Rio 2016: top American Olympic shooter Kim Rhode attacks gun control laws

[appal_jack]

America’s top Olympic shooter, Kim Rhode, took a strong stand against gun control laws, offering full support for carrying concealed weapons and attacking gun legislation in her home state of California.

“I’m definitely becoming more vocal because I see the need,” said Rhode, a skeet shooter going for a medal in her sixth straight Olympics. “We just had six laws that were passed in California that will directly affect me. For example, one of them being an ammunition law. I shoot 500 to 1,000 rounds a day, having to do a background check every time I purchase ammo or when I bring ammo out for a competition or a match – those are very, very challenging for me.”

Rhode is referring to a new set of gun control measures, one of which requires a background check for ammunition purchases, in the same way that background checks are required for guns in the state – but there doesn’t appear to be any limit on the amount of ammunition that can be purchased at once. Nor does there appear to be any requirement for a background check when ammunition is brought to a competition or match, according to the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence.

(snip)

She expected her press conferences to be more about gun control than her performance and spends time studying proposed anti-gun laws before big shooting events.

She added that the stigma that has been attached to shooting has affected her ability to get endorsements, saying that at least one large company refused to sponsor her.

She also wondered why comparable Olympic stars are not put under the same scrutiny as shooters. For instance, she said, why are swimmers not interrogated in interviews after a publicized drowning accident?

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/aug/05/rio2016-top-american-olympic-shooter-kim-rhode-attacks-gun-control-laws

Nice to see a top-performing Olympian speaking-up on behalf of Second Amendment rights.

-app

[MattP]

1. I have to show ID to buy ammo

and that burdens someone in what way?

[NashuaDW]

5. It's more than just showing an ID ...

It's a full background check, just like she was buying a new weapon.

Showing an ID adds maybe five seconds to the purchase
Undergoing a background check can add minutes to hours to days - up to three days to be exact.

But you knew that ...

[grubbs]

53. No it does not add a significant amount of time to a regular clean buyer

But you knew that.

[Duckhunter935]

6. of course that is not the same as a background check is it?

[beevul]

20. Apply that to voting - a less constitutionally protected right. N/T

[beevul]

43. Well, two days and still no answer.

I'm shocked.

[MFM008]

2. Oh well

She can move.
California isn't going to change.

[Travis_0004]

33. Lets also require an ID for voting

I guess they can move if they don't like it right?

[Dawson Leery]

3. She wants to live in the times of Annie Oakley???

This is why they are called gun nutters. They are living in the not so great past.

With that said, she can always go to Texas where any yahoo can get guns.

[Duckhunter935]

7. so you are calling an Olympic competitor

a gun nut? Next will be the penis jokes directed at her.

[oneshooter]

11. And she would be more than welcome to move here. n/t

[appal_jack]

13. Reading is Fundamental, my friend.

She lamented the loss of the world of her parents, where children read “dime novels” about Teddy Roosevelt and Annie Oakley and guns were celebrated as a part of culture.

Reading about Annie Oakley is not the same as living in Annie Oakley's time.

-app

[gejohnston]

15. Meet the guy who wrote and first introduced those new

California laws,

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/02/25/ex-calif-state-sen-leeland-yee-gun-control-champion-heading-to-prison-for-weapons-trafficking/
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-a-guide-to-leland-yee-corruption-scandal-shrimp-boy-to-guns-20140328-story.html

Yes, he didn't like target shooters and hunters having semi automatic rifles for their lawful purposes, but was OK with his organized crime buddies smuggling machine guns and rocket launchers into the US. Fuck him even if he was a Democrat.

But I didn't start hating his guts over guns and corruption. The piece of shit called me a racist because I happen to like sharks.
http://www.takepart.com/article/2011/05/10/shark-fin-bans-human-racism-or-creature-compassion

Note to jurors, I don't think my opinion of Yee breaks the rules for the following reasons. One, can't vote in any election he is ever been in, and Two, he isn't running for any office and won't be any time soon. Of course, that is assuming the "secure gated community" he currently resides in doesn't have a resident HOA of some kind.

[Eleanors38]

25. What do you call people who support the convicted gun-runner Leland Yee?

GrabNutz

or

Monopolists.

