Advocates of the First and Second Amendments sat down together Tuesday to debate whether the state's list of 257,000 handgun-carry permit holders should be kept public -- but found little common ground beyond agreeing that the ongoing debate should be civil. [More]See, that's the thing--as long as it remains civil, there's no real incentive to stop, is there? I don't think I'd be inclined toward civility if some snotty anti-gun punk posted my name under the guise of crusading journalism. The damn watchdogs are supposed to be watching the government.
But then, I don't have a dog in this fight.
Besides, I've already proposed a way gun owners who do can fight back.
Again and again and again...
Apparently, it's not civil enough.
[Via Kenny's Sideshow]
3 comments:
Let's see how these same journalism folks respond to the idea of having their names, home addresses, and telephone numbers listed for public perusal.
We already know how the "only ones" respond to that suggestion.
W-III
What's to debate? It should be destroyed post-haste. And the apparatus for making "permits" should be destroyed, and the personnel in the issuing department fired.
The legislation that created it should be recognized as null and void, and the savings of letting psychiatrists and private insurance deal with gun paranoia should be passed along to the tax payers.
No debate, no compromise and no "permits."
Leave us alone.
Now, wasn't that easy? [evil grin]
Post a Comment