Crazy Salon Writer Who Wanted Gun Owners Shot Wrote That He Possessed Guns

A few days ago, unhinged Leftist gun control advocate D. Watkins published, at the always unhinged Salon, an article with this headline and subhead

Want a gun? Take a bullet: Take this, gutless NRA cowards — you can have a gun, once you understand the pain of being shot
Gun control doesn’t go far enough. If you want license to carry a weapon, you should know the pain of getting hit

Via Bob Owens, we get this article from David Cole at Black Man With A Gun

Lesson learned: Never underestimate the hypocrisy of an anti-gun rights bigot.

Literally minutes after I finished writing my previous post, I decided to read up a little more on Mr. D. Watkins. Sorting through his previous writings at, I came upon a wonderful essay from last July entitled, “Gunplay Is All I Know.” (Though in the photo, it appears he knows little of gun safety.)

I encourage you to read the article in full, so that you can get a true appreciation for the supernova of hypocrisy that is D. Watkins. I’ll just give you a couple of bullet points…er, highlights.

First of all, if Watkins’ tale is to believed, he is a criminal. In the article, he admits to owning two firearms, despite stating that he lives in Baltimore, Maryland, under some of the strictest gun control laws in the nation:

“I’m not a gangster and could not care less about weapon shows or trips to a shooting range, but I have two guns.”

Nowhere in the article does he mention obtaining the state-mandated permit to purchase his handguns. That’s a crime. He also does not mention registering the guns with the state…that’s another crime. I saw nothing about his obtaining a license to own a handgun, as Maryland requires. Crime. And he also doesn’t mention getting a permit to carry, although to be fair, he does not specifically say that he carries his guns outside his home. But it is apparent that Watkins’ gun ownership is illegal and he knows it, as the article’s subtitle reads, “I’d rather be caught with a gun than without one.”

There’s more to it, make sure to hit the link for the rest.

As Bob Owens notes, Watkins deserves to shoot himself twice for those guns, per his own article. Further, he should be in jail, per the law. One Mr. Cole notes “As it turns out, he understands very well why an individual citizen might want to exercise the right to keep and bear arms, and does so himself (albeit illegally).” In essense, to protect oneself from violent criminals. Democrats are all for gun control, but said gun control would only effect law abiding citizens, rather than the criminals.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

5 Responses to “Crazy Salon Writer Who Wanted Gun Owners Shot Wrote That He Possessed Guns”

  1. john says:

    Teach what would you do to reduce the amount of people killed each year by guns the total of which always exceeds 30000? Most of these deaths are caused by “legal” guns

  2. john says:

    how do guns interact with the Commandment that says Thou Shalt Not Kill

  3. gitarcarver says:

    As usual, john is not telling the truth,

    Furthermore, interestingly, points out that criminals who may have committed a crime with a weapon do not actually need to obtain licenses or register their weapons, as this would be an act of self-incrimination, a ruling upheld in 1968 in the case of Haynes vs. the US.
    Another study showed that five out of six gun-possessing felons did not purchase a handgun or otherwise get one through legal means, but instead procured an illegal weapon through the secondary market, or by theft.
    The information of this study strongly supports the fact that handguns used by criminals are most often stolen or traded between each other, and therefore become nigh impossible to track in any meaningful fashion. All of these would be deemed illegal weapons.

    Even if john wants to dismiss the argument that he is wrong on the numbers, he is making a logical fallacy of trying to compare illegal acts with legal ownership. The overwhelming number of people killed in a car accident are riding in a licensed or registered vehicle. There are more deaths by car than by guns so clearly the “legality” or “illegality” of a car or weapon is not the issue. It is what is done with that weapon that matters.

    how do guns interact with the Commandment that says Thou Shalt Not Kill

    Once again, we see how liberals believe that quoting the Bible out of context somehow how gives credence to their claims. In fact, all it does is expose their ignorance.

    The term “kill” means “murder,” One would think john would support the idea of murder being illegal. One would hope that john would believe that the military should not go off to war unarmed and become cannon fodder. Of course, given john’s lack of knowledge on military things and disdain for the military in general it is very possible that does want young men and women to die while protecting the country.

    In short, once again we see that john is wrong on the stats, wrong on religious issues and wrong on his beliefs.

  4. Mike says:

    “I went to Fat Hands and Naked’s crib with $300 and came out with a two-toned .45 that had a cracked safety.”

    -D Watkins
    Sounds like an admission of illegally purchasing a firearm. How incredibly stupid if this bozo has first hand knowledge of purchasing a gun illegally and advocates for any additional laws to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, as if that would work!

    We’ll give DW the Carl Rowen Hypocrisy in Advocacy Award.

  5. jl says:

    John, you really didn’t say that, did you? Ok, how do cars, knives, airplanes, fists, or whatever else kills people interact with the thou shall not kill commandment? The “Thou” in the commandment is referring to human beings, not inanimate objects.

Pirate's Cove