"Do we as a society value safety or do we value a hobby that creates danger?" Mr. Miller said, endorsing the recommended crackdown. "That hobby directly results in people being shot and killed on the streets of our city."Take note, "sportsmen"--see what happens when you trivialize a right?
All you IQFs who think Polyphemus will eat you last and are willing to toss non-Fuddites under the bus, think again. Like other predators, government finds the weak are the easiest pickings.
But you all go right ahead and listen to editorial make-up artists like "'pro gun' Kentuckian" Tom Eblen, trying to put lipstick on the AHSA pig.
Don't ask me whether its ignorance or intent that makes him willingly and enthusiastically lead you to the slaughter. Ask him.
4 comments:
They are afraid of citizens who are TRAINING. Not for the Olympics free pistol trophy, either.
When Politicians Attack.
When bad things happen to good journalists:
An Afghan court found 24-year-old journalist Sayed Kambakhsh guilty of distributing an article that questioned the Muslim practice of polygamy. It handed him the maximum sentence on the charge of insulting Islam, death. -- AP
I'm sure the Afghan government -- including esteemed President Hamid Kharzai -- will say the law and the sentence are "reasonable" and "common-sense."
"That hobby directly results in people being shot..."
Perhaps Canadians should also consider licensing and registration of hyperbole. The above is a Class III Exaggeration, for example, and is the most dangerous kind.
Did the author mean that club members are dragging people in off the street and shooting them?
Tom Eblen has shut off his email.
Figures. I tried to send him this:
Dear Tom,
In your editorial of 25 May in the Kentucky.com websits you provide two interesting quotes.
1) Members of the NRA and similar groups are generally the most responsible gun owners and shooters out there.
2) If Second Amendment absolutists keep standing up and daring others to pry their guns from their "cold, dead fingers," eventually somebody's going to do it.
If members of the NRA and similar groups are the most responsible gun owners and shooters out there, what is the basis for this debate? Shouldn't the debate be framed about what we are going to do about the criminal, incompetent, and irresponsible shooters who are causing ALL the problems?
Philosophically, your call for negotiation is flawed, because for the last 50 years, the gun-control side of the debate has not been interested in compromise. They are MOST interested in the elimination of private firearms ownership in the United States, and negotiation is not an end for them, it's a means to an end. If I try to negotiate with people over whom I already have a major power advantage, I'm not standing in a position of strength. Negotiating over something that I already have is a loser for ME, not them.
Furthermore, the comment "eventually somebody's going to do it" betrays a certain lack of historical perspective you may wish to address. Consider this:
In Britain, Canada, Jamaica, and Australia, California, Illinois, and New York, numerous confiscatory gun bans have gone into effect in the last 40 years. Each country/state estimates it's non-compliance rate at between 50% to 80%.
Crime rates have risen steadily in each of those countries/states, particularly including gun crimes.
In the USA, there are over 450 million firearms in 230 million american hands, with millions of new ones sold every year. A central government order to turn in guns, whether Grandma's revolver, or a semi-auto military pattern carbine, or semi-auto pistol, the non-compliance rate would be approximately 70% as estimated by the California DoJ, Illinois State Police, and the New York State Police, all places where those orders were given... If there was an order to destroy all private firearms ownership in the USA, the estimated compliance rate would approach <10%.
Now, how will the central government enforce it's edicts? How can over 200 million American citizens be discovered, arrested, detained, investigated, tried, convicted, and imprisoned for violating the new gun laws? How many agents will be needed? Where will they house all these seditious citizen?
What was the last solution arrived at by a modern government which needed to suddenly imprision, house, feed, clothe, and control millions of it's own people on short notice?
And what if only ten percent of American gun owners resisted, and shot two agents for every gun owner arrested? Let's see... 10% of 230 million is 23,000,000, times two agents each is 46,000,000 dead or injured agents... Somehow I don't think we're going to find 46 million Americans who are willing to get shot to take away your Granny's Smith & Wesson Model 10 .38 Special.
People who are so mathematically challenged as to fail to understand the Laws of Unintended Consequences have a way of going down a path from blunder to disaster, and the path always leads through a slaughterhouse.
Give up the gun control law mantra, Tom. It has never worked, it doesn't work now, and it will never work, except to enable tyranny and holocaust. On the other hand, Liberty and Freedom have ALWAYS worked, and peace, prosperity, and justice have always followed closely behind.
Respectfully,
Lee W. Warner
Lakeview, AR
Whatcha guys think? A waste of time? But, hell, I got time.
Post a Comment