October 22, 2002
12:04 PM Subscribe
We're Letting the Terrorists Win It's
a sad time for America. People are hiding in their houses. This is exactly
what the terrorists want, a nation living in fear. They killed over 3,000
on September 11, 2001 and we got back up and came out fighting. We've got
to do the same thing now. My advice to the people in MD and VA? Arm yourselves
now. If the sniper knows there's thousands of armed citizens out there ready
to shoot him if they see him, he'll stop.
In the midst of it all, the anti-gun crowd is running around on a snipe hunt. In the end we have to remember "When wolves stalk the flock, best not to chain the dogs. And the flock is safer yet when the sheep grow fangs."
In the midst of it all, the anti-gun crowd is running around on a snipe hunt. In the end we have to remember "When wolves stalk the flock, best not to chain the dogs. And the flock is safer yet when the sheep grow fangs."
This post was deleted for the following reason:
the anti-gun crowd
Who's this anti-gun crowd? Do they have a platform extolling their membership-wide views? Can anyone join?
posted by namespan at 12:09 PM on October 22, 2002
Who's this anti-gun crowd? Do they have a platform extolling their membership-wide views? Can anyone join?
posted by namespan at 12:09 PM on October 22, 2002
I think action like this will cause a lot more harm than help to the "sniper" situation.
posted by culpable at 12:11 PM on October 22, 2002
posted by culpable at 12:11 PM on October 22, 2002
Telling Virginians to arm themselves is like telling my cat to lick her butt. And just as effective against snipers.
(On preview...what everyone else said.)
posted by JoanArkham at 12:12 PM on October 22, 2002
(On preview...what everyone else said.)
posted by JoanArkham at 12:12 PM on October 22, 2002
If the gun laws were stricter then idiots such as this sniper would be much easier to catch.
"And the flock is safer yet when the sheep grow fangs."
Wrong.
The flock is safer if you take away the wolf's fangs.
posted by dazed_one at 12:12 PM on October 22, 2002
"And the flock is safer yet when the sheep grow fangs."
Wrong.
The flock is safer if you take away the wolf's fangs.
posted by dazed_one at 12:12 PM on October 22, 2002
So you're reposting your own blog entries here? Not getting enough traffic on your "Christian Journal"?
posted by Dean King at 12:12 PM on October 22, 2002
posted by Dean King at 12:12 PM on October 22, 2002
Point the first: . My advice to the people in MD and VA? Arm yourselves now. If the sniper knows there's thousands of armed citizens out there ready to shoot him if they see him, he'll stop.
Bullshit. This guy is picking of people from anywhere around 100-500 yards. Me having a .22 under the seat of my car is going to do nothing.
Point the second: Putting your opinion so blatantly on the front page is very poor form, and will likely prove the downfall of your short-lived MeFi career, as the commenters above have shown.
posted by Ufez Jones at 12:12 PM on October 22, 2002
Bullshit. This guy is picking of people from anywhere around 100-500 yards. Me having a .22 under the seat of my car is going to do nothing.
Point the second: Putting your opinion so blatantly on the front page is very poor form, and will likely prove the downfall of your short-lived MeFi career, as the commenters above have shown.
posted by Ufez Jones at 12:12 PM on October 22, 2002
Guns don't kill people. Bullets moving at high velocities kill people.
posted by moonbiter at 12:13 PM on October 22, 2002
posted by moonbiter at 12:13 PM on October 22, 2002
jasontromm = moron
Your attitude leads me to believe you may actually be the sniper, so I suppose we should just ride out to your house and put you down -- just to be safe. Wouldn't want you to endager our precious freedoms now would we?
P.S. Don't compare a lunatic with a high powered sniper rifle to a wolf. It demeans wolves everywhere.
posted by BartFargo at 12:13 PM on October 22, 2002
Your attitude leads me to believe you may actually be the sniper, so I suppose we should just ride out to your house and put you down -- just to be safe. Wouldn't want you to endager our precious freedoms now would we?
P.S. Don't compare a lunatic with a high powered sniper rifle to a wolf. It demeans wolves everywhere.
posted by BartFargo at 12:13 PM on October 22, 2002
I've never before called for a thread to be taken down, but come on. The post on your personal website doesn't help:
"The anti-gun crowd is running around on a snipe hunt. In the end we have to remember "When wolves stalk the flock, best not to chain the dogs. And the flock is safer yet when the sheep grow fangs."
Stick it on your personal website. If it's really so compelling, people will link to you. Otherwise, you're just spamming your message.
(on preview: yeah, what everyone else said)
posted by jragon at 12:14 PM on October 22, 2002
"The anti-gun crowd is running around on a snipe hunt. In the end we have to remember "When wolves stalk the flock, best not to chain the dogs. And the flock is safer yet when the sheep grow fangs."
Stick it on your personal website. If it's really so compelling, people will link to you. Otherwise, you're just spamming your message.
