Hey Boo Boo, 'Who are those guys?'

Mark, your condescension is dripping ...

Why does this freedom bother you so much that you resort to lame jokes about baby bald eagles and Yogi the bear?

What's your point, exactly? You may be in Chicago, but Mark, people in the 49 other states can and do carry defensive firearms in public. It's mainstream.

You don't like second amendment rights? Fine. Then don't own or carry a firearm. You can vilify gun-toting criminals, or those who unlawfully use firearms (please do ... certain popular culture seems to glorify them; think "Dolla"). But please ... don't pigeon-hole and vilify those scores of millions who own and use them lawfully.

How about some tolerance?

If anyone is still wondering why the Republican party is a dying breed they need look no farther than todays legislative actions by Tom Coburn and Diaper David Vitter.

What, for the love of God and Charlton Heston, does credit card reform have to do with allowing firearms in national parks? Well, nothing, admits that amendment's sponsor, Republican Tom Coburn of Oklahoma.

"It was just an opportunity," said Coburn spokesman Don Tatro. "Congressional leadership has been trying to keep it from happening; and this was just the first opportunity."
http://money.cnn.com/2009/05/14/news/economy/creditcard_guns/index.htm

But even Coburn's dump of otherwise-unpassable NRA leg humping pales in comparison to Republican David Vitter's pander to the wall-building xenophobes that populate the GOP base. Vitter attempted to tack on an amendment that would require credit card issuers to verify an applicant's immigration status. Vitter's amendment was defeated 68-25

How long before a wild west shootout over a favored campsite? Or, perhaps someone walks near another campsite in the dark in search of the latrine, and some paranoid freak shoots them. Stupid!!

Um, this may be a stupid question, but: How does one "conceal" a "loaded AK-47"?

The moronic right has struck again !! Gun play at Yellowstone National Park, brought to you by the retarded Right !! Great, boys and girls, of the " Republican " Party, now we can worry about gun play, while we watch out for other wild happenings !! You get to play real cowboys and indians, with your guns in the park. Now, that is what I call family-values, the family that shoots together, slays together !!
SUPPORT OUR TROOPS, BRING THEM HOME, ALIVE AND WHOLE. NOW.

I am definitely writing my senators about this one. What do guns in national parks have to do with credit card fees? Makes me wonder what else they'll try and slip in at the last minute. Make this a clean bill!

UNBELIEVABLE!!

How stupid are these people?

NRA lackies.

Oh, boy, mom and dad let's go out into the middle of nowhere and get raped, robbed and murdered in our National Park this summer.

Criminals love to prey on unsuspecting victims in parks and recreation areas....maybe they will think twice now?

Clearly folks on the Left have not visited National Parks. Mark, have you ever set foot in one and I don't mean a quick drive through in your car?
I've been to just about every National Park in this country, and I mean in them. With many, particularly out West, you'd be an idiot to not carry protection of some kind, and it's not so you can shoot at people, so you can protect yourself from a wild animal. I've been in campgrounds in the National Parks in which a bear was no more than 20 feet away. You don't have to kill or even shoot at the bear, but a gunshot can be the difference between living and dying. But I am in complete favor of any Loony Lefty going deep into the forests without any protection at all. In fact, while you're in the woods, please make sure your clothes smell like breakfast, lunch and dinner!! Please!

When does RVer season open?

As a matter of fact, yes, have spent considerable time in a tent and hiking in national parks, Yellowstone, Grand Teton, Glacier, Rocky Mountain, Everglades among them. I particularly like the National Forest campgrounds, as opposed to the national parks, because they are more primitive, less amenable to RVs, more tent and backpack oriented. I pulled in with my family one night at a National Forest campground on the shore of Lake Superior in the Upper Penninsula of Michigan, 30 miles down a stone road to the lake, at dusk, to find about eight empty campsites and a big bear trap set in one, empty as it were. Spent the night in the tent a little wary, but managed to get through it without a gun, as I did all of my camping and hiking experiences in the best parks in America. It's not the animals I worry about, it's the other people. They can leave their guns at home, and the rest of us will be the safer for it.

