Tuesday’s column: Pimping this blog
Back in May of 2010 I began archiving emails from readers of this column. As of Friday, those number 1,420 , and that doesn’t count the paper letters that arrive. Snippets of many of the above have ended up in monthly reader-feedback columns.
What many of those correspondents are unaware of is there’s another feedback mechanism, a blog connected to this column. This is the first time I’ve specifically pimped it in print.
It’s called Dan Casey’s Blog, and it’s on Roanoke.com. It’s updated daily and is live 24 hours a day. It’s a fun and lively place, though in a few ways it’s become a bane of my existence.
All of the columns are posted there. Many emails I get are posted as “Your daily letter to the Columnist.” There’s a daily “open” thread that solicits comments on any subject, and regular “guest posts” from readers on a variety of topics.
Some concern local issues, such as the appropriateness of building hotels on a former school site in the Dorchester neighborhood. Others are from far away, and on subject as arcade as a visit to an absinthe bar in Prague.
The blog also attracts comments from readers, too, and that’s where a lot of the action is. Since its inception, back in 2009, it’s racked up more than 190,000 comments. It’ll probably hit 200,000 sometime in March if not before then.
READ THE REST OF THIS COLUMN HERE.
January 22, 2013 - 6:00 AM
200,000 hits in March? That’s weird…I thought suz said the blog would take a massive hit when she wasn’t allowed to call the president “monkey boy” anymore?
The Casey Blog is getting stagnate?
200,000 comments, steve.
Ole gray mare she ain’t what she used to be. This is a blog that presents and accepts only one side. The reason everyone has left is because its getting old. It used to be a lot of fun, now it just wreaks of the same topics over and over again. You’re welcome that I read it Dan. But instead Of snidely thanking everyone that reads it, you should take some constructive criticism, especially now that you have to pimp it out. You will find that the left and right both come together to rip apart the moron “leaders” of Roanoke. Lets see more taubman digs, Elmwood park shots, hidden council agendas, etc.
Dan, do you know of a blog or forum where I can express my feelings, vent, or harrass a Newspaper jouralist? I can’t seem to locate one. LOL
Thanks for working so hard to give us a place to be heard. A tremendous amount of time, effort, patience, and skill goes into this blog and it is most appreciated. You put up with a lot, referee those out of hand and have a great time with us. That is not even mentioning the kooks that demean and threaten. Thanks for making Roanoke a better place, Rick
Obviously Mattyr and I cannot even agree on the definition of “a lot of fun”. This blog is still the best thing on Roanoke.com even with all the trolls with no purpose other than that expressed by Mattyr, Frank, Suzie and Leon et al, to change or ruin it.
Dan, not a big fan of using the terms”pimp” or “pimping” in this context. That said, your blog constantly challenges me to challenge my point of view. Keep it up, man!
Dan, your blog has helped to define extreme right wing and extreme leftwing and those in the middle. The two extremes constantly resort to name calling, negative outbursts, cites from anywhere or anything if it comes close to their stated cause, or simply the fact they hate everything. They want to insist that everyone else is stupid and sub-human. They never see the otherside of anything, only their position has any validity.
The great thing about your blog is that it exposes those on the fringes and they and their number are readily identified as only a minority in number. They may contribute most of the posts, but in reality they are but a few. It is comforting to know that our society remains firmly in the middle in number and that the cries of the fringe, while loud, can be heard. Your blog shows that free speech works and protects us from the rants of a few so they do not spoil the minds of the many.
“This is a blog that presents and accepts only one side.”
That the moderator is liberal is a given, but to say only one side is presented or accepted is very inaccurate. For example, the most prolific poster here has been a far right conservative. That she no longer posts as often has as much to do with her gaining more pleasure from degrading others than trying to make a point. That she and others cannot frame an argument while remaining civil is her problem not the moderator’s. I’ve never called anyone here a name but she called me a “moron” and a “jackass” and I probably missed a few. There are rules here just like anywhere else. No one is saying accept my point of view or leave, just follow the rules of civility.
