Expert guest post by Mark, Gun Expert (and
Taylor Marsh’s husband)
Edited and co-written by Taylor Marsh
 |
| via Ben Smith |
Oh, good grief.
This is as
silly as it gets. In order to make Obama look better on guns, his
fans, who obviously don’t know any more than he does about them, are running
around making fun of a Clinton ad that outlines
Obama’s gun stance, which is awful, frankly, as I’ve said before around
here. But I’m not the gun expert in the family, my husband Mark is. That said,
even I knew this issue was picking nat crap out of pepper.
Now, I like Ben Smith, but on this one he should have gotten a second, maybe
even a third, opinion.
Sen. Hillary Clinton’s mailing attacking Sen. Barack Obama’s
record on guns appears to include a striking visual gaffe: The image of the
gun pictured on the face of the mailing is reversed, making it a nonexistent
left-handed model of the Mauser 66 rifle.
Mark here, helping Taylor on this one (as I did when Deadeye Dick shot his friend in the face). This whole thing makes me laugh out
loud. They’re saying someone supposedly reversed the gun in a photo, which is
the big crime, right? I’m not sure that’s true. It also appears that the cheek
piece in the Clinton mailer, from the little I can see, is on the right side
of the gun, which would make it an authentic left-handed bolt. But again, I can’t see enough of the gun. Also, if you
look at the photo, one of the problems is that the Mauser rifle in Clinton’s
mailer has a double trigger. The other photo Mr. Smith put up does not. They’re
not the same rifles. I also find it hard to believe that the custom rifle like
the one in Hillary’s mailer could not be ordered in a left-handed bolt, since
there are quite a few lefties who could buy a top end, custom rifle. Bottom
line: people who don’t know which end of the gun to shoot are criticizing whether
a specific gun exists. So, the big deal is the Clinton team that put the mailer
together shows a left-handed bolt action? It absolutely does not mean the gun
doesn’t exist. This is laughable. It also shows that people who don’t know anything
about guns should not write about them. Only people who hate Clinton
are trying to blow up anything they can into a big deal are ranting about this,
plus the reporter who thinks he got the story. Sorry, but talk to more than
one guy when you’re dealing with guns and politics.
Taylor here, now I’m sure Val Forgett III is a decent guy, but to say his description
is overblown is an understatement. However, considering he seems to be dealing with
someone who doen’t know anything about guns, he got free reign to laugh at something
that shows how desperate Obama’s fans are to blow anything up in Indiana to
try to hurt Clinton.
But actually, Clinton featuring a lefty gun is rather considerate, especially since we
know Obama is a lefty, can’t bowl,
and his gun stance sucks, so offering up a lefty gun gives him a little push
on an issue in which he has no standing. Sorry, my husband and I kid Senator
Obama. But dragging out some guy who was Mauser’s agent when the gun was released
to pontificate how silly the photo is? What, does he think it was photo shopped?
No, Val Forgett III, honestly trying to help, told a reporter, who is not a gun expert, that the picture above is like showing “Babe Ruth hitting
right-handed.”
As for the $2,200 everyone is bellyaching about, again, according to my husband,
an over and under shotgun goes for about $1,400. Anybody who was given a gun
like this would kiss the person’s feet who handed it to them.
So this is nothing. But it sure is embarrassing to have ignoramuses
pontificating about guns and trying to conflate it into a character issue,
when they likely couldn’t shoot one if their life depended on it. Guess what,
sometimes it does.
Comments are closed.