It's insane that his consideration is still ongoing after that remark.

Boot that confused idiot out of the process right now.

The Administration needs to know how unacceptable this is, how unacceptable he is.

That attitude isn't rare among some members of the military, perhaps especially in the higher ranks. Maybe it is that they think they are the professionals, and us amateurs shouldn't infringe on their territory.

I agree that Trump should put his money where is mouth is on this, and correct his appointee.

I sent this to the white house about 1 minute ago.
=========================================
President Trump’s nominee to lead the military health system said Tuesday he thinks it is “insane” for civilians to be able to purchase semi-automatic rifles like the one a gunman used to kill 26 people at a Texas church.

Dean Winslow, a professor at Stanford University and retired Air Force colonel, made his remarks during his confirmation hearing in front of the Senate Armed Service committee, according to the Washington Examiner.

Who actually "vetted" this guy! He served in the military as evidenced by the information in the article. Has he never heard of the constitution, in particular the SECOND AMENDMENT?

I have trouble accepting that he swore an oath to uphold and defend the constitution of the United States. The Second Amendment guarantees the right to bear arms, it does not specify which may, or may not be owned by Americans.

Time for this guy to be sent back to his obscure retirement.

Fortunately, this guy won't ever have any say over what firearms you can own. All he has in his fucked up opinion is the ability to screw himself out of an appointment.

The old saying of 'Opinions are like assholes, everybody has one' comes to mind.

Sometimes, like in this case of Perfesssor Winslow, the opinion comes directly from the asshole.

quote:

Originally posted by Gustofer:

quote:

“I may get in trouble with other members of the committee just say how insane it is that in the United States of America a civilian can go out and buy a semi-automatic like an AR-15,...

"I may get in trouble with other members of the committee just say how insane it is that in the United States of America a civilian can" practice Catholicism.

"I may get in trouble with other members of the committee just say how insane it is that in the United States of America a civilian can" prevent us from searching their home without a warrant.

"I may get in trouble with other members of the committee just say how insane it is that in the United States of America a civilian can" not be forced to testify against himself.

"I may get in trouble with other members of the committee just say how insane it is that in the United States of America a civilian can" not be inflicted with cruel and unusual punishment.

Etc...

Go to hell Colonel.

Totally cool post Gus, utterly. I have never positioned the argument that way, but trust me by sometime today or tomorrow I will have.
Excellent, its like cleaning my rifle, I feel prepared/

Truth be told if you were to get an honest answer from every card carrying NRA member you'd be surprised how many would say the same when questioned. Totally ignorant of the magnitude of Second Amendment, the Constitution, Freedom the whole big picture. Those same enlightened individuals also seem to be real quick to throw out an opinion on laws they think will solve the dichotomy between good and evil by blaming an inanimate object.

quote:

Originally posted by RichardC:
Dear President Trump,

Are you sure Col. Winslow is the best man for the job?

Yours truly, RichardC

agreed

he doesn't appear to understand the fundamentals of how this country works...but he's from California (Stanford) so that means he's probably batshit crazy to begin with, but we really don't need him in a government position - please find someone else who understands the problems. This guy doesn't.

quote:

Originally posted by dusty3030:
Truth be told if you were to get an honest answer from every card carrying NRA member you'd be surprised how many would say the same when questioned. Totally ignorant of the magnitude of Second Amendment, the Constitution, Freedom the whole big picture. Those same enlightened individuals also seem to be real quick to throw out an opinion on laws they think will solve the dichotomy between good and evil by blaming an inanimate object.

They are Fuds. If I had a dime for every gun control nut that claims to be a gun owner and hunter.....

quote:

Originally posted by RichardC:

quote:

Originally posted by Fenris:
OK. So where do we go to advise our dear President on our feelings?

https://www.whitehouse.gov/contact

And EASY to do. Here is what I sent, feel free to plagiarize if you want to:

quote:

As revealed by FOX recent news coverage (at this URL: http://www.foxnews.com/politic...matic-weapons.html), your nominee to lead the military health system, Dean Winslow, a professor at Stanford University and retired Air Force colonel, does NOT support the Second Amendment and is therefore unfit for appointment to any position of significant responsibility in the federal government.

I respectfully request that you withdraw your nomination of Dean Winslow.

Thank you for your consideration of this matter.

[SapperSteel]
Arimo, Idaho

quote:

Originally posted by dusty3030:
Truth be told if you were to get an honest answer from every card carrying NRA member you'd be surprised how many would say the same when questioned. Totally ignorant of the magnitude of Second Amendment, the Constitution, Freedom the whole big picture. Those same enlightened individuals also seem to be real quick to throw out an opinion on laws they think will solve the dichotomy between good and evil by blaming an inanimate object.

Yeah, heard Michael Savage going on about how no one needs an assault rifle to defend themselves at home.

Only thing a person needs is a handgun, a small capacity magazine, and a shotgun.

And shotguns are the most complicated gun for most people to operate.

That all police know, but won't tell anyone, is that all assault rifles will penetrate your walls and kill your children, and that no one even thinks about the thought of over-penetration.

And went on to contradict himself by stating the "good guy" that used an "AR" to stop the "madman with an AR" and how it was a good thing, right after saying there was no reason that anyone needs one.