Since your article in today’s paper rehashed the gun debate between Sandi and I, I want to quickly point out to Sandi that NONE of the proposed gun restrictive legislation stops that insane fool in Newtown.
I have no connection to anyone in the illegal gun trades, but I am certain I could find a way to purchase an illegal semi-automatic handgun by the end of the day. So could most of you on this blog. Restrictive gun legislation will only make that process easier.
That is correct Scott Whitaker! Well said. They claim a persecution that is totally of their own making.
Theres a reason for that, Beason…the left views the world through tunnel vision(utopian bubble)and their way is the ONLY way. We ALL saw Harry Reid say that had Romney won, that he `wouldn`t even work with him`. You and the rest are of the same fabric. Grow up.
Mattyr…Don`t stomp on Dannies little `power trip`…after all, he has a whopping 200,000 posts(my mistake, 200,001).
#11…Hypocrite.
12. applewood – thank you for proving my discertation.
Oh and Harry Reid is supposed to just take what we have taken for four years and go on back to business as usual? No, I don’t think so. For a right winger to accuse us of “tunnel vision(utopian bubble)” is pretty hilarious. You folks are in such a bubble you have to revise history, create your own media and distort every fact you come into contact with.
What Reid said, in fact: ”Romney’s fantasy that Senate Democrats will work with him to pass his ‘severely conservative’ agenda is laughable. In fact, Mitt Romney’s Tea Party agenda has already been rejected in the Senate,” Reid said.“
Only in the short run Another Chuck. I am sorry that you will not see past today. No one is trying to stop Newtown, that tragedy already happened. But like the myriad other bad things we have lessened or removed from society, these severely dangerous and not needed guns WILL go, it is only a matter of time and carnage. That you are so willing to risk more carnage is not laudable.
I will also point out that a responsible gun owner COULD have stopped “that insane fool in Newtown”. She chose not to.
applehead, what we “all saw” is you making up random quotes and assigning them incorrectly. That’s what we “all saw”. So why don’t you grow up.
I will also point out that a responsible gun owner COULD have stopped “that insane fool in Newtown”. She chose not to.
Comment by Sandi Saunders — January 22, 2013 @ 9:49 am
AMEN!! That boy NEVER should have had access to any firearm, and his mother is guilty of gross negligence by having them in her home!
We know what he said, Sandi…He is unwilling to work in a bipartisan way..in any shape or form. Obviously, you agree with that. You, my dear, are THE problem, not the solution.
Another Chuck _ The proposed changes allow. down access to assault rifles and slow down the speed of shooting. According to you and others, they would not affect the pro shooter at all and they only limit access for those that are not trained in weapons and where to get them. That is the point you know.
But this blog is about Dan, sorry I went astray.
sorry slow down
AC, I wouldn’t have a clue where to begin to find a place to purchase an illegal firearm.
We ALL saw Harry Reid say that had Romney won, that he `wouldn`t even work with him`. You and the rest are of the same fabric. Grow up.
Comment by applewood — January 22, 2013 @ 9:34 am
So, we can take it that you’re just as outraged about the deliberate obstructionism of Congress against Obama, then. Excellent. The funny thing is that I haven’t seen any posts from you decrying that – no scolding for the “one-term president” language – no cries of disapproval for McConnell’s announcement that the GOP would block anyone put forth by the White House for judicial positions – nor, for that matter, have I seen any laments about pretty much the entire tenure of McConnell.
So, what say you, applewood? Are you selective and blindly biased in your outrage or are you being deliberately disingenuous? So, while Mr. Beason and the rest of us grow up, do you think that maybe you could at least wake up?
We know what he said, Sandi…
Comment by applewood — January 22, 2013 @ 9:56 am
Actually, I think it’s more like “we know what we want to hear.”
The fact of the matter is that both sides are guilty of obstruction, and the voters are allegedly sick of it, yet the obstructionists continue to get elected.
Mattyr stomped on nothing. Especially after he/she started out with thus lie: “This is a blog that presents and accepts only one side.” I mean, what’s the use of paying any attention to a person who has to start a comment with prevarication.
