In Shorewood, you're not allowed to raise chickens.
In St. Francis, however, chickens are allowed free range.
Apparently, you can't feed your family, but you have to expose them to danger and insanity.
In related news, gun nuts and white supremacists prove that it's possible for them to go to a secluded, rural area and share in food and insanity in peace.
No word on how they would do in civilized society.
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
In a related yet unreported story, lots and lots and lots of other people had picnics and BBQs in Wisconsin WITHOUT carrying handguns, and they were safe too.
ReplyDeleteIn another related story, yesterday in LaRose La., a boy took his father's handgun, which was probably loaded and left unlocked in case the dad had to attend a picnic, mow the lawn, get the mail, or other life threatening endeavor where a loaded gun is necessary...
That boy shot at his teacher before killing himself at school.
The boy was apparently distraught over a bad grade on a test he needed to pass to graduate...a life shattering event for an 8th grader, which would have faded in time into a footnote in his life...had not the means to his destruction been so readily available at the moment he was most weak.
Wow, Caps. Gun nuts and white supremacists? Thats pretty lame and uncalled for, don't you think? I guess you can lump me right in there. Sorry man, but that was not right.
ReplyDeleteHey anon. You can likely find more deaths by inattentive drivers, inexperienced drivers and drunk drivers. Should we then take cars away from people? Is not a car, even more deadly than a gun? Do cars not take more lives than guns each year?
Bill,
ReplyDeleteWith all due respect, anyone that thinks they need a gun to cut the grass is a nut.
The link on white supremacists is to a group of white supremacists that were going to go there.
Cars can be used to kill, but that is not their primary or sole purpose. Guns don't do anything but.
Billiam, sir:
ReplyDeleteI have long used your very argument. I did it for years based on the theory that people carrying guns were doing so for a reasonable and lawful purpose, and people driving automobiles were doing so for a reasonable and lawful purpose, an accident is an accident, and neither is any more or less, shall we say malicious.
But I overestimated the vast gun owning community, and now I must readily admit it. I had no idea that a weapon would be considered necessary for law mowing, or picnic going in the suburbs.
So I will go along with you this far. If a gun accident is caused when the gun is being used reasonably for some valid purpose, it is no more or less an accident than if a band saw, or automobile, or any other tool causes an accident.
However, would you agree with me that if a man was driving his automobile around his front yard in circles just because the Wisconsin Constitution says he can, and hits a child, that is a bit more than an accident?
Billiam, sir, I defend your right to defend yourself or your family with your firearm. I always have.
But the vitriol extended to members of the gun owning and carrying community by the picnic going, lawn mowing gun carriers in this matter is...dissappointing.
Right wing talk radio in this community likes to talk about something called the law of unintended consequences.
Unintended consequence one: A man following your child home from the store while carrying a gun is not disturbing your peace or the child's peace.
Now, in this argument, everybody pictures themselves as the gun carrier, not anybody else. Maybe there are three 18 year olds who have not committed a felony following your child home. Don't for a moment thing that your peace or your child's peace can be considered disturbed in Wisconsin.
Unintended consequence two: Six "law abiding citizens" standing on the sidewalk in front of your home openly carrying semi-automatic pistols is not disturbing the peace. Let's say the young men are members of a fashon club. You can tell they are members of a fashon club because they are all wearing powder blue baseball style hats sideways.
They are not disturbing your peace, and the police cannot question them to determine if they even are law abiding citizens simply because they are observed openly carrying.
If you need to go to the store to get some bread, you can do so safely knowing that the six law abiding citizens are guarding your vacant home from danger.
I would say that you probably get the picture, but sadly, in this debate, that should never be assumed.
anyone that thinks they need a gun to cut the grass is a nutIt depends.
ReplyDeleteA low-mounted .50cal machine gun will cut grass very nicely if you use a slow, sweeping-motion while depressing the fire control buttons.
It IS true that one cannot obtain the same level-cut if using a semiauto .22Cal rifle.
By the way, what do you consider to be "civilized society"? Milwaukee County, which has the highest per-cap murder rate in Wisconsin?
I'm going to agree with you a bit Dad...that is IF we were talking about dangerous areas of Milwaukee. But we are talking right now about West Allis, and a park outside of Onalaska.
ReplyDeleteBear in mind, sir, that I was a loan collector in 1979 operating out of an office on Capital and Fond du lac. I didn't much like the job for a number of reasons, but I never carried, wanted, or needed a gun.
Now I grant you, your independant observer might find me rather high on the testicular fortitude, muscle mass and self defense training scale. The "sand box" I play in is a twenty by twenty ring at the Kosiesko boxing center.
And honestly, I can think of a neighborhood or two where a side arm while in one's yard would be, oh, what's the word I always use, oh ya, reasonable.
But when mowing in West Allis, a good old Black and Decker would be all I required. Were I cooking brats in Onalaska, which oddly enough I have also done, I think I'd brave it without carrying. In fact if I felt the need to carry in those situations just because I had the right in the Wisconsin Constitution, I think I might have to question certain aspects of my own personal constitution.
I'm actually from Onalaska. It's all a little embarrassing to me that an otherwise rational community allowed this to happen. But then again, it's the town of Onalaska, not the city proper, so there's at least some solace for me.
ReplyDeleteDad29, obviously your comment was tongue-in-cheek (or at least I hope so), but if people honestly believe suburban Milwaukee county has any sort of resemblance to the lawless, uncivilized hellhole necessitating daily packing of guns, they need to turn off the talk radio and stop blindly paying attention to the vapid, sensationalist local news. The vast majority of the city of Milwaukee is perfectly safe as well.
We can very much achieve civility without firearms, especially in docile little Onalaska, WI.
Capper, a guns do not just kill people. A gun can't kill anyone without the intent of the user.
ReplyDeleteAnon, While I wouldn't carry a gun while mowing my lawn, the guy wasn't breaking any laws, and was on his property. His way of making a point is certainly not the best way, but he wasn't breaking the law. Now, there are many who like to say "Oh, be reasonable. Some restrictions are in order." Call me paranoid, but, by increments, a little at a time, we're losing our rights. Where does it end?
Bill,
ReplyDeleteThat is what I said. A gun is a tool whose only purpose is to kill. A car is a tool used to transport people and/or goods from one point to another.
Both can be misused, but when a gun is misused, people get shot.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWhile I wouldn't carry a gun while mowing my lawn, the guy wasn't breaking any laws, and was on his property.
ReplyDeleteAnd if you could guarantee the bullets would stay on his property, no one would have a problem with it.
A low-mounted .50cal machine gun will cut grass very nicely if you use a slow, sweeping-motion while depressing the fire control buttons.Civilized.
ReplyDelete