« Yet One More Reason Why There’s No Hope for the Future | Main | Barrel Life, Part I »

April 20, 2006

This page has been moved to http://www.fieldandstream.com/blogs/gun-nut

If your browser doesn’t redirect you to the new location, please visit The Gun Nut at its new location: www.fieldandstream.com/blogs/gun-nut.

All or Nothing; A Gun Owner’s Guide to Loyalty

In a recent blog I admitted to being a New York Times reader, and the reaction was not favorable. One reader said, in effect: “Now we know where the Bush bashing comes from. I suppose you’d be happier if we were in Gore’s second term, or Kerry’s first.”

I’ve seen over the years that some gun owners tend toward an all-or-nothing, you’re-either-with-us-100-percent-or-you’re-against-us outlook. This can be comforting in troubled times and saves you the bother of thinking for yourself, but it doesn’t hold water.

Let’s look at the Bush bashing first. I bash Bush because:

  • President-bashing is an American tradition that goes back to the beginning of our republic. Abraham Lincoln took a worse lacing from the press than any chief executive in our history.
  • Bush talks funny.
  • Look at his record

Why, after reading The New York Times, would I bash Bush? Does reading it make you victim to some kind of thought-control process? Since I also bash Hillary every chance I get, is this also caused by The Times ?

Why would I prefer Al Gore, or that curious object, John Kerry? Does pointing out W’s many and horrific shortcomings automatically make me a supporter of those two goons?

I’ve been an NRA member since 1964 and a Benefactor Member since 1979, and I’ve been reading The American Rifleman since the 1950s. If we didn’t have the NRA, I would be writing about things other than guns because we wouldn’t have guns, but does all this mean I have to agree with every single thing the NRA says and does?

And President Bush is always free to bash me if he so chooses.


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference All or Nothing; A Gun Owner’s Guide to Loyalty:



I couldn't agree more. Resonable dialog is a more effective way to promote pro-gun and conservation issues. The shrill all-or-nothing types have hijacked enough internet chat sites.

I enjoy the blog Dave.


I'm often suprised to find out that since I'm a registered democrat I'm also a liberal extremist who hates guns, soldiers, apple pie, etc. It really is a shame to find this out about myself since I do enjoy firearms and shooting (and pie). Guess I'll have to sell off all the guns I own, buy a van that runs on used cooking oil, and start protesting every little thing I don't agree with. Oh darn.

GLN Admin

I read just about anything that comes in front of me. It is not because I wish to debate or compromise. It is becuase I want to know the enemy.

For too many years we compromised with the gun grabbers and every time we lost. Even FOPA86 has its area where we got screwed.

Now is the time to not compromise. Now is the time to repeal layer by layer of gun control that has been built up.

The Second Amendment has nothing to do with hunting.


Thank you Mr. Petzal for being the voice of the common man. It drives me crazy that these days all we ever seem to hear are the uber-conservatives and the ultra-liberals; probably because they whine the loudest. I think most of America sits somewhere in the "middle of the road" category and sadly spends too much time working for a living to be bothered making thier voice heard.

Thank you for your fair reviews or a myriad of subjects and relying on good old fashined common sense.


Dear Mr. Mambi Pambi Liberal Petzal, I'm going to stand in for President Bush on this one because I'm not sure that our Supreme Commander In Chief needs to take time out of his busy schedule of doing God's work (i.e. making Haliburton rich, paying back politicaly cronies, etc...) to bash some gun geek.

First off...what are you doing wasting time reading? Get with the times man! It's all about radio man! All the real news that you need can be provided by our good friend Rush.
Second...Only "real" gun owners take an all-or-nothing approach. It is not only comforting to let others do your thinking in times of trouble, but all the time is good too. Why do you think we have politicians in the first place?! Duhhh!!!!
Third...Abraham Lincoln deserved all the bashing he received, wanting to fight his southern brethren, and thinking that black people should be free.
Fourth...Bush does not talk funny! What he says is funny!
Fifth...His record...Let's skip his record. Next.
Sixth...Yes! You should agree with everything that the NRA champions!!! Questioning the NRA is like..well...like questioning a republican president or something in the Bible. It's just bad! It's like saying "hey Satan...save me a spot in hell...cause that's where I deserve to go!"