Besides, mattyr, Dan seems to do just fine attracting new bizarre trolling wingnuts like Frank and Applewood. And lo and behold!!! Their confused, paranoid comments appear by the bucketload!!! Now if you’re afraid that Dan allowing them to post their ramblings so often is damaging the way folks view conservatives, you might have a point.
Chicago has perhaps the most restrictive gun laws in the country. How’s that working out? Laws to stop illegal drugs are working great too. We haven’t been able to keep illegal human beings (many with guns) out of the country despite all types of legislation. Sandi, it seems as if you believe that by passing laws we can solve all problems. But, that’s not what you are really saying. You, Obama, liberals et al, are saying, since we don’t like guns, we feel that the rest of you should not be able to have them. As a law abiding citizen, I find that to be very insulting. We are still somewhat a free country.
As an example,if you were serious about eliminating the majority of gun crime, you could go to inner-city communities and talk to people about the harm the gang culture creates. Or talk about the benefits of a 2-parent household, education and personal responsibility. How much would your efforts help? Probably very little. But your efforts would be directed at the source of the majority of the problem as opposed to Obama’s and your efforts to limit magazine sizes and types of weapons law abiding citizens can purchase.
“Now if you’re afraid that Dan allowing them to post their ramblings so often is damaging the way folks view conservatives, you might have a point.”
–Comment by gdad
Many people have accused me of making up these RWer posters, of creating whole anonymous blog personas like Suzie’s, merely for the purpose of making extremne conservatives look like fools. Holy smoke — like I have the time, ha!
It’s absolutely not true. Just for starters, my imagination is way too limited for that kind of stuff. You simply can’t make up the kind of stuff Suzie, and Leon, and (of late) applewood are posting here.
27. Another Chuck – Do you really believe that Chicago is not doing an all of the above approach to stop violence? Maybe you should read about Obama’s community action work in Chicago as well as the actions of others to stop the vilent culture. Perhaps their gun restrictions aren’t strict enough and guns are obtained from other states like VA. Bloomberg seems to think so.
Our governments are trying all reasonable remedies within the realm of budget and priority to stop violence. Perhaps more support of their efforts and less grousing would achieve better results.
Chuck,
Illinois has the most restrictive gun laws in the whole country. Let’s compare that to Arizona, which has the least restrictive.
2011 crime rates in Illinois
Murder rate: 5.6
Forcible rape rape: 28.8
Aggravated assault rate: 237.5
2011 crime rates in Arizona
Murder rate: 6.2
Forcible rape rate: 34.9
Aggravated assault rate: 254.8
Earlier on this blog, I compared New York with Arizona, and Jon Wilburn laughed at that because Arizona is a border state where there’s a lot of drug smuggling.
So lets compare it to California, a neighboring state, also a border state, also a gun-control state, with more inner cities than Arizona has.
2011 crimes rates in California
Murder rate: 4.8
Forcible rape rate: 20.3
Aggravated assault: 242.0
My point is not necessarily that crime is LOWER in gun-control states (it’s not necessarily, depending on the states you’re comparing, and the categories of crime). The point is, it’s foolish to correlate easy and legal access to guns in a given geographic area with a drop or an increase in violent crime.
You guys ought to drop that BS, because it’s so wrongheaded that it actually works against your argument. Even Jason, who’s one of the most hard-care pro-gun folks on this blog, admits that “more guns = less crime is a total myth.”
Richard, I believe they are trying to do the best they can. However, you completely disregarded the point of my post. Passing laws to limit clip size and types of weapons a law abiding citizen can buy will not solve any of these problems. Based upon your previous posts, I have concluded you are a progressive liberal. I applaud your your mentioning the “realm of budget” as a realistic restraint. You must be more evolved than many of your ilk.
Another Chuck, it seems as if you do not understand that a society molds itself by “passing laws” and working for the society we want as opposed to the society we have. No one is naive enough to think “we can solve all problems” with anything. (Well, except right wingers)
I do not believe you have a clue what anyone is saying. You claim we “don’t like guns”, which is stupid because we own and use guns.
