TexasCHLforum.com

Wow. I can't believe anyone took this seriously.

In the article, a quote by an ATF agent baffles me:

"It puts ideas in people's heads," Dunham said. "We don't need any more creative weapons than there are."

What does that even mean? We shouldn't have innovation in firearms? It seems certainly obvious that he knows this stuff is satire, does he really think this stuff is going to birth some sort of "creative weapons" movement? It also dumbfounds me that he seems to find 100,000 hits to someone's attempt at humor disturbing.

Mithras61 wrote: I find their lack of a sense of humor almost as entertaining as the original joke!

seems to be a lot of that goin' around...

NcongruNt wrote:Wow. I can't believe anyone took this seriously.

In the article, a quote by an ATF agent baffles me:

"It puts ideas in people's heads," Dunham said. "We don't need any more creative weapons than there are."

What does that even mean? We shouldn't have innovation in firearms? It seems certainly obvious that he knows this stuff is satire, does he really think this stuff is going to birth some sort of "creative weapons" movement? It also dumbfounds me that he seems to find 100,000 hits to someone's attempt at humor disturbing.

Without weapons innovations, would we have been successful in World War II?

NcongruNt wrote:Wow. I can't believe anyone took this seriously.

In the article, a quote by an ATF agent baffles me:

"It puts ideas in people's heads," Dunham said. "We don't need any more creative weapons than there are."

What does that even mean? We shouldn't have innovation in firearms? It seems certainly obvious that he knows this stuff is satire, does he really think this stuff is going to birth some sort of "creative weapons" movement? It also dumbfounds me that he seems to find 100,000 hits to someone's attempt at humor disturbing.

It strikes me as surprising that anyone wold expect normal reasoning from someone in the ATF. These folks don't have any reputation as reasoning human beings.