So let's recap Mr. Petzal. In order to save your soul you need to STOP:
. Bashing President Bush
. Questioning anything
. Reading (Except American Rifleman, American Hunter, and The Bible)

Better think twice about going against us real gun owners!


Uh dave, what can of worms are you going to open tomorrow?


Dave, I think you summed it up pretty well a while back in an article you wrote in F&S "Why Politics Stinks". If anyone here thinks Bush is really a friend of gun-owners, they have had their heads in the sand for the past six years. Sure, he appears at NRA meetings whenever there is an election but what has he done to help protect the Second Amendment? The death of the AWB and the Lawful Commerce Act were all done by the Congress, not Dubya. Where was he when the authorities were confiscating firearms during Hurricane Katrina? Yes, Mr. Internet Gore and Hanoi John would have been far worse then Bush but that still does not make King George a good leader.

P.S. Lincoln was a dictator, pure and simple. You don't want to get me started on him!


Lincoln was a dictator? Seriously? I'd like to get you started on this because it is one of the most assinine things I've every heard.

Lee Woiteshek

Well, since I started this mess, I'll guess I should wade in. I went to this blog because I'm a big fan of Dave's writings. I expected to read tips on hunting,loads,outfitters,nice guns, great optics, neat gadgets, and "hell I was there stories". What I didn't expect, and don't want was poltics. NYT is an outspoken adversary of guns, hunting, and any Repbulican adminstration. I would rather read Dave's review of Savage's smokeless muzzleloader, than Dave's review of President Bush. To bring something like that to a website like this to me, is akin to discussing the latest porn flick in church on Easter Sunday. There are better venues for such things. Bottom line, is that its Dave's website, and if he wants NYT wallpaper in his home, and bash the Pres at least once an article in every topic he certainly can.


Can you feel the love?

I am sick of hearing only the far left/far right arguments. These arguments only receive notice for two reasons: their entertainment value and their fund raising power.

People want to hear the next crazy statement (entertainment), and politicians want to scare you into believing the other side is out to get you, yes you!!! (fundraisers).

Larry Cheseney

Hey fellas ,remember the old phrase, "there is nothing worse than arguing politics and religion" It will sure as hell start a fight in any setting. On a bus in a bar at a party and even with your best friend or your wife. Maybe even someone elses wife.

Dave,you have kicked over an ant hill on this one.


Poor Dave P. The guy invaded the scared temple and abused the Holy Priests of Hysteria by: a. lampooning the Head Honcho, G.W. Bush; b. hinted a doubt with the NRA; c. dared stabbed thy Holies’ sensitive repose with the vile name: Hillary Clinton. As expected the Holy Faithful went up like rockets and it didn’t take the Sword of Spite long to fall. 10,000 At-a-Boy’s wiped out with one sentence of biting, unveiled Truth.

The Holies crack me up! These guys can be baited so easily and they ALWAYS have a rationale for taking affront.

Dave P—You’re a good man and lack any mean-spiritedness. Stir the proverbial Pot with your wit and fine-writing some more! I use too many adjectives and have trouble not to dangle my preps. If nothing else these blog’s should be a literary exercise and not a total gossip trail.

See you on Campus

Tom in Virginia

Dear Dave...thank you for not only thinking, but daring to speak out when truth demands the floor, as you see it. By the way---I admire Lincoln greatly, but he WAS an authoritarian ruler, suspending habeus corpus and arresting those who disagreed with him [the Copperheads, as they called]...nor do we hear much about his diverting the soldier's ballots from his last election, where he was effectively challenged by General McClellen. He was also responsible for pardoning many soldiers from execution...and he was certainly wanting a reconciliation with the estranged confederate nationals. You cannot help but like him. He was also a fair marksman, and the last Prez to shoot out on the White House lawn, I believe. I still prefer the likes of Charlton Heston...smiling, here.
However, it may be time, at last, to return to things that are more firearm-related, having laid down your right to speak and think freely. Laying down this independent stance only makes us admire you more, and few readers can really doubt your love of the right to keep and bear....