What we “feel” is that to have the society we want, we need to remove or disapprove of the things we find detrimental to that society. That does include semi-automatic military styled assault rifles and 30 round magazines for which we find no need or substantive reason to keep in light of their popularity with mass shooters.
Society has also decided “that the rest of you should not be able to have” cocaine, crack, heroin, and haldal (although I am rethinking that one). The concern of society is not whether you “find that to be very insulting” but whether we find that to be better for society.
You all keep harping on “inner-city communities” as if no one is working on the violence and easy availability of guns that the gun culture in this nation has created. But that is not true. There are myriad efforts underway and decades of effort behind the decrease in violence.
The president has (as well as others) talked “about the benefits of a 2-parent household, education and personal responsibility”. Repeatedly. You decry or ignore those efforts, but they exist and can be documented. Limiting these kinds of guns on the street will aid these efforts. No one needs for you to admit that for it to be true.
Mass shootings, which is the current terror tactic attacking society are not the province of the ghetto gangs. They are almost exclusively white, privileged (by poverty standards) and “from good homes”. For some reason the gun culture in this country has convinced them they can “fire at will”.
Dan, I used Chicago as an example and I realize that there seems to be no direct correlation to geography and gun crime. On the other hand, there is no consistent correlation between the strictness of gun legislation vs actual gun crime. And that has been my point all along.
Dan Casey: Many people have accused me of making up these RWer posters, of creating whole anonymous blog personas like Suzie’s, merely for the purpose of making extreme conservatives look like fools.
I doubted that a person with a distinct online persona like Suzie’s would keep quiet after witnessing a blogger liken her overseas trip to Zimbabwe to a witch riding a broom and crashing into a tree, and she (or whatever the gender behind Suzie’s persona) said nothing about it. I need to stop assuming such things.
pimp your blog? what a common and low class phrase
32. Another CHuck – limiting the assualt rifle and clip size along with universal checking will eliminate the chosen weapon of these mass killings, slow down the killing by forcing the killer to pause ( see Arinona killing for how a change of clip gave time to stop the shooter) and make it harder for these killers to get the weapons of choice. Is there anything the limits do that hurt the law abiding citizen. It is not like the Administration is keeping you from hunting, sport shooting,or protecting yourself. What is the big deal. Biden went to great lengths to not step on toes of the normal hunter, etc. but you guys cannot support any change. You would rather see the killings continue than do without something you do not need in the first place.
“there is no consistent correlation between the strictness of gun legislation vs actual gun crime.”
Comment by Another Chuck
Alright, then, AC, that being the case we’ll expect you to tell those like Jack and John who insist on it that there’s not such a correlation.
Not to be immodest, but Suzie made this blog. And not once mention in the OP. That’s gratitude, for ya.
Yes, I brought the blog to its zenith in the fall of 2012. It’s current decline corresponds with my less-frequent postings. Some liberal bloggers basically admit this.
Richard Beason, your comment that ” I would rather see the killings continues that do without something I don’t need in the first place” is wrong and extremely ignorant! I’m surprised Deputy Dan Blog Cop let that be published! No offense, Dan….you can be Sheriff Dan Blog Cop if you want to be;)
Richard,
Your post sounds alot like throwing something on the wall and hoping it will stick. That is not a good basis from which to enact legislation. Connecticut had an assault weapons ban. Effective?
Numerous laws created using that tragedy as the fodder will result in only those same numerous laws being broken once the next nut goes berserk. In case you hadn’t noticed, the laws you think are going to change everything and make us all “safe” are getting violated every time one of these nutsy’s goes lunar. It is against the law to murder, last time I checked…..
That gives you some idea as to their effetiveness, and, the false safety the liberals hope to create in passing such hollow legislation. Not to metion how many clips and assault weapons are already out there. You need to study the history of prohibition to find out what happens when something that was legal gets made illegal-and how effective that was at stopping the flow of liquor in the US.
Why don’t you follow the constitutional process to get the 2nd amendment overturned like was done with prohibition?
I will grant you expertise with any “common and low class phrase” pammala.