(on preview: yeah, what everyone else said)
posted by jragon at 12:14 PM on October 22, 2002
Arm yourselves now. If the sniper knows there's thousands of armed citizens out there ready to shoot him if they see him, he'll stop.
In my experience, even if you have a railgun its usually a better strategy to run as fast as you can to the flag/gas pump.
posted by Stan Chin at 12:15 PM on October 22, 2002
In my experience, even if you have a railgun its usually a better strategy to run as fast as you can to the flag/gas pump.
posted by Stan Chin at 12:15 PM on October 22, 2002
i thought the point was to generate discussion, not name calling?
posted by jasontromm at 12:15 PM on October 22, 2002
posted by jasontromm at 12:15 PM on October 22, 2002
Yeah, and arming pilots will make the skies safer. Whatever.
Already shared my humble thoughts on the matter.
* Jumps off bandwagon, hits post, bites tongue.*
posted by gottabefunky at 12:16 PM on October 22, 2002
Already shared my humble thoughts on the matter.
* Jumps off bandwagon, hits post, bites tongue.*
posted by gottabefunky at 12:16 PM on October 22, 2002
Point the third: Please don't anyone waste time or bandwith by posting a MeTa thread about this. Matt will see it and take it away, along with dealing with this fuckwit, without the need for a large outcry by the community.
posted by Ufez Jones at 12:17 PM on October 22, 2002
posted by Ufez Jones at 12:17 PM on October 22, 2002
The flock is safer if you take away the wolf's fangs.
This FPP is way off, IMHO, but this statement is too. De-fanging all wolves is impossible. A responsible armed citizenry is a pretty good idea. Rampant calls for vigilanteism aren't. Tracking firearms and licensing their owners is a good idea. Taking them away isn't. It's not that hard.
posted by namespan at 12:19 PM on October 22, 2002
This FPP is way off, IMHO, but this statement is too. De-fanging all wolves is impossible. A responsible armed citizenry is a pretty good idea. Rampant calls for vigilanteism aren't. Tracking firearms and licensing their owners is a good idea. Taking them away isn't. It's not that hard.
posted by namespan at 12:19 PM on October 22, 2002
Guns should only be used to turn off the lights in your house, oh yeah, and to open beer cans.
posted by bunktone at 12:19 PM on October 22, 2002
posted by bunktone at 12:19 PM on October 22, 2002
I believe in complete and unrestrictred rights to gun ownership. I am pretty damn extreme in this regard. That being said: jasontromm, you're a moron.
posted by IshmaelGraves at 12:20 PM on October 22, 2002
posted by IshmaelGraves at 12:20 PM on October 22, 2002
Folks, you're wasting your time (and playing along) by posting in anger.
Doesn't a troll look more trollish when surrounded by polite people, and less trollish when he appears to be in the company of other trolls?
posted by Shane at 12:20 PM on October 22, 2002
Doesn't a troll look more trollish when surrounded by polite people, and less trollish when he appears to be in the company of other trolls?
posted by Shane at 12:20 PM on October 22, 2002
If the gun laws were stricter then idiots such as this sniper would be much easier to catch.
well, I don't know that this is true (or that the sniper is an idiot). But I agree that if no one has seen the sniper, then how are armed citizens supposed to shoot the sniper?
posted by stifford at 12:20 PM on October 22, 2002
well, I don't know that this is true (or that the sniper is an idiot). But I agree that if no one has seen the sniper, then how are armed citizens supposed to shoot the sniper?
posted by stifford at 12:20 PM on October 22, 2002
Sorry my post wasn't that clear. I'm not suggesting taking away guns. Make them easier to trace. That's the equivilent of taking away the wolf's fangs.
posted by dazed_one at 12:21 PM on October 22, 2002
posted by dazed_one at 12:21 PM on October 22, 2002
"If the sniper knows there's thousands of armed citizens out there ready to shoot him if they see him, he'll stop."
Huh? No one has seen him yet. No one. If every single person in the area had a gun he would have been shot at exactly zero times.
Conversely, if every single person in the area had a gun, many innocent people would have been shot by frightened and trigger happy vigilantes.
Great solution - arm the mob and suggest they shoot at suspicious people in vans.
And what do we do after this is over and the streets are flooded with guns? Do we trust that there is only *one* nut case? Or does your suggestion simply put more shooters out there.
posted by y6y6y6 at 12:22 PM on October 22, 2002
Huh? No one has seen him yet. No one. If every single person in the area had a gun he would have been shot at exactly zero times.
Conversely, if every single person in the area had a gun, many innocent people would have been shot by frightened and trigger happy vigilantes.
Great solution - arm the mob and suggest they shoot at suspicious people in vans.
And what do we do after this is over and the streets are flooded with guns? Do we trust that there is only *one* nut case? Or does your suggestion simply put more shooters out there.
posted by y6y6y6 at 12:22 PM on October 22, 2002
As a relatively new comer to this site I was worried when I saw this thread, and then had my faith in the sanity of at least some of humanity reaffirmed.