(Trick question:. Both answers are correct.)

[stopbush]

4. So, she has to show ID to purchase hundreds or thousands of rounds

for practice and competition.

And there's the problem: anyone planning a mass murder can also purchase hundreds or thousands of rounds of ammunition as long as they show an ID.

[Duckhunter935]

8. It is a full background check

not just showing ID. This usually costs money and time, especially if the system they use is slow or not working.

[Travis_0004]

32. The real issue is the cost and time on the store

I can sell a 500 dollar gun, and turn a profit, even if the background check takes 10 minutes.

If ammo has a 3 dollar profit on a box of 50, its not worth my time to sell it.

I can either require a minimum purchase, raise the price, or stop selling it.

And thats probably the point of the law, they know that a lot of sellers will find it easier to stop selling it, rather than hire more employees as background checks will increase 10 fold.

For as much as people talk about justice, laws like these hurt the poor the most. I'm white, educated, and I know a few cops. I can easily get a may issue CCW permit.

I earn enough money, I can just buy 500 rounds at a time. It doesn't bother me.

I guess if you are black and or poor, getting a permit can be tougher, if its may issue, and now getting ammo is going to be tougher. I guess if you wanted the right to self defense, you should have been born in the middle class.

[Eleanors38]

26. The gun-control extremists wreck any opportunity at reasonable measures like UBCs...

By loading up proposals with even more restrictions; in this case a UBC for guns is hyped up to include ammunition (or in Feinstein's care, adding in another AWB attempt). The extremists, or GrabNutz, sabotage themselves, intentionally I believe so that they might keep a culture war alive.

[stopbush]

27. The gun-control advocates are simply responding to th gun lobby which will

allow no discussion of any gun control measures at all.

I have no problem with the control advocates passing extreme restrictions on guns and ammo. Doing so may serve to move the NRA et al off their "nothing or nothing" position. In the meanwhile, gun owners are slightly inconvenienced. I'll take that trade off it results in a few lives being saved.

[Eleanors38]

30. If you read about the history of gun-control, the extremist controllers set the tone...

some 50 years ago by demonizing gun-owners willy-nilly in the always compliant MSM. In fact, MSM is an institutional element of gun control. It is this markedly extremist position by MSM and the small number of well-positioned elites which has caused the liberalization (ironic, isn't it?) of gun laws around the nation over the last 30 years. In short, you have it backwards: The second amendment supporters responded to the controllers, only the former could make their laws stick and stick hard.

By now it should be obvious that the gun control outlook (it certainly is NOT a movement) wears no clothes. That is why it proposes more Leland Yee-type legislation, and has made demonization, animosity and that old go-to in American culture, shaming, to become its major "talking points." Second Amendmemt advocates have taken notice, and acted accordingly by passing ever-more liberalized gun laws, and in so doing filled the legislatures of most states in the Union with regrettably extremist legislators who know an issue gift when they see it. And those legislatures run the table with reapportionmemt schemes: They WILL be there for a long time, courtesy of that gift what keeps on giving: Gun control.

I would remind you that the nation's murder-by-gun rate has plunged over the last 20+ years, even as the number of firearms has balooned beyond anyone's expectations. I support UBCs, but what was once a reasonable measure with a chance of passage is more a pipe dream as the controllers can't resist that glance back at Sodom and loading up simple legislation with more and more restrictions. And each time the controllers propose unrealistic laws, the guns fly off the shelves, ammo goes in short supply, money flows into 2A pressure groups, and the Democratic Party gets smash-mouthed again. And again.

[beevul]

36. Right. Sure they are...

The gun-control advocates are simply responding to th gun lobby which will allow no discussion of any gun control measures at all.

Right. Sure they are.

This is a typical misrepresentation leveled by those who push for more and more restrictions but can never come out and say how much gun control will be enough. The assertion is issued as if there is no gun control at all, with the deliberate unspoken implication being exactly that.

I have no problem with the control advocates passing extreme restrictions on guns and ammo.

Of course you don't - you're one of them.

Doing so may serve to move the NRA et al off their "nothing or nothing" position.