Suzie, that is not “immodest” it is insane.
41 Bob the point is that the harder it is to get a weapon, the less chance you will commit murder. This is not prohibition. It’s not an addiction. It’s not even fun. The idea is to slow down the time between an idea and Ann action until intervention can take place. Too compared this with alcohol is absurd.
Another Chuck, sorry to have offended you buy I remain convinced that you are letting you politics control your brain.
“I want to quickly point out to Sandi that NONE of the proposed gun restrictive legislation stops that insane fool in Newtown.”
–Comment by Another Chuck
Newtown, probably not. The crazy guy killed his mom and stole her guns. But Aurora? Va Tech? Tuscon? I think you’re on thin ice saying NONE of Obama’s proposals could have stopped those insane gunners. (Sorry, “fools” just doesn’t seem apt, given their homicidal natures.) Didn’t all those mentally ill gunners buy their guns legally? Some of Obama’s proposals, effectively implemented, could have prevented those guys from buying their guns the way they did.
Sounds like someone saw more counter-violence advocates in Richmond this year and is frustrated that all the money, time and reputation he’s spent on guns didn’t make a damn bit of difference.
suz @ 3:07
“I brought the blog to its zenith in the fall of 2012”.
Oh, You mean with all the derisive comments you received with your dopey “Romney’s gonna win in a landslide” nonsense? You got hammered but good this fall and you deserved it.
suz, your posts are just back ground noise. This blog is doing just fine without you using it as your personal litter box 25 times a day within each thread with you making asinine comments about things you know absolutely nothing about. Why don’t you go elsewhere and find another blog that could benefit from your talent? Everyone thinks this board is far better without you nuke puking all over everything.
I wonder if #46 was supposed to be aimed at me??? Most of it’s posts are but this one is 180 degrees off on all counts, so I’m not sure.
Interesting take by HuffPo on New York’s new laws:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/15/mental-health-experts-new-york-gun-law_n_2480508.html
and NPR
http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2013/01/17/169529792/mental-health-gun-laws-unlikely-to-reduce-shootings
Damn, suzieQ is just so proud of her nonstop trolling and insanely bad predictions. The top achievement of its life.
Come on, John W, what the heck would you do with your life if you didn’t have demonstrations and lobbying efforts to go to or blogs to argue on or new carrying holsters to ponder or businesses banning guns to fret over? Think how bored you’d be if you weren’t out selling stuff for the guns and ammunition industries.
Our mental health system needs fixing a much as the rest of our health care system does, but not because of gun violence. The mentally ill are targets of crime far more often than they are the perpetrators.
#49…The Huffington Post has been proven to spread nothing but LIES to spread thier ideology. NOTHING they print could be further from the truth…Same with the Washington Post, New York Times…LIARS for the MESSIAH Obama. Newsweek is finding out what happens when you continue to LIE, yet they keep right on with the biased lies…Now, that is the epitome of stupidity.
Why is it you people believe any society makes laws?
#47…Well, little Stevie C….Did him have a little tantrum ? Poor little thing, so upset because Suzie actually makes you look like a fool. You just don`t have the intelligence to keep up with her. She speaks truisms…you and your kind MAKE UP LIES. Pathetic.
Oh applewood, you have no credibility and you are still shredding it. Wow, that takes talent.
‘No applewood…you’re the liar.” – Saul Alinsky (dead)
“The Huffington Post has been proven to spread nothing but LIES to spread thier ideology. NOTHING they print could be further from the truth…Same with the Washington Post, New York Times…LIARS for the MESSIAH Obama.”
–Comment by applewood
Good god, this poster is devolving into gibberish even faster than Frank, Suzie and Leon did.
Proven by who? When?
Yet another silly, unsupported assertion by a RW know-nothing who’s supremely confident that they know it all . . . and who, ironically, puts words into the mouth of Thomas Jefferson that he never said.
Wow. I can hear the Non-Civility in this thread from the people who cheered the loudest when Casey instituted the new Civility rules.
Don’t hate. Just sayin’.