It's funny how the vast majority of the millions upon millions of legal American gunowners manage to avoid raping, robbing, and murdering people in their homes, on their streets, and around their places of business. It's almost as if they can control themselves.

"...particularly out West, you'd be an idiot to not carry protection of some kind."

Oooh Johnny D, you stud you. Wrap that rascal.

Little Johnny D,
The only thing you have to worry about when you visit a national park is running into me. I'd take away your peashooter and break you in half like a pretzel before you could even blink an eye.

Republicans need guns, otherwise they'd get their as*es kicked.

John D,
You fool. First of all, it's we on the left that want to keep the parks intact and protected. Remember HB241? Part of the Contract on America?
I have camped in a tent, hiked and visited National Parks for over 50 years and not once have been threatened by man nor beast.
And the last thing I would want is some cretin like you with loaded weapon mincing around the campground.
If you are worried about crime in the parks, support increased ranger enforcement officers.
You are delusional.

Of course this law will make it easier for criminals, and just plain nut-jobs like John D to get loaded guns into the parks.

What is it with these right winger males and their Hummers and guns? Are they compensating for some,,,, deficiency in some area?
Or are they really just scared little boys?

"With many, particularly out West, you'd be an idiot to not carry protection of some kind.."

Some of us actually live 'out West'.
Get on to Ebay and bid on a clue.

And you know what? I don't think you, John D, could even kill a bear with a gun. I seriously doubt you would be able to pull it off. You would wound the bear badly, and it would go on a rampage and the real authorities would have to clean up your mess.

"It's funny how the vast majority of the millions upon millions of legal American gunowners manage to avoid raping, robbing, and murdering people in their homes, on their streets, and around their places of business. It's almost as if they can control themselves.
Posted by: Jack | May 19, 2009 7:56 PM"

Or maybe it's funny that all the hundreds of thousands of criminals with guns in America used to be law abiding citizens with an available gun?

"Clearly folks on the Left have not visited National Parks."

That statement is just plain stupid on the face of it.

Come on Bruce and Terry. Even you guys would have to admit that statement makes not one tiny bit of sense.

John D, aren't you ever ashamed of the stupidities you post here?

Explain to us how you arrived at the conclusion that lefties have never really been in a National Park? We are the tree huggers, you dimwit!

Hmmm, it's amazing that the Swamp Gestapo Thugs will censor thought that is not of the Left. Yet, the Swamp Censor Thugs will post threats made upon others:

Little Johnny D,
The only thing you have to worry about when you visit a national park is running into me. I'd take away your peashooter and break you in half like a pretzel before you could even blink an eye.

Republicans need guns, otherwise they'd get their as*es kicked.

Posted by: John E | May 19, 2009 8:18 PM

Weird, sick, John E: I wouldn't need a gun against a still lives at home in mummy's and daddy's basement loser like you, but then again given the chance. . . . .

Silva,

I saw the headline and I thought it was about the old Algore story:

"Who are those guys????"
Al Gore, pointing to the busts of George Washington, Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson, during a tour of the museum at Monticello prior to the 1993 inauguration.

I don't know, I think that although driving 55 would save a lot of lives and gas, just think of how long it would take to get anywhere.

See? Arguing about the above topic makes as much sense as arguing about guns. They have nothing nothing nothing to do with credit card reform! We can argue about guns separately, I agree with carrying btw. The pubs win again. Now, look closely at this hand, keep watching this hand...

Have hiked, camped, for 50 years all over the West. The only time I ever felt threatened was during hunting season when a bunch of drunken idiots with assault rifles started shooting anything that moved.

Jack,

Do you ever get out? Do you ever watch the news? Gun owners murder people in their homes all the time. There have been several mass murders by fathers of their families in just the past few weeks.

Johnny D.,
You sniveling boob. Man up or crawl back into your backyard bunker.

For anyone undecided about this, imagine this:

That guy blasting "Macho Man" by the Village People from his RV is John D packin' heat.

Feel safer?

