<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Weapons of war</title>
	<atom:link href="http://chrishernandezauthor.com/2013/02/12/weapons-of-war/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://chrishernandezauthor.com/2013/02/12/weapons-of-war/</link>
	<description>A fine WordPress.com site</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Jun 2013 13:35:02 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scot M</title>
		<link>http://chrishernandezauthor.com/2013/02/12/weapons-of-war/comment-page-1/#comment-1232</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Scot M]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Mar 2013 20:13:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chrishernandezauthor.com/?p=455#comment-1232</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Chris, i would like to hear your take on what Jeremy mentioned regarding what is happening here in NYS. The SAFE Act is quite literally the epitome of the work &#039;Unconstitutional&#039;. The way it is phrased, the people it is going to target, and the way the law was passed. I tends to strike one as &quot;mildly tyrannical&quot;. We the People of NY were NOT included in any debate regarding certain (aka all) portions of the bill that was passed, yet it was. Nay, it was shoved down the voting members throats a mere hour after it was first presented to them.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Chris, i would like to hear your take on what Jeremy mentioned regarding what is happening here in NYS. The SAFE Act is quite literally the epitome of the work &#8216;Unconstitutional&#8217;. The way it is phrased, the people it is going to target, and the way the law was passed. I tends to strike one as &#8220;mildly tyrannical&#8221;. We the People of NY were NOT included in any debate regarding certain (aka all) portions of the bill that was passed, yet it was. Nay, it was shoved down the voting members throats a mere hour after it was first presented to them.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Juli Adcock</title>
		<link>http://chrishernandezauthor.com/2013/02/12/weapons-of-war/comment-page-1/#comment-1202</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Juli Adcock]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Mar 2013 06:11:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chrishernandezauthor.com/?p=455#comment-1202</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;m sure glad to hear I&#039;m not the only one with that problem!  I can write a whole lot better than I can speak!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m sure glad to hear I&#8217;m not the only one with that problem!  I can write a whole lot better than I can speak!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Wayne Cunningham</title>
		<link>http://chrishernandezauthor.com/2013/02/12/weapons-of-war/comment-page-1/#comment-1185</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Wayne Cunningham]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Mar 2013 01:53:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chrishernandezauthor.com/?p=455#comment-1185</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[There is no reason to have to justify any weapon. We should not even be talking about which weapon is permissible. The right to bear arms is not limited to ownership. Good article.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There is no reason to have to justify any weapon. We should not even be talking about which weapon is permissible. The right to bear arms is not limited to ownership. Good article.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: chrishernandezauthor</title>
		<link>http://chrishernandezauthor.com/2013/02/12/weapons-of-war/comment-page-1/#comment-1001</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[chrishernandezauthor]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Mar 2013 05:35:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chrishernandezauthor.com/?p=455#comment-1001</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Jeremy,

Some of what you posted is about private citizens acting within the law to say what they want. Plenty of anti-gun people insult us on a daily basis. Should they not be allowed to insult people they don&#039;t like? Citing insulting comments by private citizens as evidence of tyranny is like the Dixie Chicks claiming censorship because pissed-off customers quit buying their music. 

Likewise, newspapers doing stupid crap like publishing a map of gun owners isn&#039;t tyranny. It&#039;s moronic and an attempt to demonize, but it&#039;s not the government doing it. I don&#039;t think the newspaper should have access to records of where gun owners live, and I think they need a legal asskicking for publishing the map, but a newspaper being stupid does not equal tyranny.

The letter campaign is stupid, ill-advised, and a blatant attempt to influence. But how does that equal tyranny? Did anyone lose any rights because they received the letter?

You mention coercion and include &quot;gun buybacks, bans and confiscations&quot;. A gun buyback is not coercion. Nobody has to participate in gun buybacks. Bans can definitely be part of tyranny and confiscations undoubtedly are. So far we&#039;re resisting the bans (in general) and there have been no confiscations, other than during Katrina, which I&#039;m not defending.

I don&#039;t disagree that we have a worry of tyranny. I just don&#039;t see that it exists right now. The current political climate is highly charged and our side is generally presented negatively by the media. Plenty of anti-gun people openly detest us. That&#039;s bad, and cause for alarm (which is why I&#039;m speaking out about the 2A). But in my mind, it&#039;s not tyranny. Despite the insults of anti-gun people, despite a gun-owner map, despite failed bills by people with no respect for the bill of rights, I can still own ARs, speak my mind, and travel freely. To me, that&#039;s not tyranny.

Hopefully my response didn&#039;t come across as confrontational either, because I&#039;m not disagreeing with your concern. I just think you&#039;ve lumped many disparate, unconnected factors into one and labeled it as something it isn&#039;t. I appreciate your comments though, and hope to hear more of your point of view.

