Tongue in cheek satire!

Tongue in cheek satire!

This is a discussion on Tongue in cheek satire! within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; The part time gun owner. (Inspired by havegunjoe's mention of such types in another thread.) This is what we talk about so often - the ...

Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Tongue in cheek satire!

  1. #1
    VIP Member (Retired Staff) Array P95Carry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    South West PA

    Tongue in cheek satire!

    The part time gun owner.

    (Inspired by havegunjoe's mention of such types in another thread.)

    This is what we talk about so often - the guy who has just enough for his hunting or sporting needs and everything else is frowned upon. His ownership bears no relation to the 2A as he sees it, if he does at all. Like as not he is also anti war!

    Let us imagine his dialog when interviewed for local radio by a true gunny like us - and believe me, I have personally heard someone spout this garbage. It's in a way a collection of so much we have all heard!


    Interviewer - "So, you enjoy shooting?"

    Gunny - "Yes, I hunt each year and apart from deer, try for squirrels too this time of year."

    Interviewer - "Can you tell me what guns you have, use and like?"

    Gunny - "Well, for deer I have a nice Remington 700 in 7mm mag, and for squirrel I use my over and under Spanish 12 gauge."

    Interviewer - "Do you find those enough?"

    Gunny - "Of course - never likely to need more than that, ever. I doubt I use more than a few rounds of ammunition each year either."

    Interviewer - "But, would you like any other rifles, semi auto's for example?"

    Gunny - "Oh heck no - why would anyone want to own those things, let alone even be allowed to have such dangerous weapons. They should be banned from civilian ownership because they are assault weapons and can fire so fast."

    Interviewer - "What about handguns then?"

    Gunny - "No need for those either. My neighbor shoots his out the back of his place and has so many it frightens me. He even carries one on him - he says for self defence. I reckon that will only get him into trouble and he'll get himself shot"

    Interviewer - "But what if you were faced with an armed assailant, yourself? Would it not be prudent to have some means of protection?"

    Gunny - "Oh no, I could never shoot anyone and anyways, as the police tell me, I am best giving in to their demands and not to struggle. Much better then to wait for the police to arrive. Compliance will always work best."

    Interviewer - "So, you'd happily risk being shot then?"

    Gunny - "Well, no but - I still couldn't shoot anyone."

    Interviewer - "Do you know what the Second Amendment is?"

    Gunny - "I've heard of it."

    Interviewer - "It embraces our right to keep and bear arms"

    Gunny - "Oh, well - surely there are limits on what people can have I hope"

    Interviewer - "Sure, certain categories like machine guns would need a special tax stamp, and so-called weapons of mass destruction are out of course."

    Gunny - "MACHINE GUNS??? You mean anyone can have one of those? No one needs things like that, ever. No wonder we are in such a state with gun crime."

    Interviewer - "It's called freedom - something we too often take for granted and work hard at to maintain. There are young guys fighting for this as we speak. You seem to want it limited even more."

    Gunny - "Well yes - we can't have all these guns everywhere. Get guns off the streets I say and the fewer the better. I want to feel safe."

    Interviewer - "But you have your guns!"

    Gunny - "Well yes, but they are only for hunting."

    Interviewer - "So it's alright if you can have your choice but no one else should have more than that - is that what you are saying?"

    Gunny - "Pretty much yes - they are plenty."

    Interviewer - "Do you have knives or carry a knife?"

    Gunny - "Oh no - too dangerous. Well those folding things I see some people have clipped to their pocket anyways. I only have a small Swiss Army knife, very small - enough to cut a piece of cord at most. No one should be allowed to have a large knife on their person, they could use it as a weapon."

    Interviewer - "What suggestions might you have then, so we can all be safer?"

    Gunny - "I think I would get rid of that second amendment thing and bring in laws like the UK and Australia have done. Get rid of all these guns."

    Interviewer - "Including yours?"

    Gunny - "Oh no - but that's different. Mine are only for hunting."

    Interviewer - "How do you propose disarming the criminal fraternity?"

    Gunny - "Easy - ban all guns, like I said. Well except simple hunting guns like mine of course."

    Interviewer - "But criminals by their nature do not obey laws do they?"

    Gunny - "Hmmm - never thought of that."

    Interviewer - "Criminals can and will always get guns and will use them against the unarmed citizens as and when they wish. Why should the law abiding citizen with a clean record be deprived of the right to self defence?"

    Gunny - "I can see how the criminal gun problem is tricky but hey - the police are armed so that's OK. They will protect me."

    Interviewer - "Do you call yourself an American?"

    Gunny - "Yes of course I do."

    Interviewer - "Sorry to break this to you, but you are not and I suggest you go live some place else!"
    Chris - P95
    NRA Certified Instructor & NRA Life Member.

    "To own a gun and assume that you are armed
    is like owning a piano and assuming that you are a musician!." - a portal for 2A links, articles and some videos.

  2. #2
    Distinguished Member Array Gunnutty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    I realize that this is satire but but it sounds very much like what Ive been hearing from some of the retirees moving into Arkansas from up in Chicago. Very sad.

  3. #3
    Senior Member Array Wayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Eugene, OR
    Yep, that sounds about right.

    A well regulated {insert} state {end insert} militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the [S]people[/S] government to keep and bear arms, {insert} the people to have guns for sporting uses and hunting untill told otherwise{end insert} shall not be infringed.

    The new 2nd amendment as the liberals would like to see it written.


    [S] [/S] is supposed to strike through the word

  4. Remove Advertisements

  5. #4
    VIP Member
    Array goawayfarm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Fork Union, Virginia
    That is why gun-control has made so many gains.