Thanks.
posted by lerrup at 12:22 PM on October 22, 2002
Thanks.
posted by lerrup at 12:22 PM on October 22, 2002
Generating discussion is grand. But we also have posting guidelines that we try to follow. That's what I'm personally reacting to here, not the fact that I disgree with you.
Here are some pointers:
"A good post to MetaFilter is something that meets the following criteria: most people haven't seen it before, there is something interesting about the content on the page, and it might warrant discussion from others."
So you got 1 out of 3. But then there's this tibit:
"And lastly, don't troll (quick definition: posting purposely inflammatory things for the sole purpose of baiting others to argue the points until blue in the face - basically people do this for kicks, to destroy conversations and communites, for the hell of it). "
posted by jragon at 12:23 PM on October 22, 2002
Here are some pointers:
"A good post to MetaFilter is something that meets the following criteria: most people haven't seen it before, there is something interesting about the content on the page, and it might warrant discussion from others."
So you got 1 out of 3. But then there's this tibit:
"And lastly, don't troll (quick definition: posting purposely inflammatory things for the sole purpose of baiting others to argue the points until blue in the face - basically people do this for kicks, to destroy conversations and communites, for the hell of it). "
posted by jragon at 12:23 PM on October 22, 2002
well, I don't know that this is true (or that the sniper is an idiot). But I agree that if no one has seen the sniper, then how are armed citizens supposed to shoot the sniper?
Jesus will guide them, right Jason?
posted by Sinner at 12:23 PM on October 22, 2002
Jesus will guide them, right Jason?
posted by Sinner at 12:23 PM on October 22, 2002
There is no proven link between "The Terrorists" and "The Sniper". Dude.
posted by maniactown at 12:24 PM on October 22, 2002
posted by maniactown at 12:24 PM on October 22, 2002
Did learn one thing from this troll: The NIV of the bible is copyrighted. That's silly.
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 12:25 PM on October 22, 2002
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 12:25 PM on October 22, 2002
A responsible armed citizenry is a pretty good idea.
I'm liberal and I don't necessarily disagree with this statement, though I do agree it would be little help in this specific case. Key word here of course is responsible. Namespan, if you can assure me they're responsible, I'm game. Until then, I'll feel a little safer knowing (hoping?) the vast majority of people around me are unarmed...
posted by jalexei at 12:28 PM on October 22, 2002
I'm liberal and I don't necessarily disagree with this statement, though I do agree it would be little help in this specific case. Key word here of course is responsible. Namespan, if you can assure me they're responsible, I'm game. Until then, I'll feel a little safer knowing (hoping?) the vast majority of people around me are unarmed...
posted by jalexei at 12:28 PM on October 22, 2002
This guy is picking of people from anywhere around 100-500 yards. Me having a .22 under the seat of my car is going to do nothing.
This is a good point--rifles and handguns will do little to stop the sniper. Even if you have a gun that is effective at the 100-500 yards range, by the time you hear the sniper's shot, locate the white van, and aim, the guy'll be off. I have a better solution: shoulder-mounted rocket launchers. If you hear a shot (or a window slamming, or a car backfiring), find the nearest white van, and take that sniper out! BOOM! No aiming, no muss, no fuss. Plus, if everyone in the area is armed with rocket launchers, the beltway commute will get really interesting.
posted by mr_roboto at 12:29 PM on October 22, 2002
This is a good point--rifles and handguns will do little to stop the sniper. Even if you have a gun that is effective at the 100-500 yards range, by the time you hear the sniper's shot, locate the white van, and aim, the guy'll be off. I have a better solution: shoulder-mounted rocket launchers. If you hear a shot (or a window slamming, or a car backfiring), find the nearest white van, and take that sniper out! BOOM! No aiming, no muss, no fuss. Plus, if everyone in the area is armed with rocket launchers, the beltway commute will get really interesting.
posted by mr_roboto at 12:29 PM on October 22, 2002
i thought the point was to generate discussion, not name calling? I can come up with some name calling for what I bolded from your words
My advice to the people in MD and VA? Arm yourselves now. If the sniper knows there's thousands of armed citizens out there ready to shoot him if they see him, he'll stop.
In the midst of it all, the anti-gun crowd is running around on a snipe hunt.
flock is safer yet when the sheep grow fangs."
posted by thomcatspike at 12:35 PM on October 22, 2002
My advice to the people in MD and VA? Arm yourselves now. If the sniper knows there's thousands of armed citizens out there ready to shoot him if they see him, he'll stop.
In the midst of it all, the anti-gun crowd is running around on a snipe hunt.
flock is safer yet when the sheep grow fangs."
posted by thomcatspike at 12:35 PM on October 22, 2002
« Older Le Voyage dans la Lune/A Trip to the Moon | Nokia Game Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
Yeah, you know, since so many people have seen him.
posted by four panels at 12:06 PM on October 22, 2002