doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com TRASHED THREAD #502

I'm aware that a number of you here are anti-2nd Amendment, but I didn't realize you'd be just as keen to abolish the 1st!

Best solution, tudurgs, is to just shout em' down, right?....or lobby Dave, as some have done, for the removal of those board members who exercise that right? Some of you ladies are starting to sound like the PC speech advocates we hear of today on our college campuses. Maybe we could even bring in some university trauma counselors to help those of you who feel so violated, as is today's custom.

Or better yet, we could all just lightly skip over those posts by certain members (God knows I do), and even some threads that we think might ruffle our feathers. Sorry for the rant, guys, but this righteous indignation that almost smacks of fascism wears a little thin at times.....even though I recognize you've a right to say it......

"I'm aware that a number of you here are anti-2nd Amendment..."

robt., none that i am aware of, certainly not i...

but then, keet is certainly suspect of being an anti 2nd amendment mole...

who, or what ever it is, has a long history here of rabid irrational posts regarding our gun control rights, which plays right into the hands of the known anti gun fanatics...people like keet, if genuine, are scary to normal people who have rational fears and concerns about public safety issues...

Gee Justin, I guess we're going to disagree on this. But as Larry's older brother King has often stated, there's no unanimity in anything. A couple guys seemed to agree with me that Ed Good's anti gun rhetoric, which he has frequently posted on this website, is offensive and damaging to all of us who respect the 2nd Amendment.

A couple others are not clear about their displeasure. When Mike Campbell speaks of leaving when some clowns are gone, I assume he is referring to Larry Clown... I mean Brown. But he'll be back, just like some others like Brian Dudley and Last Dollar who left in a drama laced huff. Hell, even Jerry Lee, aka Alvin Linden returned as a young gal named Hillary with the screen name Gunluvr. But she (or he) is not the first here to post under more than one name.

Ted was 110% correct about some epic battles that occurred here in the so-called good old days. Here's an example in one anti-gun Trolling thread that King started right here on the front page back in 2007:

http://www.doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=40636&page=3

My favorite post in that entire thread was this one. You'd have to read the thread and be familiar with the totality of King's posts here to really appreciate it:



A couple others apparently fail to see any connection between preservation of gun rights and sporting clays guns, doubles, or even the existence of a firearms related website. When you post something that "bores" me Justin, I will probably just not read it. I think Rob't Harris really nailed it in his post above. We've seen a thousand off topic threads and threads that go off topic. I wonder why only certain ones ignite a shitstorm? I have been tempted to whine and e-mail Dave whenever it happens just to make a point, but I can't lower myself to be so petty and childish.

FYI, I did not "rail against someone's business practices" as you accused me. However, I agree with Ted 110% in his observations and opinions about Ed, and especially the one he posted this morning about Ed using folks here as a "tool". But it goes further than just his questionable business practices. Ted is forgetting that Ed's last attempt to sell a couple guns here did not go very well when Dave questioned him about his return policy and dealer status. Ed enjoys Trolling and fomenting discord here. He's been temporarily banned at least 3 times, and also tossed off other firearms forums. Maybe you read AmarilloMike's "Pledge Drive to Ban Ed Good" and "Pledge Drive to Ban Ed Good For Good: Part Deux". King Brown got really upset with that effort to solicit donations to ban Ed, but he says nothing about suggestions by his little brother Larry to ban pro-gun Conservatives such as myself. Hmmmmm. I still have Ed's PM to me where he asked me who I was. He got really excited when I told him I was really King Brown posting under another name, and that I was working to make fools of the guys in Misfires, and hoped to bring down that whole sub-forum to finally silence the Conservative pro-gun guys there. He replied that that was a good idea. Here's some of it:















The anti-gun quotes by Ed Good I reproduced here are but a fraction of what he has said on the subject. Ed and a few others have flat-out denied making anti-gun statements, but that pesky QUOTE function can be a b*tch. Several of the trolls who are desperate that Misfires should never return have very self-serving reasons to conceal what they said there. Frankly, I don't care either way, but I will always believe there was a very concerted effort by some here to shut it down. I enjoy a civil discussion about guns as much as anyone, but I'm not so desperate for civil discussions that I turn a blind eye to the anti-gun Trolls here who frequently stab us all in the back while they pretend to be one of us. Many of our esteemed colleagues from Great Britain, Canada, and Australia who lost many of their gun rights have concurred and warned us against complacency. I doubt if any of them would harbor the truly silly notion that only military veterans could have a valid commitment to support for gun rights or the rest of the Constitution.


edit: Looks like Ed was making yet another denial about the existence of anti-2nd Amendment trolls here even as I was typing this. And you wish to have a civil discussion with someone who can deny their own words??? That's funny!

