The Pelican and Guns

Discussion in 'The Howard Stern Show' started by itpdude, Jan 14, 2013.

  1. itpdude

    itpdude New Member

    Reputations:
    61
    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    14,597
    Likes Received:
    13
    Where is The Pelican wrong about guns? I'm not an expert on firearms. There are probably a bunch of people on this board who know a TON more about firearms than me, but I do own several firearms and have a good idea of what is what. And that non-expert knowledge is far greater than The Wig's knowledge. There are some basic concepts that The Wig is wrong about and he's not alone. Many people don't know the differences between certain weapons on a base-level.

    One: The CT shooter did not use automatic weapons. Automatic weapons are firearms where the trigger can be held down and the rounds keep on firing. The CT shooter used semi-automatic weapons. A semi-auto weapons is one where you have to pull the trigger for each round to fire. A semi-auto is different than, say, bolt-action or pump-action where, say, with a pump-action, you must chamber a new round by pulling the pump-handle. Bolt-actions are very similar to pump-action in that to chamber a new round, you must open the breech to extract and chamber a new round.

    Two: "There are limitations on the first amendment (libel and slander), therefore there should be limitations on the second amendment", Howard Stern paraphrased. There are already limitations on the second amendment. Example: A 12 year old cannot purchase a rifle. Depending on jurisdiction, a convicted felon who has served his time cannot own a firearm or is subject to limitations on where he can possess a firearm (in TX, it is limited to the convicted felon's house). A 20 year old cannot purchase a pistol. Machine guns have essentially been illegal since 1934.

    Three: "The founders never envisioned any firearm other than muskets when they wrote the 2nd amendment", Howard Stern paraphrased. The problem with the concept of limiting the bill of rights to those things available at the time of the writing of the Constitution is that the founders, for example with the first amendment regarding free-speech, were most familiar with pamphlets, newspapers, soap-boxes in the city square, etc. The founders had NO IDEA that free-speech could ever be extended to radio, television, satellites, social-media, the internet, etc.

    If we are going to be okay with limiting access to firearms more under the guise of "the founders never envisioned an AR-15 semi-automatic weapon", then we provide precedent to limit the first amendment more under the guise of "the founders never envisioned something called Twitter and Facebook being used to organize violent flash-mobs."

    I know, TL;DR. Sorry.
     
  2. reno

    reno VIP Extreme Gold

    Reputations:
    322,159
    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2012
    Messages:
    13,678
    Likes Received:
    40,436
    For someone who has a gun and a NYC permit, he seems pretty ignorant about guns in general.
     
  3. Kamie

    Kamie Active Member

    Reputations:
    57
    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2012
    Messages:
    3,377
    Likes Received:
    20
    If everyone had such well-thought out opinions, this country would be a better place. Anyway, I don't think Howard is putting that much thought into it. He is just parroting back opinions held by his friends in the Hamptons.
     
  4. ohmicah

    ohmicah Real Gad About Town

    Reputations:
    263
    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2012
    Messages:
    8,282
    Likes Received:
    3,693
    Once we accepted that these are privileges and not rights we were sunk as a country. That would be about Woodrow Wilson times.

    The Founding Fathers, who coined the phrase 3/5 of a person, may not have envisioned the technology or weaponry of today but they sure as shit knew how a government behaves. Keeping the government in check is the whole point of the Bill of Rights. Not the government keeping us in check.
     
  5. itpdude

    itpdude New Member

    Reputations:
    61
    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    14,597
    Likes Received:
    13
    Thanks for calling my post "well-thought out." I needed that today. It's a bit gloomy in Atlanta today.

    But yeah, Howard is going for the basest argument possible and is getting a LOT of his facts wrong. It's so strange.

    The pro-gun crowd could easily say, "okay, let's make auto weapons illegal and leave it at that", which would mean no new laws would be passed because that law is already in place with the 1934 Firearms Act: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Firearms_Act
     
  6. RumBalls

    RumBalls The original RumBalls, est. Jan 16, 2012

    Reputations:
    10,136
    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    2,622
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Glorified version of a Pel-I-can
     
  7. Kamie

    Kamie Active Member

    Reputations:
    57
    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2012
    Messages:
    3,377
    Likes Received:
    20
    Now we will have gun control via executive order. Who needs Congress when you have a benevolent King?
    "My understanding is the vice president's going to provide a range of steps that we can take to reduce gun violence," said Obama. "Some of them will require legislation, some of them I can accomplish through executive action. And so I will be reviewing those today, and as I said, I will speak in more detail to what we're going to go ahead and propose later in the week. But I'm confident that there are some steps that we can take that don't require legislation and that are within my authority as president, and where you get a step that, has the opportunity to reduce the possibility of gun violence, then i want to go ahead and take it."
     
