Or, as Peter Carlisle said, a law abiding gun owner that can't drink only one drink....

MuddaBiotch Minority Report

Or, as Peter Carlisle said, a law abiding gun owner that can't drink only one drink....

It's a well known fact that every single person on Earth is completely incapable of controlling themselves.  When you drink a beer, or any alcoholic beverage for that matter, that drink then forces you to drink another, and another, and another.  There is no self control!

So, like the repressive government in Orwell's "1984", she believes in thought crimes. Essentially, we're all guilty and we must prove our innocence by never committing a crime.

Libtard logic, I guess.

Or, as Peter Carlisle said, a law abiding gun owner that can't drink only one drink....

When I first moved here in the early 90s, I was told of a stereotype:  most locals who drink do so excessively.  This rampant alcoholism is a problem that everyone just knows about.  It was part of why we were told you leave cases of beer out for the garbage collection workers.

Whether or not that's true, maybe we should be asking why that problem isn't being addressed instead of lumping all residents into the same stereotype.


Most places that have CCW have some regulations concerning alcohol.  As discussed in the Deedy trial, we might want to consider a zero tolerance rule while packing heat.  The other way is to make carrying a firearm while intoxicated consistent with driving under the influence.  use the same 0.08 BAC  level to judge if a person carrying is breaking the law.  Simply assuming all who drink can't stop themselves from becoming legally drunk KNOWING THEY ARE CARRYING A FIREARM WHICH CAN CAUSE ALL KINDS OF LEGAL TROUBLE is very insulting.


I've heard it said that when you carry a firearm in public, you become a different person.  There are no more confrontations in movie lines when someone cuts in  front of you, no more road rage, no more drinking past the point of legal intoxication ... you make your decisions now factoring in that bulge on your hip, and that you will be inviting extra scrutiny by law enforcement for the simple fact you are carry a gun -- probably the only one involved who is carrying.  If you are at fault in any way for an altercation, the gun will just make matters worse, even if you didn't draw it.  Some irate punk getting in your face will make you decide to just walk away, whereas before you might have stood your ground.

The stakes are higher when you carry a gun, and that fact isn't lost on most people.  You will act like a different person ... more mature .... more responsible ... and less likely to drink at all without first storing the gun away somewhere out of reach.

Like the author I find it "ironic" that her name is GUNN-BARRETT 

I find it funny that "anti gunners" are so predisposed to criminal psychotic behavior that proliferates when they are in possession of a firearm. I for one don't have the same problem of "stupidity and irrationality" that Miss Gunn-Barrett and her gun banning posse suffer from. I guess the one positive is that if she ever has a change of heart and decides to want to own a fire arm her admission of being a crazy lady would preclude her from ownership during back ground checks and protect us all from her stupid and irrational behavior.

Geez, one look at that skank and you know she is a New Yerker. 

Wish we could cordon off that cesspool from the rest of the country and eliminate it's influence and prevent contamination.

Based on this reasoning, every single law enforcement officer nationwide should be disarmed because they're bound to abuse their power and use their firearms to kill innocent people.

 

"I find that OFFENSIVE! You shouldn't/can't DO/SAY that!"

How many times have you heard some whiney PC leftist say something to this effect? I know I've heard it quite often, those of you that know me know why. 

This admonishment tells us a great deal about those that use it. They are telling us "I have no control over my emotions. So I need YOU to alter YOUR behavior/speech to control it for me." As they are usually utterly self centered and smug in the knowledge they couldn't possibly be "wrong" about anything, this seems like a normal mental outlook to them, not psychosis. They think "everyone" thinks this way. Of course, in their insular little world, it's probably true.

They simply assume that we are the same simple minded fools, incapable of self control, that they are.

They think "everyone" thinks this way. Of course, in their insular little world, it's probably true.

In NYC, likely to be true, which is why I am all for excising that cancerous cesspool out and ridding the country from it's poisonous influence.

Just figure, all the major alphabet networks are there, the NY Slimes, get rid of them all.