops will be continuing to occupy those places for decades to come...

Now, contrast that with the millions of disarmed civilians that Hitler and Stalin slaughtered.

But, by all means... don't let FACTS get in the way of a good liberal opinion piece.

 

[mopar92]

Yeah, gee, almost as stupid as insisting there's no such thing as an assault rifle.

We need to educate people about the origins and applications of weapons, not just bridle at the terms used.

A light man portable weapon capable of fully automatic fire firing an intermediate cartridge. So by default I own a modern sporting rifle descended from an assault rifle but since I can neither afford or legally buy a happy switch my rifle by definition is NOT an assault rifle.

 

[BenL]

A light man portable weapon capable of fully automatic fire firing an intermediate cartridge. So by default I own a modern sporting rifle descended from an assault rifle but since I can neither afford or legally buy a happy switch my rifle by definition is NOT an assault rifle.

Precisely.

No one suggested there's no such thing as an assault rifle. I merely suggest that anything with a barrel that holds more than 2 rounds is not an assault rifle.

 

[kohburn]

Yeah, gee, almost as stupid as insisting there's no such thing as an assault rifle.

We need to educate people about the origins and applications of weapons, not just bridle at the terms used.

assault rilfe is a military term and accounts for actual class of weapon

assault weapon is a political turned legal term that includes all semi-auto scray looking rifles

do not make the mistake of using the terms to reffer to the same thing

 

[BenL]

only thing I want to know is why the pictures in the slideshow look like they're from the 80's.

Because that is where her opinion is from.



For the first time in a long time (certainly in my lifetime), I feel like the second amendment is coming back into vogue, again. The lefties are in the "hissy fit" stage of losing the war; popular opinion is no longer on their side. They'll do things like write pseudo-objective articles about gun shops or post as concern trolls on gun forums.

 

[boricuamaximus]

Good article.

She touched on one of the things that has always bothered me about the gun debate. Namely that conservative, pro-gun, NRA members talk about how illogical the anti-gun position is without the ability to recognize their own flawed arguments.

IMHO, too many gun owners are too quick to debate the 2A without talking about what a tremendous responsibility is entailed in carrying a deadly weapon. Estimating the caliber from an entrance wound in a victim without ever once wondering who the person was, or whether and how she could have avoided becoming a victim? Doesn't put us in a good light.

And how rational is it to think that owning hunting rifles, even semi-auto ARs, keeps us safe from invasion? Everyone in Afghanistan owned fully automatic AK's. Didn't seem to stop us from invading them. Yeah, sign up for all the combat carbine training you want, none of it is going to do you a damn bit of good when faced with mobile artillery and close air support.

You'd be better off learning how to build IEDs.

Unfortunately, many of us can't see how illogical these arguments are, and how they make us look just as stupid as any "blood in the streets" liberal.

I think you should be interviewed and have a license for speaking your mind. Just to make sure that you dont say anything hateful.