Chris]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jeremy,</p>
<p>Some of what you posted is about private citizens acting within the law to say what they want. Plenty of anti-gun people insult us on a daily basis. Should they not be allowed to insult people they don&#8217;t like? Citing insulting comments by private citizens as evidence of tyranny is like the Dixie Chicks claiming censorship because pissed-off customers quit buying their music. </p>
<p>Likewise, newspapers doing stupid crap like publishing a map of gun owners isn&#8217;t tyranny. It&#8217;s moronic and an attempt to demonize, but it&#8217;s not the government doing it. I don&#8217;t think the newspaper should have access to records of where gun owners live, and I think they need a legal asskicking for publishing the map, but a newspaper being stupid does not equal tyranny.</p>
<p>The letter campaign is stupid, ill-advised, and a blatant attempt to influence. But how does that equal tyranny? Did anyone lose any rights because they received the letter?</p>
<p>You mention coercion and include &#8220;gun buybacks, bans and confiscations&#8221;. A gun buyback is not coercion. Nobody has to participate in gun buybacks. Bans can definitely be part of tyranny and confiscations undoubtedly are. So far we&#8217;re resisting the bans (in general) and there have been no confiscations, other than during Katrina, which I&#8217;m not defending.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t disagree that we have a worry of tyranny. I just don&#8217;t see that it exists right now. The current political climate is highly charged and our side is generally presented negatively by the media. Plenty of anti-gun people openly detest us. That&#8217;s bad, and cause for alarm (which is why I&#8217;m speaking out about the 2A). But in my mind, it&#8217;s not tyranny. Despite the insults of anti-gun people, despite a gun-owner map, despite failed bills by people with no respect for the bill of rights, I can still own ARs, speak my mind, and travel freely. To me, that&#8217;s not tyranny.</p>
<p>Hopefully my response didn&#8217;t come across as confrontational either, because I&#8217;m not disagreeing with your concern. I just think you&#8217;ve lumped many disparate, unconnected factors into one and labeled it as something it isn&#8217;t. I appreciate your comments though, and hope to hear more of your point of view.</p>
<p>Chris</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: chrishernandezauthor</title>
		<link>http://chrishernandezauthor.com/2013/02/12/weapons-of-war/comment-page-1/#comment-1000</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[chrishernandezauthor]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Mar 2013 05:13:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chrishernandezauthor.com/?p=455#comment-1000</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thank you Frank, I appreciate the comment.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you Frank, I appreciate the comment.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeremy</title>
		<link>http://chrishernandezauthor.com/2013/02/12/weapons-of-war/comment-page-1/#comment-999</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jeremy]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Mar 2013 03:39:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chrishernandezauthor.com/?p=455#comment-999</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Chris, if an orchestrated campaign to systematically disarm the law abiding through intimidation, demonization, coercion and outright unconstitutional legal means does not fit the definition of government tyranny, what does?

Examples:

Intimidation: http://www.softgreenglow.com/wp/?p=15854
      The money quote: &quot;The letter campaign has been regarded as successful for two reasons. First…the number of individuals who “cancelled” the gun purchase, or did not take possession of the gun after receiving the letter, substantially increased….&quot;  

Demonization: Google &quot;gun owner maps&quot;  Segues neatly into a comparison of law abiding gun owners to sex offenders/convicted felons.  Listen to the language of the gun banners: &quot;gun fucks&quot;, &quot;gun fetishists&quot;, &quot;tea party psychotards&quot;, Etc. How about certain people calling for the NRA to be declared a &quot;terrorist organization&quot;?  

Coercion: Gun buybacks, bans and confiscations. But there haven&#039;t been any confiscations, you say.  (cough cough HURRICANE KATRINA cough cough)  How about Democrats in California,  Missouri and Minnesota proposing gun confiscation bills?  Won&#039;t pass, you say? THEY STILL PROPOSED THEM AND ARE STILL SERVING IN THE LEGISLATURE. 

Outright unconstitutional legal means:  (insert text of NY SAFE ACT here)
         Essentially bans whole classes of firearms by declaring their magazines illegal and mandating usage of magazines THAT DO NOT EXIST.
Oh, and mandatory registration is a prominent feature. (among other things)
The current laws are no better.  Own a thirty rounder? Seven Years in jail.
       
http://www.wgrz.com/news/article/202218/37/Army-Vet-Charged-For-Possession-of-Illegal-Clip