I'm a 59 year old woman and the holder of a Concealed Handgun License. I carry a weapon with me where it is legal to do so. I 've never had to use my gun, which by the way is a Beretta Tomcat, not an AK 47, but at 5'2" I feel like the playing field is a little more even knowing my weapon is close by. One would be naive to think the bad guys are only in the cities and wouldn't think of going to a park and taking advantage of someone in a "house" without solid walls! Those of you who disagree, might want to check the crime rate of CHL holders compared to that of the rest of the populous.

If anyone still is wondering why newspapers are going bankrupt, read the above "news" column, where Mark Silva tries his best to imitate the New York Times-style snarky Leftwing sneerathon--and can't even do that very well.

Meanwhile, in much more important news, the voters of California overwhelmingly rejected a set of tax hikes proposed by the Governator and the Democratic legislature. See http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gtCWUjTUW08PytEz1VoNOaz9pzJQD989T0CG0 for the details. Yes, even California voters are sick of higher taxes and, given a chance, will vote against tax hikes, news that the tax-loving left and the media will try and hide.

"Criminals love to prey on unsuspecting victims in parks and recreation areas....maybe they will think twice now?"

Right! With this law they can be fully armed, and no one can do a thing!

Posted by: John D | May 19, 2009 6:44 PM

Brilliant! John D wants people to be able to carry guns in National Parks in order to be able to shoot the wild life the parks are there to protect.

"Look Mommy, The buffalo is crossing the road!" BLAM! BLAM! BLAM! "Not anymore Jimmy."

I personally love the comments about how its going to be a shootout.
As a CCW, much of this conversation is biased as best.
You do realize in almost all states that allow CC, 48 of them in some way shape or form, it is already legal to carry in a national/state forest, just not national parks... yet.

I could truly care less either way, as I will follow whatever the law states, but it is legal in national forests in states already.

www.handgunlaw.us

You're right David. I'm sure the "criminals" didn't carry weapons before this law passed. But wait, criminals can't buy a weapon legally, so I guess there's really nothing for me to worry about :)

To John D and CarlIn Chicago and the rest of you defending the second amendment. If it were a democratic senator inserting the pork you'd all be foaming at your mouths crying fowl! But since its a republican adding the pork to this bill you try to change the outrage into a constitutional right to bare arms! And you wonder why the majority of Americans voted you guys out? WTF does carrying a gun have to do with credit card abuse???
JohnD, I've camped in Yellowstone, Glacier, Teton and many other places growing up and my Dad always brought his handgun, Now an AK47, thats a different story. Perhaps you should bring your bazooka next time and blast that deadly bear cave into oblivion! So again I aks what does this pork have to do with this bill?? NOTHING YOU MORON!

It's been a joy to read the comments from the Dimwit Left. Dimwits, first of all, states with concealed carry laws have LOWER crime rates and those rates fell after concealed/carry laws passed. Crime rates are highest in areas with the most rigid anti-gun laws like Chicago, DC, etc.
As far as wildlife in National Parks, I have never shot at one and hope that never to be the case. But every year people get maimed or killed by wild animals out in the wild. I've been in the hinterlands of Alaska, Montana, Idaho, Utah, Colorado and other states. I've backpacked in Canada where not a soul was in site. Protection is a necessity, one hopes to never have to use it.
And, by the way, when it comes to our wild animals, I am a proud supporter of World Wildlife Fund as well as groups that protect our domesticated animals such as the Humane Society and ASPCA. And, I own several rescued pets and have found homes for other rescued pets.

Dimwitted Lefties, please exit USA as quickly as possible so us decent, hard-working, tax-paying, intelligent folk can make this country great again!

John D -- OK, so you are in your camp area and a bear comes along. You shoot at it and miss. Where does that bullet go? More than likely into the body of some innocent person (child?) out for a nature walk.

Good going.

Gosh...If those National parks are that rough....maybe we should put the Gitmo detainees there.

Retrograde John D,
We are talking about National Parks, which are crowded, not public lands, National Forests or wilderness areas.
All these areas have different standards and levels of protection.

