Well, forgive me but a dummy grenade is an inert lump of metal and an empty rocket tube is just that — empty. Baseball bats are more dangerous. I’m sorry if said FBvian is a’feared of inanimate objects. Meanwhile, it appears I have struck a nerve. A couple of less hoplophobic FBvians weigh in after the jump.
Edit: Unfair Park has a nice little side angle about some right-wing nutjob website hyperventilating over this.
Heaven forbid the maintenance man looks in my office closet when he comes to fix the water leak today. I’d have a lot of ‘splainin’ to do to the Dallas police, evidently. Do you think the various deer antlers and turkey feathers in there also will suffice?
I’ve been following the big “black rifle” debate amongst hunters and shooting enthusiasts. There’s only one conclusion to reach when wondering why someone would prefer an AR-15 (or TEK-9 or SKS like the subject of the DMN article) instead of a nice bolt action or semi-automatic hunting rifle. “To each his own.”
If I have a fender-bender, will I have to explain why I drive a Chevy 4×4 instead of a nice little efficient Prius? What about Mr. Uptown and his Aston Martin DB9? So I don’t want to hunt with a military weapon, it doesn’t make them any less worthy or efficient for someone else to use. Truth be told, it doesn’t really make them more dangerous either. We’re only scared of that which we don’t understand…
That’s what I get for assuming a police force would be better-educated about real world uses (and laws) for guns than our politicians. But that just makes an @ss out of me…
And then this:
Mr Thompson and Mr. Trahan,
I read with interest your piece about the
“Arms stash” found in an apartment. It is interesting to me that I have
never read a story about a “steak knife stash” or “baseball bat stash”
or “several pairs of sharp scissors stash” in your paper.
The use of the word “stash” was probably due to a headline editor with
an obvious anti-gun bias. However, your decision to include Chief
Goldbeck’s comments about the owner “hav[ing] to explain how these
weapons came into their possession” and “It raises the suspicion: Why
does a person have these types of weapons?” expose your own biases.
First, why does the person have to explain? A good question you never
pursued. Why did the police secure a search warrant? Gun possession is
legal. Why is it any of Chief Goldbeck’s business why this person owns
legal guns any more than it is his business why he may have a drawer
full of steak knives? Or a collection of cadillacs (weapons that are
globally lethal according to some)? And isn’t it convenient that the
police found “what they think is child pornography”. Could that be a
ruse to cover what may be an illegal search – and seizure?
So, you guys just out of journalism school?