I don't care about Ed's motive. He started a thread that has (or maybe had, now) the potential to provoke significant discussion on a topic of interest to a whole lot of people here. If someone wants to complain about Ed's position on gun rights, why not wait until he SAYS something about gun rights? Or better yet . . . hey, why not start a thread about gun rights and launch into your attacks, dredging up stuff from the past that's been dredged many times before? Afraid that maybe you'd get the plug pulled on you?

And no, the first amendment does NOT apply here. BB moderators can censor as they wish. You don't like it, either go elsewhere or create your own sandbox to play in.

And Keith, I never said that only military veterans have a VALID commitment to supporting the 2A and the rest of the Constitution. What I was pointing out--and will stand behind until hell freezes over--is that military veterans ALL make a very different commitment than non-veterans. In the form of a blank check made out to Uncle Sam. When you do that, you are offering your LIFE for your country. I don't think your life is at any risk by either posting on a BB in defense of the 2A, or writing articles about guns (as I do), or sending money to the NRA. Once you enlist and a war comes along, you can't just decide you don't like the job and leave. That's where the difference lies. And anyone who questions me on my support for the ENTIRE Constitution, my immediate question to them is: I think I proved that support via my military service. How about you?

OK, I said VALID and you said TRUE. Big whoop! I forgot you need to stoop to any level to belittle someone and avoid admitting when you are wrong.

I also never said that my life was at risk for posting my support of the 2nd on a BBS. But the 2nd Amendment itself is under constant assault. Oh, you're also wrong about the part where you said " Once you enlist and a war comes along, you can't just decide you don't like the job and leave." It used to be that way, but Obama showed us differently when he traded 5 terrorists for Bo Bergdahl and praised him for his service after he deserted.

I didn't question your support of the "ENTIRE Constitution" Larry. Once again you demonstrate your frequent reading comprehension problems and put words in my mouth. Why don't you just admit you don't like me and admit that you never would have said a thing if Stan's early statement about Ed's frog-eye torch colors was the only off topic statement. I can admit that I don't like you or respect you. I respect your service to this country, but I don't respect you personally. What was it... only about a month or so ago that I confronted you for also taking a thread off-topic? Short memory too, eh? You're a real piece of work.

So what kind of shotguns do hypocrites and people with reading comprehension problems prefer for sporting clays?

Dave - Please pull the plug on this drivel

tudurgs: sounds like a good idea...

meantime, see new thread re sporting clays guns...

Keith, I know you may THINK it is . . . but everything isn't about YOU. If one--that's ANYONE, Keith (please note, your name is not specifically attached)--enlists in the military, they're making a rather unique offer concerning defense of the Constitution, and protection of EVERYONE's rights. They've given up choice. Uncle Sam gets to send them wherever, whenever. And some of them don't come back. There are plenty of other ways to stand up for the 2nd Amendment. Valuable ways, but different. Perhaps Keith--now this IS for you--you can tell me just ONE other way that equals the commitment one makes by serving in the military. Under what other circumstances does one offer to put his life on the line for the Constitution and his country--and leave his fate entirely in the hands of the government?

By the way . . . you're confused on the Bergdahl situation. What the president said about Bergdahl did not get him off the hook for desertion. His case is currently under appeal concerning some of the evidence, but he's facing a general court martial. That's the highest level of military justice. And he could receive life in prison, given the charges he faces. It does not look likely that he's going to walk away free.

Dim wit.
Intelligence insulter.

Larry,
Ed1 has, in the past, posted complete BS with regard to metal finishing and case coloring. He has foisted his "restored" case colored guns on unsuspecting, non board members, on the net for a long time. He argued with the likes of Oscar Gaddy (that would be the late DOCTOR Gaddy to us) and others who actually knew something about metal treatment, and the art and science of same. Brother Drew has a sickening collection of acetylene torch case colors, a horrific photo of an attempt at sleeving by Ed's hero, Ed Landers, and, now, the photo of the gastly epoxy repair to his BSS.
Perhaps we can agree, that, St Ledger, Ed ain't. But, wait, Larry, there's more.
The attempts he makes to post "interesting", to you, comments, are nothing more than him seeking to find legitimacy for the double gun butchery he oversees. Why just look, he is a participating board member here, how could you go wrong with that old gun (that seems a little expensive, and looks not quite right) that he is selling? A good few have been saved by hitting boards like this and avoided doing business with this hack of double guns. Some have showed up later with questions after a purchase from Ed, and it never ends well for them, Larry.
The second amendment stuff is simply the icing, on top of the frosting, of the turd cake he bakes for unsuspecting neophyte buyers. If someone wants to come here, of all places, and post that they believe nobody should have an AR or a semi-auto handgun, by all means, feel free. But, don't complain when the crap hits the fan. Keith has pointed out some of the complete lunacy these guys are capable of thinking and posting. You can't make it up.
Buyer beware. THAT should be Ed's tag line. Not "interesting".

At least not interesting in a good way.


Best,
Ted