Please, 9/11 brought with it sweeping and in many times stupid and intrusive legislation – AND TWO WARS – built square on the back of 3000 dead Americans. Were you all so up in arms with this “never let a crisis go to waste” crap then? Doubtful…unfortunately, no one was, and there was little substantive push-back at all.
The NRA is going to fund plenty of push-back to any new gun legislation, and whatever ends up passing with have spent sufficient time in the cauldron of the Republican House to be adequately debated, analyzed, and compromised on.
We can engage in discourse here without “F thems” and “F you, toos.”
Let’s practice that, starting right now.
Huff Post…Proven LIARS …If you choose to believe that horse manure, so be it. Just because you think its the gospel, doesn`t mean that I believe it. I`ve sifted through the biased-lies and decided that its not worthy of a bird cage floor, which is probably why you fawn over it.
“Were you all so up in arms with this “never let a crisis go to waste” crap then?”
Absolutely.
” RW know-nothing”
Practice over, hit the showers boys.
#56…Sandi…What are you thinking ? Why in the world would I want credibility with you ? Your ego matches your Messiahs.
Oh yes, let’s do keep the cheap veneer of civility, while mauling every other rule of decency. Seriously can you explain the difference between what passes for civility from Frank, Leon, pammala or applewood and the good old-fashioned F bomb? I fail to see any.
“Huff Post…Proven LIARS …If you choose to believe that horse manure, so be it. Just because you think its the gospel, doesn`t mean that I believe it. I`ve sifted through the biased-lies and decided that its not worthy of a bird cage floor, which is probably why you fawn over it.”
–Comment by applewood
Two points here: First, applewood indicted Huffington Post and the New York Times and the Washington Post with the “nothing in them is true” charge. Now, he/she seems to have backed off on two of those three. Now, it’s merely the Huffington Post in which it has been “proven” that “nothing” is true.
So, we are making progress!
The question remains: proven by who? By the person who puts words in the mouth of Thomas Jefferson that he never said?
Nyah . . .
VT Hokie, I didn’t mean you. I’m sure you were. And you haven’t really said much about this, and not that the advantage posed by Newtown is driving legislative opportunism.
“Huff Post…Proven LIARS…”
Proven by whom, applewood. Give us a link. Oh, and when Huff Po repeats word for word something that the Vatican said, does that mean the Vatican is also lying?
Crickets (or just more gibberish).
Heck , Dan..the other day you stated that you didn`t even know who Thomas Jefferson was. Now, you not only bring him up, but also `capitalize` his name. Very good. And, why would I try and prove anything to you ? Do I actually think that you would come out of your utopian bubble, and believe it ? No, I most certainly do not. Ms. Adrianna Huffinton and her service are LIARS…They have been caught red-handed at spreading falsehoods. Get out sometime…open your ears. You`ll have to do away with the `bubble` though.
Man, you guys just need a thrash post. Maintain strict rules of civility on all threads except one thrash post per week/month/whatever. You guys can build up all of your insults and vitriolic condescension and unleash it upon one another. As soon as you’re off of that thread, though, the petty crap is over. I think it would be a good outlet, but I don’t run this blog and there are still rules that have to followed regardless (cursing and such).
A writing site I frequented used to have an annual event called HateMadness, where we’d cut loose on each other in full-on sociopathic rage, whether warranted or not, often just making up bizarre, hateful scenarios. It was set up like a bracket tournament. It was actually quite cathartic and therapeutic. It made us realize that no matter how nasty we could be to one another, they were just words typed into a computer by some person somewhere. They held no truly offensive power. In fact, one of my best online friends I first met as he was my target of a truly horrific HateMadness post. We’re still in contact regularly. I’m not saying that would work here; that site is largely unmoderated and this blog still operates under the mantle of roanoke.com and their rules and regulations. I’m just saying that you’d be surprised at how well it works to blow off some steam on a forum every once in a while and actually seems to make people get along better.
/two cents
“Practice over, hit the showers boys.”
Hmm, looks like Henry had to skip out of the other thread where he got caught just making stuff up.
“By the person who puts words in the mouth of Thomas Jefferson that he never said?”