A right that you are afraid to exercise under the threat of government oppression isn&#039;t much of a right, is it?  I don&#039;t mean this to sound confrontational or obnoxious, but what term would you use to describe the current political climate regarding gun rights?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Chris, if an orchestrated campaign to systematically disarm the law abiding through intimidation, demonization, coercion and outright unconstitutional legal means does not fit the definition of government tyranny, what does?</p>
<p>Examples:</p>
<p>Intimidation: <a href="http://www.softgreenglow.com/wp/?p=15854" rel="nofollow">http://www.softgreenglow.com/wp/?p=15854</a><br />
      The money quote: &#8220;The letter campaign has been regarded as successful for two reasons. First…the number of individuals who “cancelled” the gun purchase, or did not take possession of the gun after receiving the letter, substantially increased….&#8221;  </p>
<p>Demonization: Google &#8220;gun owner maps&#8221;  Segues neatly into a comparison of law abiding gun owners to sex offenders/convicted felons.  Listen to the language of the gun banners: &#8220;gun fucks&#8221;, &#8220;gun fetishists&#8221;, &#8220;tea party psychotards&#8221;, Etc. How about certain people calling for the NRA to be declared a &#8220;terrorist organization&#8221;?  </p>
<p>Coercion: Gun buybacks, bans and confiscations. But there haven&#8217;t been any confiscations, you say.  (cough cough HURRICANE KATRINA cough cough)  How about Democrats in California,  Missouri and Minnesota proposing gun confiscation bills?  Won&#8217;t pass, you say? THEY STILL PROPOSED THEM AND ARE STILL SERVING IN THE LEGISLATURE. </p>
<p>Outright unconstitutional legal means:  (insert text of NY SAFE ACT here)<br />
         Essentially bans whole classes of firearms by declaring their magazines illegal and mandating usage of magazines THAT DO NOT EXIST.<br />
Oh, and mandatory registration is a prominent feature. (among other things)<br />
The current laws are no better.  Own a thirty rounder? Seven Years in jail.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.wgrz.com/news/article/202218/37/Army-Vet-Charged-For-Possession-of-Illegal-Clip" rel="nofollow">http://www.wgrz.com/news/article/202218/37/Army-Vet-Charged-For-Possession-of-Illegal-Clip</a></p>
<p>A right that you are afraid to exercise under the threat of government oppression isn&#8217;t much of a right, is it?  I don&#8217;t mean this to sound confrontational or obnoxious, but what term would you use to describe the current political climate regarding gun rights?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Frank Salazar</title>
		<link>http://chrishernandezauthor.com/2013/02/12/weapons-of-war/comment-page-1/#comment-998</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Frank Salazar]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Mar 2013 01:50:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chrishernandezauthor.com/?p=455#comment-998</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[No truer sentiments.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No truer sentiments.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: chrishernandezauthor</title>
		<link>http://chrishernandezauthor.com/2013/02/12/weapons-of-war/comment-page-1/#comment-997</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[chrishernandezauthor]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Mar 2013 00:56:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chrishernandezauthor.com/?p=455#comment-997</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Daniel,

I hear you, but I still think tyranny is too strong a word. Food for thought though.

That&#039;s a cool Cooper quote. When I think back to being shot at and missed badly by Taliban firing full auto in Afghanistan, I know exactly what he meant.

The sniper who barely missed, however, was another story...]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Daniel,</p>
<p>I hear you, but I still think tyranny is too strong a word. Food for thought though.</p>
<p>That&#8217;s a cool Cooper quote. When I think back to being shot at and missed badly by Taliban firing full auto in Afghanistan, I know exactly what he meant.</p>
<p>The sniper who barely missed, however, was another story&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Daniel Morseth</title>
		<link>http://chrishernandezauthor.com/2013/02/12/weapons-of-war/comment-page-1/#comment-996</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daniel Morseth]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Mar 2013 00:53:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chrishernandezauthor.com/?p=455#comment-996</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Good article, though must disagree about the tyranny issue; if one does not believe that tyranny is in place in DC, then one has not read the various executive orders or the screeds issued by Obama, Biden, Holder, Nappy, et al ad nauseum. Or noted that our Congress swine totally ignore the will of the voters who placed them in office.  But that aside, I totally agree that full auto is only useful in suppressive fire, three round bursts are slightly more useful in firing at targets partially behind cover, and well aimed single shots are primo. As the late and terribly missed Colonel Cooper was fond of saying, &quot;May your enemies be on full auto.&quot;
Hooah.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good article, though must disagree about the tyranny issue; if one does not believe that tyranny is in place in DC, then one has not read the various executive orders or the screeds issued by Obama, Biden, Holder, Nappy, et al ad nauseum. Or noted that our Congress swine totally ignore the will of the voters who placed them in office.  But that aside, I totally agree that full auto is only useful in suppressive fire, three round bursts are slightly more useful in firing at targets partially behind cover, and well aimed single shots are primo. As the late and terribly missed Colonel Cooper was fond of saying, &#8220;May your enemies be on full auto.&#8221;<br />
Hooah.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chuck S</title>
		<link>http://chrishernandezauthor.com/2013/02/12/weapons-of-war/comment-page-1/#comment-915</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Chuck S]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Feb 2013 02:57:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chrishernandezauthor.com/?p=455#comment-915</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[My own blog? If I had a cogent thought that I suspected someone else might care about, more than once a fortnight...I might. Not there yet, though!

Really enjoying catching up on your archive, though. Good stuff, and I&#039;ll be checking back often.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My own blog? If I had a cogent thought that I suspected someone else might care about, more than once a fortnight&#8230;I might. Not there yet, though!</p>
<p>Really enjoying catching up on your archive, though. Good stuff, and I&#8217;ll be checking back often.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