This is yet another of the typical misrepresentations leveled at pro-gun posters. Spoken as if the nra is against ALL gun laws, which is historically, hilariously, demonstrably, a fantasy.

It does however, betray the reality of the anti-gun position:

"Any gun law previously passed counts as nothing, and for purposes of discussion does not exist unless under direct threat of repeal, in which case it will be characterized as the most important gun control in the world until the threat has passed. Individuals and groups offering so much as the slightest resistance to what we the gun control activists want right now, shall be characterized as 'against all gun control', 'extremists', 'absolutists' etc."

I'll take that trade off it results in a few lives being saved.

Trade offs are always easy when you're bartering with someone elses currency.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

40. It's the extreme restricions that make RKBA advocates so distrustful of gun control.

It's gun control that is the extremist, no debate, no compromise position.

Case in point: Post #37

[bluestateguy]

9. The new laws in California are pretty overbearing

nt

[mwrguy]

10. Maybe she should stay in Rio

[appal_jack]

12. Why should a gold-medal winning Olympian abandon her own country?

There are lots of countries that are friendlier to gun-grabbers than the USA. Have you considered relocating to Great Britain or Australia perhaps?

-app

[gejohnston]

16. or Brazil

[DonP]

18. Or consider Mexico, only 1 gun store in the whole country, total gun control very safe there

And that one is run by the cops.

Perfect place for you to move to, settle down and feel safe.

[gejohnston]

14. Brazil's gun laws are stricter than the UK's or Australia's

it doesn't seem to help their murder rate at all.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

19. But Brazil isn't industrialized enough to have them counted as having a higher...

...homicide/suicide/death rate than the US. And Mexico doesn't count because they're not industrialized enough. Having them make a huge portion of GM's electronics doesn't count. Maybe it's because the border tunneling drug runner gangs get their full-auto AKs in Southwestern gun shops here in the US.



Having armed criminals run about the population engaging in intimidation with illegal firearms is okay with certain governments. It's okay because tacitly accepting that lawless behavior and the accompanying lack of freedom doesn't really count as oppression. Most the victims don't die. What a crap awful feeling it must be to govern somewhere like that.

"If you will not fight for right when you can easily win without blood shed; if you will not fight when your victory is sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves." - W Churchill

In many countries today leaders don't see this since they live as a class apart from the unprivileged 99%.

[beevul]

21. You would...

You would be more than happy to 'trade' a gold medal winning pro-gun Olympian, for an anti-gunner of almost any stripe, wouldn't you?

[mwrguy]

22. Of course I would be happy to trade a teabagger for a progressive

[beevul]

23. Thats an answer to aquestion that I didn't ask.

The 'trade' was a 'pro-gun gold medal winning olympian' for an anti-gunner of almost any stripe.

I bet you'd take...say...Mark Kirk of Illinois, over the medalist in question.

[sarisataka]

29. Really?

Because Bloomberg and Gun Control was quite willing to give Mark Pryor's(D) senate seat to Tom Cotton (R).

You may recall Senator Cotton as the tea partier that wrote a little letter to Iran to "clarify" how the Constitution requires treaty approval.

But I suppose it's all good since Pryor wasn't anti-gun enough?

[Eleanors38]

31. That sound a lot like "Send 'em back to ______!"

[virginia mountainman]

17. Its nice to be able to make your own ammunition...

Keep getting stupid with the gun control laws, I need a well paying side job..

[Eleanors38]

24. Reuters is virulently anti-gun. THAT'S the reason she expected "gun control" to be more important

than her performance. MSM:. Elites talking to elites about gun control, even at the Olympics.

[underpants]

28. What did those skeet ever do to her?

Save the skeets!!!

[anamandujano]

34. She sees her future as an NRA shill.

All Olympians are looking for endorsements. What can she hawk, toothpaste maybe but the NRA pays better.

[pablo_marmol]

35. Right. HOW DARE she confront dishonest political theater. NT

[anamandujano]

37. Are parents grieving dead children dishonest political theater?

I'm not interested in debating this crap with you any further so any answer you post will go unanswered. Have a nice day.