  8. nicksgt

    nicksgt Well-Known Member

    Reputations:
    -49,134
    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2012
    Messages:
    6,593
    Likes Received:
    5,682
    :spit:
     
  9. Winst

    Winst Well-Known Member VIP

    Reputations:
    -12,881
    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2012
    Messages:
    8,290
    Likes Received:
    2,224
    No one ever questions HS about his possible ownership/possession of (very) *illegal* firearms.

    Maybe someday someone should...maybe someday someone will.


    It was a (special) gift...he didn't buy it.
    It's been mentioned/hinted at on the air a few times.
     
  10. Chimney Portions

    Chimney Portions I drink cum Banned User

    Reputations:
    53,779
    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2011
    Messages:
    30,067
    Likes Received:
    2,253

    I suspect he'll try to close the "gun show loophole" via EO. How could he justify using an EO on an "assault weapon" ban when we're less than 20 years removed from an "assault weapon" ban that was a result of an act of congress. Then again, it is Obama we're talking about...

    I don't care if people hate guns or love Obama...the fact that we have come to accept our presidents acting as legislators is deeply alarming.
     
  11. Chimney Portions

    Chimney Portions I drink cum Banned User

    Reputations:
    53,779
    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2011
    Messages:
    30,067
    Likes Received:
    2,253
    I don't recall ever hearing that. Ever since I've been listening, Howard has been anal about the law.
     
  12. shitcunt

    shitcunt Well-Known Member

    Reputations:
    14,432
    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    3,992
    Likes Received:
    1,478
    Liberals do everything based on feelings. They want to pass a bunch of laws that wouldn't have done anything to stop the CT shooting just so they feel better. Who cares if it makes schools even a tiny bit safer. Just do something so you feel better.
     
  13. itpdude

    itpdude New Member

    Reputations:
    61
    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    14,597
    Likes Received:
    13
    The executive legislates all the time. Example: Congress passes an environmental law saying carbon monoxide pollution needs to be cut X%. That's it.

    The EPA, which is the executive, then comes up with rules that it feels are consistent with cutting that particular pollution X%. It's a whole thing.

    But executive orders are a whole other thing. I would love to see Obama do an EO ban on guns or whatever. I hope he overplays his hand. It's our best chance at a dissolution of the United States union which is probably the best thing that could happen. Example: A United States split up, say, 4 ways means a decreased ability to continue American imperialism across the globe, playing world's policeman.

    That would be nice.
     
  14. HORSETOOTHED

    HORSETOOTHED Well-Known Member

    Reputations:
    6,155
    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2011
    Messages:
    2,464
    Likes Received:
    1,209
    An Uzi maybe?

    I agree with CP though, I doubt he'd keep any illegal guns, he's too afraid of jail.
     
  15. itpdude

    itpdude New Member

    Reputations:
    61
    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    14,597
    Likes Received:
    13
    You gotta think that Howard and a lot of other celebs keep it pretty clean because they don't want to become examples.
     
  16. Chimney Portions

    Chimney Portions I drink cum Banned User

    Reputations:
    53,779
    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2011
    Messages:
    30,067
    Likes Received:
    2,253
    Uzis are legal in NY (for now.) I bought a post-ban Uzi carbine back when I still lived in Long Island. I know that NY doesn't permit Class III ownership, so a full-auto Uzi would be illegal to own no matter how rich you are, but there are heaps of semi-auto Uzis in NY. Carbines and pistols.
     
  17. Chimney Portions

    Chimney Portions I drink cum Banned User

    Reputations:
    53,779
    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2011
    Messages:
    30,067
    Likes Received:
    2,253
    Nothing would make my happier.
     
  18. itpdude

    itpdude New Member

    Reputations:
    61
    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    14,597
    Likes Received:
    13
    I know several things that would make me happier. Fuck you money would make me happier. Say $10 million after-taxes? That would make me happier than the US stopping its imperialism.

    Hmmm, the ability to travel in time would make me happier than a cessation of US imperialism.

    Trying to think of what else. . . . . I guess ending of all hostilities throughout the world. That would make me happier, but that's kind of incorporated into the US not being an imperial state.
     
  19. itpdude

    itpdude New Member

    Reputations:
    61
    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    14,597
    Likes Received:
    13
    Wonder if a split up US could, or would, afford the war on drugs?
     
  20. Chimney Portions

    Chimney Portions I drink cum Banned User

    Reputations:
    53,779
    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2011
    Messages:
    30,067
    Likes Received:
    2,253
    A United America can't even afford the war on drugs.