The Cowardly Frum of CNN.com
FRUM, YOU DON’T WANT THE TRUTH. YOU CAN’T HANDLE THE TRUTH. YOU JUST WANT TO WRITE YOUR FRUMPY ARTICLES
“They stamp serial numbers in places where they can be effaced.”
Frum, you’re being dishonest and you know it…there is NOWHERE that a serial number can be placed where it is immune from defacing. And let’s be honest, a defaced serial number on a firearm makes it a de facto illegal firearm.
“They sell bullets that can pierce police armor.”
Armors vary, and most body armor will be pierced by any hunting round. In fact, a hunting cartridge has fore more likelihood of piercing body armor than even a so-called armor piercing handgun round.
In fact the article you linked to on 5.7x28mm, explains what is constituted as armor piercing ammo. It’s not that a bullet can piercin armor. Because to be honest, many average bullets will do so in the right circumstances. It basically comes down to whether the bullet itself is soft (typically lead or frangible material) or a solid heavier metal or substance.
Let’s talk about the infamous “Black Talon” with it’s teflon like coating. Which was merely to keep the barrel cleaner and did not make it armor piercing as gun control advocates put forth the myth. So let’s deal with a bit more reality than myth.
“They will not include trigger locks and other child-proofing devices as standard equipment.”
Okay, first off…I believe trigger locks are not the safest security device. My trips through Gander Mountain, in which every rifle has a trigger lock, has led me to this conclusion. As I was often able to insert a tip of my finger into the lock, and fire the trigger mechanism.
That said, every new firearm I have purchased has come with a padlock and a sheet of paper demonstrating how to utilize said lock to make the firearm safe. Perhaps all manufacturers do not include such. But many do…and you can learn how to use said lock for other firearms. And they’ve very very cheap… a few dollars.
And many firearms now have internal locks (more on that soon).
“They ignore new technology that would render guns inoperable by anyone except their approved purchaser.”
The smart gun debate….any complexity added to a device increases it’s risk of failure. You are taking a device used in emergencies and making it less reliable. Most folk have a basic view on this, because these laws nearly always have exceptions for law enforcement. You want to mandate a dangeroues, unknown, and unreliable technology. But exclude police.
The general answer is, when you perfect this technology enough that police officers are comfortable using it. Than you can obligate civilians to abide by it as well.
Be it smart guns with fingerprint readers and limitless never run out batteries, or internal gun locks. A technology which has left many with firearms that won’t shoot. Not a great situation if you’re facing a couple of home intruders. And a quick perusal of this issue and S&W will return numerous results.
“They reject police requests to groove barrels to uniquely mark each bullet fired by a particular gun.”
Many states already require an “expelled casing”, and the forces involved in firing a bullet pretty much make the recording of barrel markings useless. They were touted as a way to solve crimes. But different types and brands of bullets pretty much result in myriads of variants making identification impossible. Especially not to the degree that would be required for a reasonable conviction.
Let’s talk micro-printing. The idea that a small unique identifiying mark would be placed on the hammer. Every shot fired, the hammer would mark the brass. First off, most people quickly figure out in under 30 seconds that a mere file will eliminate the effectiveness of such implementation. So will repeated high use, say target practice in competition. Suddenly, when your firing pin is worn out so that it no longer leaves said markings, you become a felon. Not a good system.
“the tobacco industry”
Tobacco is not a Constitutional right. Nor does it protect thousands of Americans from criminals, invaders, and tyrants.
“Congress has actually immunized makers of that product against harms inflicted by unsafe design.”
Wait, went to your link. This isn’t about a defective unsafe design. This is merely about a device being dangerous when used improperly. Bleach is dangerous. Should every child who has ever been poisoned by any household cleaner have the right to sue Proctor and Gamble out of business?
“When someone makes a dangerous product or acts negligently, they ought to be held liable otherwise it encourages irresponsibility,” Schiff says.”
No, quit being a lying two faced snot Frumpy. You’re being disingenuis to your readers. And you know it. This was simply protecting the firearm manufacturers from lawsuits by anti-gunnners on the basis that a gun is dangerous, therefore it is defective. Any vehicle traveling at 60mph is dangeorus. Let’s ban all cars. Any car in an accident is a failure of design. Come on, stop with the lies.
“There’s a gun agenda that need not depend on politics and that will not snatch a single weapon from any owner, whether law-abiding or not.”
Really, cause I’d love to see it. We keep hearing numerous individuals such as yourself calling for gun confiscation. Even that is half a joke, because beyond that you advocate for gun banning through time. The eradication of access to younger folk to be able to buy given firearms. You may not advocate taking of semi-automatics from the hands of the people. Likely because you’d get shot and start a civil war. Rather, you want to ban them and grandfather them. Hoping the old folk will be content to have theirs, and screwing the younger generation out of a right. Well, sorry, we don’t want to play that game.
There is also a Plan C, Mr. Frum. Oh what is that? That is Plan Constitution. Where you and yours get all your wet dreams, and We the People, pretty much tell you that regardless of what laws you might have passed in Congress. We deem you to be inviolation of our personal rights, on a level so much that we just ignore your laws – think of it as sitting in the front of the bus.
WHY WE HATE YOUR ARTICLES FRUM, because you’re a liar, you mislead people, and CNN is so cowardly they don’t even let us comment on anti-gun articles because they know we’d tear you to shred with all your lies.
Seriously, CNN.com should be sued for damaging the environment. They print the same anti-gun article a few times a year, spouting the same arguments Frum does. Seriously, that electricity saved could go towards benefiting the authors of their global warming articles.