He was all over the place, mostly emotional yammering on and I turned him off.

Now, he has his moments, and once in a while he has some good information, but I think I'll use the ignore feature on my radio for the drive home from now on.

I'll be sending a message to the Whitehouse today regarding this man and his comment, asking for the immediate removal of him from consideration for the position.

Such opinions *are* "the swamp" just as much as entrenched establishment wonks, and I will ask the President to fulfill his promise of draining said swamp.

I hope many others do the same. Fools like this man certainly already exist in our government, but we definitely don't need to add anymore of them.

Yes, it's exactly to respond to people in government like this that we need the full scope of the 2A. Not one inch.

Sent...

quote:

Dear Mr. President,

It has come to my attention that, during confirmation hearings, Dean Winslow, your nominee to head the military's health care system, asserted (unsolicited, mind you) that he felt it was "insane" that Americans be allowed to possess semi-automatic rifles like the AR-15.

I would respectfully urge you to consider withdrawing his nomination for that post. Regardless of any other considerations or qualifications, I don't believe anybody should serve in any capacity in government who does not support and defend the *entire* U.S. Constitution.

Regards,
Me

quote:

Originally posted by dusty3030:
<<snip>>

quoting Michael Savage: "And shotguns are the most complicated gun for most people to operate."

Yeah, that whole pick it up, put a shell in it, point and click confuses the crap out of me too.

Remember, even Justice Scalia said that some limits on the 2d Amendment are reasonable. Just as there are limits on all the bill of rights rights - slander is speech, but you can't utter it.

We don't know where those limits are yet. The law isn't developed. I certainly hope, and expect that they will not include semi-automatic weapons. But limits of some kinds will be constitutional.

quote:

Originally posted by jhe888:
Remember, even Justice Scalia said that some limits on the 2d Amendment are reasonable. Just as there are limits on all the bill of rights rights - slander is speech, but you can't utter it.

We don't know where those limits are yet. The law isn't developed. I certainly hope, and expect that they will not include semi-automatic weapons. But limits of some kinds will be constitutional.

Even the best and brightest are wrong sometimes, including the great Scalia, may he RIP.

That some judges thought some restrictions were reasonable isn't evidence that they were, only that those folks thought so. It's considerably more likely that they suffered from a moment of weakness of mind or character, or were motivated by other factors, each and every time they screwed up some the clearest language ever written into the law in any nation at any time in history. Same with the bastardization of the commerce clause. It's shameful, inexcusable, and gets no pass from me, no matter their other positive attributes.

The court and system itself gets a lot right, and plenty wrong, including, especially, this.

Even if we concede some theoretical limit, maybe that includes Battleships and Apache helos, maybe such crew served gear. But instead they've gone way to far, every damn time, and they ought to be ashamed for even considering anything else. It is outrageously wrong.

quote:

Originally posted by jhe888:
Remember, even Justice Scalia said that some limits on the 2d Amendment are reasonable. Just as there are limits on all the bill of rights rights - slander is speech, but you can't utter it.

We don't know where those limits are yet. The law isn't developed. I certainly hope, and expect that they will not include semi-automatic weapons. But limits of some kinds will be constitutional.

You have missed the point entirely. Utterly, absolutely and entrely.

Few people here couldn't tell you about limitations on the First and Second Amendments.

Not the point. Not the point at all.

quote:

Originally posted by sigmonkey:

quote:

Originally posted by dusty3030:
Truth be told if you were to get an honest answer from every card carrying NRA member you'd be surprised how many would say the same when questioned. Totally ignorant of the magnitude of Second Amendment, the Constitution, Freedom the whole big picture. Those same enlightened individuals also seem to be real quick to throw out an opinion on laws they think will solve the dichotomy between good and evil by blaming an inanimate object.

Yeah, heard Michael Savage going on about how no one needs an assault rifle to defend themselves at home.

Only thing a person needs is a handgun, a small capacity magazine, and a shotgun.

And shotguns are the most complicated gun for most people to operate.

That all police know, but won't tell anyone, is that all assault rifles will penetrate your walls and kill your children, and that no one even thinks about the thought of over-penetration.

And went on to contradict himself by stating the "good guy" that used an "AR" to stop the "madman with an AR" and how it was a good thing, right after saying there was no reason that anyone needs one.


He was all over the place, mostly emotional yammering on and I turned him off.

Now, he has his moments, and once in a while he has some good information, but I think I'll use the ignore feature on my radio for the drive home from now on.

I was listening to this also. Wont be listening today. Along the same lines as Bill O'reilly has his "heavy weapons" crap after Newtown. Stopped listening to him then....

OK, I'm going to come down on the other side in this. I firmly believe in limitations. I think no one needs or should own nuclear weapons except the government (even NK). If the crazy bastard in Texas had such gear, he'd have blown up an entire city. Not that its a bad thing, depending on which city. On free speech, I believe there should be limits on who you can send it to. Like the jerks that constantly send me spam. That should be limited, or they should pay me to receive it. And auto dialing my phone #.

See, some limitations aren't offensive at all. Back to guns. I'm kind of against heavy artillery being in the hands of ordinary fools.