Gents: Thank you all for your comments. I don't have time to answer as many of you as I'd like, but I can add this:

I've tried going to the radio for news. Don Imus is OK because he brags about his .357 and frequently threatens to shoot people. Also, he's as old and cranky as I am. He's not OK because he frequently allows as how gun control is a good thing.

Lincoln suspended habeus corpus, which is the foundation of Anglo-Saxon law, and threw people (the mayor of Baltimore, for one) in jail for indefinite periods of time for no other reason than they gave him problems. He also ignored an order from the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and went to war without consulting Congress at all.

His Secretary of War kept a bell on his desk and would remind people who disagreed him that "I have but to ring and you will go to a place where the dog's don't bark."

Gitmo would be no surprise to him.

Great rant. Keep that sedition coming!


I have to agree with Matt (the first reply up there). Common sense doesn't seem to prevail anymore. Though I'm a Republican myself, I'm getting tired of George Bush's tendency to make us look bad, and no politician, no matter how conservative, is "safe" to your Constitutional rights.

And besides...lighten up. No one who hunts or shoots "wishes we were in Gore's second term", give Dave some credit.


I am known as a liberal thinker at work and every once in a while I will state that I agree with a conservative pundit and there is always one jackass that will blurt out "there is hope for you yet". Alas, it is not long before I am hopeless again. I like to think I am a moderate person in beliefs and actions, most importantly when it comes to issues that affect everyones personal freedoms.


The first act of Lincoln's treason to be mentioned is the confiscation or attempted confiscation of arms from citizens in the border states before they seceeded.

Lincoln brow-beat the boder states into leaving the Union by raising an army to invade them when they were still quite loyal to the Union.

Lincoln suspended habeus corpus, as was already mentioned, and made a habit of throwing people (everyone from regular citizens to the Maryland legislature) in jail with no trial based on what he thought they might do.

After Chief Justice Roger Taney stated that he didn't think Lincolns actions were Constitutional, Lincoln tried to have the Chief Justice arrested but his aides refused to go along with it.

Lincoln ordered Union commanders on numerous occassions to shoot unarmed citizens.

Lincoln ran Camp Douglas, a prison which far put Andersonville (a disgrace in its own right) to shame. Some of the people held there were UNION soldiers awaiting formal prisoner of war exchange byt the way. Normal procedure would be to have the men sit at home with their families and not in one of your OWN POW camps!

Lincoln placed the cities of Baltimore and Chicago under military rule, which almost immediately after the war ended was deemed grossly unconstitutional.

After Vicksburg fell, Lincoln allowed unin commanders to take the former slaves there and send them back to work as slaves, only this time so Yankee officers could have their pockets lined.

Cases of looting by Union soldiers that went unpunished are too numerous to mention.

We all know how nasty the war got over in Missouri. However, the thugs who claimed to fight for the Confederacy there (i.e. Quantrill) were disavowed by the CSA while the equally blood-thirsty ones who claimed to fight for the Union were officially recogonized. One real nut by the way was a Yankee senator named Lane.

If this isn't enough to show you Lincoln was a dictator, I have plenty more.

Robert D Keith

What an awful experience this has been! Please don't turn over the compost pile again.

Mickey Coleman

Not being a student of history, or much else for that matter, I was never aware of Camp Douglas. Andersonville was pretty bad from what I read about it. I think it was Kantor that wrote the book by the name. One thing you should remember about Andersonville was that the South didn't have the food and medicines for the prisoners. As they say in Tennessee, "HELLFAR! We didn't even have enough food and medicines for us'ns."

Our Blogs