Your statements make me wonder if it is actually YOU that has never been in a National Park.

You people just don't get it.

John D,

Check out the photo above. Mr. Ranger doesn't carry a weapon even though Yogi steals picnic baskets regularly. It's a crime spree. Shoot Yogi, then explain it to Boo Boo, who you could make into one of your rescued pets. What a prized trophy!

By the way, NYC, for one, has rigid gun laws and crime has dropped year after year. Once again, you're simply WRONG, and frankly it's getting tiring.

Dimwitted Lefties, please exit USA as quickly as possible so us decent, hard-working, tax-paying, intelligent folk can make this country great again!

Posted by: John D | May 20, 2009 11:30 AM

Oh really? Like the past 8 years of the largest government and largest deficit in history? This is what you call great? And you still wonder how you lost! LOL

* * * * *
Or maybe it's funny that all the hundreds of thousands of criminals with guns in America used to be law abiding citizens with an available gun?
.
Posted by: Allajoke | May 19, 2009 9:24 PM
.
Please, go live in the forest. If you believe what you wrote, you are poorly adapted to civilization and have no conception of causation or human nature. To believe what you wrote, you should then fear for the water faucets, bathtubs and toilets in your home as they may cause you to commit suicide or murder someone by drowning. You should fear the contents of the kitchen as they might make you to stab someone, rob another at the point of a fork, get obese and die from using spoons, or microwave the neighbor’s toy poodle. You should tremble at the sight of a car in the garage because it may cause you to run over someone or drive drunk. And since electricity might tempt you to torture or kill people, by all means turn it off. Yet, without these amenities, you may as well live in the forest and leave the dangerous life to the civilized.
.
“Many wise words are spoken in jest, but they don't compare with the number of stupid words spoken in earnest.” - Sam Levenson

* * * * *
Posted by: Scot S. Blakeley | May 20, 2009 11:12 AM
.
Thanks for keeping the Swamp the best comedy show around. Your high dudgeon this time has produced a genuine Dan Quayle moment. I quote:
.
“If it were a democratic senator inserting the pork you'd all be foaming at your mouths crying fowl!”
.
Uh-uh, Scot. We cry “fowl” to draw attention to birds. The term might come to mind upon observing a Democrat Senator, but not always. Also, not all Senators belong to the Democratic Party, but I would hope they were all “democratic.” In addition, I might be prompted to cry “foul” depending on what you mean by a “democratic senator inserting the pork.” It would be heinous act to do such a thing to a “fowl.” However, an amendment that doesn’t provide for spending isn’t considered “pork” in the political and legislative sense. Therefore, the amendment spoken of in this case doesn’t qualify. And, lastly, Scot: If I were you, I wouldn’t be calling someone else a moron after being tackled by a homophone.

John D.,
Your postings are loony and dimwitted and for the most part, untruthful. You in for a long 8 years mister and I suggest you leave the country so you don't do anything drastic. Move overseas to a real socialist country.You say you been to the hinterlands. Yeah right. Where in Canada have you been backpacking?? What parks did you visit in Idaho?? Your a first class fool who is full of it.

I think they need to expand this bill to include theme parks. I can't tell you how many times my family was attacked by a 5ft mouse or a 6ft moose. I need to blow those suckers away before they eat my family.

John w, Unlike all the things you name, handguns are designed to do one thing, and one thing only, kill human beings. If you can't see that difference, then you really should go live in a nice safe bunker deep underground where your lack of logic and ability to reason won't make you a danger to the rest of humanity. Civilisation is obviously more than your barbarian nature can handle.