    During the 18th century, guns were for defense & hunting. We fought the Indian Wars, the Revolution. People used their own weapons for defense & hunting. The hunters were going after food & clothing.

    Then in the 19th century, guns again were for defense & hunting. We fought the War of 1812, The Civil War, Spanish-American war. At the same time hunters were after food & clothing.

    During the first part of the 20th century, guns for defense were still carried by a LOT of people. Pocket pistols were commonplace. Although our wars were now mostly foreign, personal protection was still important. Hunters were still after food (not so much for clothing).

    Then came the middle 20th century, carrying a firearm for personal protection went out of vogue & most guns were owned for hunting only. (hunting now mostly for sport)

    Into the latter half of the 20th century, violent crime increased. However, by this time most states had passed laws forbiding concealed carry or extremely limiting it. Criminals knew this & florished. Hunting are still there, but in decreasing numbers & mostly for sport.

    Toward the end of the 20th century, people had started to wake up to the fact that they were now in peril from armed criminals. Slowly at first & then with increasing speed, concealed carry became lawful again.

    The problem arises from the anti-gun side as they had to come up with ways to stop 'evil guns' (instead of stopping EVIL PEOPLE). Personal responsibilty has gone the way of the dodo, now we blame the object, not the PERSON.

    The anti's also knew that there were a lot of gun owners in the USA. So how do they deal with them..............finally it came to them...... 'we'll fool gun owners into supprting gun-control'.

    The way they went about it was to tell people that we need to get rid of any NOT related to hunting, there was to much 'gun crime' & everybody's recent favorite.....

    "It's for the children."

    Remember all the politicians on the liberal side, like Al Gore who said that they 'weren't after any guns that were used for hunting'. 'Who needs full-auto weapons to hunt?'. 'We need to get rid of Saturday night specials'........etc....

    To a large degree it worked. They convinced a LOT of people that the Second Amendment wasn't about keeping invaders & government in check, it was only for hunting. As a result more & more gun laws were passed.

    Today, the good thing is, we now have 24/7 news coverage. Since the news gets more attention when something bad happens, death & destruction get top billing. Now everybody sees 'what evil lurks in the hearts of men'.

    Now some have realized, that the only recourse they have is to arm themselves. They also see the futility of the anti-gun stance, that only wants to make them helpless victims. We also, now have forums like this to help spread the 'good word' & educate as many as possible.

    Another thing that helped people to realize how vunerable they are is the sad day on 11SEP01.

    end of rant
    (sorry to be so long)
    Last edited by goawayfarm; October 26th, 2006 at 07:47 PM. Reason: got to work on my spelling....
    A vote is like a rifle, its usefulness is based on the character of the user -T Roosevelt

    If you carry a gun, some will call you paranoid. If I carry, what do I have to be paranoid about? -C Smith

    An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it. -J Cooper

  6. #5
    Member Array ptmmatssc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    It's a sad thing , but I get some of those comments from some of my own family members. Funny thing is , they all hunt . none of them agree with me carrying , or having the weapons I have. They seem to forget that those same weapons halted 2 home invasions in my lifetime . I usually ask what other rights they would like to get rid of .maybe freedom of speech , or freedom of religion , and always get the same response , "it's not the same" . It's disheartening to know that there are so many people out there with this mind set , especially when they are your own family.

  7. #6
    Lead Moderator
    Array rstickle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Laurel, MD
    Quote Originally Posted by goawayfarm View Post
    That is why gun-control has made so many gains.

    During the 18th century, guns were for defense & hunting. We fought the Indian Wars, the Revolution. People used their own weapons for defense & hunting. The hunters were going after food & clothing.
    Actually even more to the point, during this period, especially in the frontier states/colonies, (Pennsylvania down through the Carolinas) the (long) gun was considered more a "tool" than a "weapon"...... Much like a good knife or axe.

    In the other side of the coin, hand guns were considered pretty much worthless for the most part.

    EOD - Initial success or total failure

  8. #7
    Lead Moderator
    Array rocky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Too many morons who expect the state to provide their every need. N.O. is a great example of expecting the govt. to do everything for em.
    "In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock." Thomas Jefferson

    Nemo Me Impune Lacesset

  9. #8
    VIP Member Array Old Chief's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Southwest Tennessee
    Bad things may happen to good people but most liberals are convinced that it just will not happen to them in their good neighborhoods. Being overly dumb just seems to fit most folks with peanut sized brains and little reasoning ability.
    When you accept mediocrity you sow the seeds for future failure.
    One should never confuse good fortune with good training.
    Illegitimus Non Carborundum. In God we trust.

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Similar Threads

  1. A guide to carrying while dancing! (slightly tongue in cheek)
    By Agent47 in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: November 20th, 2009, 08:53 AM
  2. Wallet - Right cheek or left cheek?
    By Mr 40 in forum Defensive Carry Holsters & Carry Options
    Replies: 50
    Last Post: January 13th, 2009, 03:38 PM
  3. The NEW .825 G&S Online Express Magnum (satire)
    By Andy W. in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: May 8th, 2007, 08:51 PM
  4. Tongue - firmly in cheek :)
    By P95Carry in forum Defensive Rifles & Shotgun Discussion
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: December 27th, 2005, 07:43 AM
  5. The three ''C's"" - tongue in cheek!
    By P95Carry in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: August 14th, 2005, 01:32 AM

Search tags for this page

satire vs toungue in cheek
second amendment satire site
the second amendment satire
tongue and cheek satire

tongue in cheek satire

tongue-in-cheek satire
Click on a term to search for related topics.