I’m going with the guy who assigned Machiavelli’s quote to Saul Alinsky (dead)
I was rather hoping for more opinions and thoughts on what the HuffPo article actually said. Instead it devolved into this: “They’re liars!” “No, you are!” “No, you are!”
Anyone have an adult point of view to offer?
The consensus seems to be that there is little to nothing that can be done to stop the carnage so let’s just not bother. Wild, wild west, here we come again. Yippee!
#47…Well, little Stevie C….Did him have a little tantrum ? Poor little thing, so upset because Suzie actually makes you look like a fool. You just don`t have the intelligence to keep up with her. She speaks truisms…you and your kind MAKE UP LIES. Pathetic.
Yeah, Applewood, Steve C has been smarting since I made him look bad in a couple of parodies a couple of years back. Shoot, it was meant as a joke, but he just can’t let it go.
Umm, applewood, Dan was riffing on the fact that you spelled Jefferson as Jeffreson. Gee, you can’t even get that?
Well, VT Hokie, I’d say that it’s certainly possible that the law will indeed cause an unintended effect. But it’s pretty much speculation at this point. I thought the Huffpo article was a good one.
The REALLY hysterical thing is that applewood reacted negatively without even reading the story, which in fact probably supports his view.
” RW know-nothing”
Practice over, hit the showers boys.
Henry continues to show why he’s one of the best at this.
Sandi:
“Wild, wild west, here we come again. Yippee!”
100 fold increase in CHP holders over the last 18 years who also had their rights to carry discretely in restaurants that serve alcohol restored too. All that and no wild, wild west, yet. You make it up as you go.
“Henry continues to show why he’s one of the best at this.”
You mean making stuff up? Or regurgitating FR idiocy? Or both?
“yet”
Admission by John Wilburn @ 9:31pm
“Warren”, that “yet” was quite purposeful as we’ve been waiting for so many “yets” for so long they’ve become a running joke. We have yet to see all of the “bloodshed over bar tabs” that was supposed to happen when discreet carry rights were restored in establishments that serve alcohol, we have yet to see any problems resulting from open carry rights restored in state parks, we have yet to see where the Attorney General’s opinion which stated that self defense was “good cause” for carry in worship service has caused any problem from wider-spred church carry, we have yet to see the chaos that was predicted by the Blacksburg town council over localities losing the control to ban air gun discharge on one’s own property. We have yet to see a whole lot of disasters the gun grabber prophets have wailed about.
“100 fold increase in CHP holders over the last 18 years”…”and no wild, wild west, yet.” But no, don’t let the reference get past you. What was the wild, wild west, if not practically everyone arming and fending for themselves? Did you have some other interpretation of it?
Sandi Saunders:
“What was the wild, wild west, if not practically everyone arming and fending for themselves? Did you have some other interpretation of it?”
http://www.unpopulartruth.com/2009/04/myths-of-old-west.html
JW, have you felt safer in church services since the AG’s opinion?
Dan:
“JW, have you felt safer in church services since the AG’s opinion?”
No real change for me because I carried anyway under the assumption that I might have to defend it if challenged. I have always felt that self defense is most definitely “good cause” and now that the AG has agreed with me, I’m less concerned about having to make such a defense. Of course, I spend less time in a church that most anyone on this blog, so I might not be the best person to ask.
I would feel safer in church services if I wasn’t being asked to turn off my ability to think for myself.
Paranoia 24/7 must eat up a lot of energy.
gdad:
“Paranoia 24/7 must eat up a lot of energy.”
gdad would know. I’d hate to be so afraid that I have to live in anonymity. That must really suck.
Hey, John W, when I get threatened online by right wingers who have already told folks they carry guns, and one of those gun-toting wingnuts pretends he’s discovered who I am and is secretly tracking me, and another one warns me that I’d better be careful what I say because he can make life hard for me, you’re danged right I’m staying anonymous. OTOH, daily life doesn’t scare me so much that I need to own and carry an entire arsenal to feel safe, and I don’t spend any spare time thinking about the aforementioned dolts.