* * * * *
Posted by: Nick | May 20, 2009 4:24 PM
.
Nick,
.
Your ignorance is astounding.
.
Handguns are not, as you say, “designed to do one thing, and one thing only, kill human beings.” Manufacturers also design handguns for hunting and for defense against attacks by wild animals (other than humans). Certain large caliber handguns have, for example, been developed recently for use in Alaska to allow workers and outdoorsmen to protect themselves from getting eaten by large bears. Also worthy of mention is the fact that some firearms, including handguns, are designed for target shooting and nothing else. Target shooting is a sport, and is part of more than one Olympic contest. So, while shooting human beings is one of the intended and designed purposes of some firearms it is by far not the only reason for their design or existence.
.
In addition, you completely missed the point of my post. The point of my post (in response to the earlier poster) was to ridicule the notion that crime could result from the undue influence of inanimate objects. Crimes are acts of human will. Inanimate objects do not and cannot “cause” criminal behavior simply because human beings have access to them. Crimes, and violent crimes in particular, occur only because those who would commit them already possess the character, the hardness of heart and malignant mind, to do so. Firearms cannot load themselves, hide themselves, draw themselves, aim themselves or pull their own triggers. Without a human agent willing to use one, a firearm will sit motionless in the last place it was left. In other words, people are morally and practically responsible for crime, rather than the instrumentalities they use. That is why we punish humans for criminal behavior, and not their guns and knives.
.
Do you understand now, or must I follow up with an illustrated post with places for you to color in? In any event, I think you should go now. Your mommy might discover that you have been using her computer.
.
PS - It doesn’t become you to accuse others of lacking in logic until you acquire the capacity to be logical yourself. Nor would I accuse others of lacking in the ability to cope with “civilization” unless I first learned how to spell the word.

Oh Doug, I backpacked near Lake Louise in Canada and in British Columbia. As far as the U.S. is concerned I've been just about everywhere in Alaska from the Kenai Peninsula all the way up to Barrow. I've walked on glaciers in Wrangell, St. Elias National Park; seakayaking near Valdez; and throughout Denali. In the Lower 48, been to Glacier twice, Rocky Mtn. National Park, Craters of the Moon and Sun Valley in Idaho to name a couple; Arches, Zion, Bryce, Moab in Utah, Grand Canyon and Sedona in Ariz.; Yosemite in California; and more. In fact, since you weirdoes are so curious about me I have been in every U.S. state (50, not the 57 Obama spoke of), and every province in Canada but the Northwest Territories and the Yukon. I've been from Vancouver all the way to St. John, Newfoundland.

I think the one with the blue umbrella is John D.

Hunting with hanguns? Yeah, that's what they're designed for. You're a funny guy John. Great comedy ! Does anyone take your nonsense seriously?

Why are you flatliners worried about law-abiding citizens having guns in the park? It's the non-law abiding citizens that you should worry about. The non-law abiding were probably already carrying the guns into the parks anyway. (That's what makes them non-law abiding).

BillyR and Scottie - you might want to sit, your head is probably spinning.

“Hunting with hanguns? Yeah, that's what they're designed for. You're a funny guy John. Great comedy ! Does anyone take your nonsense seriously?”
.
Posted by: Nick | May 20, 2009 9:54 PM
.
You mean you’ve never heard of handgun hunting? Here, read all about it:

http://www.biggamehunt.net/sections/Firearm/Beginners_Guide_to_Big_Game_Handgun_Hunting_10120412.html
.
http://www.hawkbullets.com/Handgun.htm
.
http://www.chuckhawks.com/handgun_hunting.htm
.
http://www.basspro.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CFPageC?storeId=10151&catalogId=10001&langId=-1&&mode=article&objectID=30232&cat=&subcatID=0&objectType=article
.
http://www.handgunhunt.com/
.
http://www.foggymountain.com/handgun-bear-hunting.shtml
.
Just give up, Nick. You lose. And you know what else? You’re pretty arrogant for someone as ignorant as you routinely turn out to be.

Thank you John SNOB W for correcting my spelling however pork is pork no matter how you wrap it. So what that there is no spending involved, again please explain to me what does having a handgun in Yellowstone park have to do with this bill?? And Terrie, so glad to see ya here, just a reminder though, its your head thats still spinning from the losses after the election not mine.

John W, I encourage you to go hunting bear with a hand gun. Have fun! We'll miss you!