[friendly_iconoclast]

39. No, but gratuitous mention of dead children is. It's known as 'appealing to emotion' or Lovejoying:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_emotion

Appeal to emotion or argumentum ad passiones or appeal to feels is a logical fallacy characterized by the manipulation of the recipient's emotions in order to win an argument, especially in the absence of factual evidence.[1] This kind of appeal to emotion is a type of red herring and encompasses several logical fallacies, including appeal to consequences, appeal to fear, appeal to flattery, appeal to pity, appeal to ridicule, appeal to spite, and wishful thinking.

Instead of facts, persuasive language is used to develop the foundation of an appeal to emotion-based argument. Thus, the validity of the premises that establish such an argument does not prove to be verifiable.[2]

Appeals to emotion are intended to draw visceral feelings from the acquirer of the information. And in turn, the acquirer of the information is intended to be convinced that the statements that were presented in the fallacious argument are true; solely on the basis that the statements may induce emotional stimulation such as fear, pity and joy. Though these emotions may be provoked by an appeal to emotion fallacy, effectively winning the argument, substantial proof of the argument is not offered, and the argument's premises remain invalid.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Think_of_the_children

"Think of the children" (also "What about the children?&quot is a phrase which evolved into a rhetorical tactic.Literally it refers to children's rights (as in discussions of child labor).In debate, however, as a plea for pity, used as an appeal to emotion, it is a logical fallacy.

[anamandujano]

41. "gratuitous"

Guns make people crazy. I rest my case.

[beevul]

45. You've present a far better case...

Guns make people crazy. I rest my case.

You've present a far better case than your interlocutor that that is the case, I'll grant you that.

[friendly_iconoclast]

46. You 'rested your case' by using logical fallacies? Shades of 'Hitchen's razor':

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitchens's_razor

Hitchens's razor is an epistemological razor asserting that the burden of proof regarding the truthfulness of a claim lies with the one who makes the claim; if this burden is not met, the claim is unfounded and its opponents need not argue further in order to dismiss it. It is named, echoing Occam's razor, for the journalist and writer Christopher Hitchens, who, in a 2003 Slate article, formulated it thus: "What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence." The dictum also appears in God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything, a book by Hitchens published in 2007.

Hitchens's razor is actually an English translation of the Latin proverb "Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur", (What is freely asserted is freely deserted.)

[anamandujano]

49. .

[IMG][/IMG]

[DonP]

50. So far, thats your most "inteligent" argument

Actually above normal for the average gun control fan.

Might also explain why your side is so pathetic and never get anything actually done out here in the real world.

You really need to get together and compare cartoons with the folks in Castle Bansalot.

[derby378]

55. And, in the meantime, I own a Kalashnikov and remain quite sane, thank you...

But by all means, please indulge.

[beevul]

48. They were at the rnc.

Pretty much everyone agrees on that.

Other parents are different, because gunz?

[pablo_marmol]

54. "I'm not interested in debating this crap with you any further..........."

Quite all right. Your emotion-baiting/faith based "arguments" have been slapped down handily by other DEMOCRATS here.

[friendly_iconoclast]

38. "(T)he NRA pays better." They do? And how did you come to know this?

[anamandujano]

42. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Every time the word gun is mentioned, the paranoid 2nd Amendment nuts run out and buy another. It's worth it to them to pay through the nose. An Olympian is a special catch for them.

[friendly_iconoclast]

44. So, no evidence. Did you perchance attend the College of It Stands to Reason?:

"Sergeant Colon had a broad education. He´d been to the school of My Dad Always Said, the College of It Stands to Reason, and was now a postgraduate student at the University of What Some Bloke In the Pub Told Me."

Terry Pratchett, Jingo

[DonP]

47. Oh you mean when you don't have any proof, just make shit up

That's one of the most popular gun control fan strategies.

Of course you never achieve anything out there in the real world, but I'm sure it makes you feel all warm, fuzzy and self righteous for confronting those "Evil Gun Owners" online. Boy, you sure told 'em!

But I bet you, nor any of your ilk, will be marching against Gun violence in the Englewood neighborhood of Chicago, where 10 were killed Monday?

Much easier to just pose and rant online than ever do anything out where the violence is real.

[Duckhunter935]

52. Lol, no answer as usual when challenged

[liberal N proud]

51. Color me surprised

Not!