* * * * *
Posted by: Scot S. Blakeley | May 21, 2009 7:58 AM
.
Scot:
.
1. I didn’t correct your spelling. You spelled the words correctly. You just used them incorrectly. I would have had more to write about if I was into fixing your grammar and spelling. I just stuck to the funny parts.
.
2. The term “pork” - short for “pork barrel” or “pork barrel politics” - refers to spending that is intended to benefit constituents of a politician in return for their political support. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pork_barrel and http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1O999-porkbarrel.html. It is never used to refer to legislation without these features. In which case, you used the term incorrectly to describe the handgun amendment. That amendment conferred no localized benefits.
.
3. So you ask: “[P]lease explain to me what does having a handgun in Yellowstone park have to do with this bill??” It doesn’t. Then again, there is no rule that requires an amendment to a bill to have anything to do with the bill’s original content. There have been many instances where an amendment to a bill has so altered the original content that even the bill’s original sponsors ended up voting against it.
.
4. You call me a snob? That’s rather impudent coming from someone who can’t spell or use words correctly, yet can call someone else a “moron” because they dare to hold a valid, yet contrary, opinion. As I see it, that makes you a snob, Scot.

* * * * *
Posted by: Nick | May 21, 2009 10:31 AM
.
I wouldn’t go bear hunting if I had an elephant gun and a platoon of Marines with me. (I only hunt for “fowl.”) But that doesn’t change the fact that people hunt with pistols, that handgun manufacturers have adapted handguns designs for that purpose, or that you were wrong in all of your previous assertions about handguns.
.
But instead of admitting you were wrong (like you are), you just change the subject and come back at me with ankle-biting remarks. Since I don’t particularly care to engage in a debate with someone whose position changes like a moveable feast, I am finished.

Scottie,

It's your track record on issues that parallels the Cub's WS success.

"that handgun manufacturers have adapted handguns designs for that purpose"

You mean they have adapted handguns from their originally designed purpose, killing human beings. Sounds like I was pretty right.

Terrie, that phrase is so old already give it up and John, if being human and typing too fast making mistakes is what makes a snob well then Im all for it. You on the other hand are the true snob and hypocrite. I have no doubt if a democrat had injectied something you conservatives are so against into this bill you'd be just as passionately against it as I am for this BS ok!

Your words and wisdom is so profound it makes me blush! There feel beter now?

“You mean they have adapted handguns from their originally designed purpose, killing human beings. Sounds like I was pretty right.”
.
No, you originally claimed that “handguns ARE designed” for only one purpose, namely killing people. That was a sweeping statement of the PRESENT purpose for handgun design, and it was wrong. You previously said nothing about their original design or purpose. Even if you had, you still would have been wrong; because handguns were originally designed for more than killing people.
.
But we still see you, again, attempting to move your arguments retroactively. You should have been a Soviet historian. A good Soviet historian, it was said, could always accurately predict the past.

Scottie,

History is littered with popular people and ideas that were thought to be the next great thing only to have time and history prove them to be nothing but phony and wrong. Sorry you on board that train.

Scottie,
History is littered with popular people and ideas that were thought to be the next great thing only to have time and history prove them to be nothing but phony and wrong. Sorry you on board that train.

Posted by: Terry | May 21, 2009 4:11 PM

Terrie, you're so full of cliches today, just like the rest of your republican party they're tired and old!

Scottie,

You just can't dispute facts.

Scottie,

You just can't dispute facts.

Posted by: Terry | May 21, 2009 9:28 PM

And you cant ever stick to the present issues at hand without drudging up something from the past. It is a fact that you and your party lost the last elections and many red states. It is a fact that the majority of Americans agree with the current direction of the country. It is a fact that the republicans have a lower approval rating in congress than the democrats. It is a fact that your party has an identity crisis. It is a fact that nobody cares!

Scottie,

All facts. Speaking of not sticking to the isuue at hand, when did this become a post about 2006 & 08 election results? I thought this was a topic on the right to bring guns into national parks?

Conservatives are in the same place the flatliners were at in 2005. Tides shift and tables turn. We just saw an interesting election in California this week.

ya ya we shall see...but if I were you I wouldnt hold my breath!

I give you five bucks if you can hold it for an hour.