Gun restrictions are inevitable in today's violent climateI'm not sure that I've ever read a more ignorant, stupid and poorly-written opinion piece. When you realize how many I've read, that's really saying something.
So why is it I think his conclusion is probably right?
13 comments:
"Gun restrictions are inevitable..."
So are patriots defying such restrictions.
And yes, most gun owners aren't involved in illegal activity.
'But we want "The Government" to save us by doing something, and since peaceable gun owners are the only ones likely to be affected by any new gun laws that's where we want the axe to fall so that we may perceive some results. And we don't want to hear that criminals ignore such laws with contempt and impunity, because that might upset our cozy little illusions. Let the innocent go ahead and suffer for us, so that we may feel safer.'
I can't quite figure out just what his "conclusion" is - unless it is the title here.
More attempts at restriction are obviously inevitable. But advocates for self defense need to stop using counterproductive language and reasoning.
I've just finished reading "Nation of Cowards" by Jeff Snyder. Much food for thought there.
We've too often been using the faulty reasoning that the "guns" stop crime, or whatever.
The gun is just one of many tools, as most of us agree. The only thing that can influence crime or anything else is between the ears of those who use the tools, which can be used for good or evil.
The solid projectile gun is currently one of the more effective tools to this end, but who knows what the future holds?
The underlying imperative is for personal responsibility. Those who exercise this will use their tools for good. Those who do not accept personal responsibility for their actions will probably use them for evil.
Government control of the tools will simply enable more people to stop exercising self control, which seems to be the true object.
I'm still digesting much of what I've read in this book. Anyone else have some thoughts on it?
***So why is it I think his conclusion is probably right?***
Probably because BS slung enough, slowly stops becoming BS
There is "criminal violence" and there is "political violence". Both are being used against innocent people, but the political violence is more dangerous because we are prohibited from shooting the perpetrators.
"In my opinion, there is no legitamate use for civilians to use a semi-automatic weapon."
Apparently, both critical thinking and pressing the spell-check hotkey are too difficult for the author.
"Hit the streets"
"Sprayed"
"legitimate hunters"
"children dying"
holy crap, I got my buzzword bingo card filled up in one paragraph.
Next week's op-ed: SUV violence.
"Guns should never be put in the wrong hands because we are simply trying to protect gun owners' rights. What about the rights of those who are being hurt by guns?
Besides gun owners being more responsible by not allowing children to hunt, not allowing children to gain access to a gun closet and the added protection of a trigger lock, there needs to be stricter laws to raise people's awareness that with privilege comes responsibility."
He, also, has some difficulty discerning any difference between Rights and privileges. Alas, Civics class.
EEOC group home hire.
In the event of a home invasion, for example, by the time the individual gets to that "locked" handgun, they could already be dead. Yeah, and that "locked" handgun has been stolen, the lock removed and in a criminal's hands. Nice work there jackass...all those sensible laws passed by those lacking sense.
In a land of absolute gun control, sure there is no street violence. However, theres this thing called "government institutionalized violence", and if you dare to speak out against it, your'e off to the camps too.
We'll see how he feels about semi - autos after his house has been hit by a wave of goblins
( we'll use Cooper here ) numbering 20 to 30 at a time .. such as happens daily in the glorious new South Africa .
This is the reason folks should open their eyes to the horrible and savage criminal acts being committed against those who were unarmed . Even the laws of nature ensure all creatures have the right to strive to survive . Consider our side for once - reality .
It's yet another indictment against the Regime that they not only force us to live in such a society , but increasingly the right to resist evil is being eroded .
For could not the well rounded of our people route out a sizable chunk of the criminal trash that needs it ... but we would have to face the might and opposition of The Machine also .
Profit out of chaos -
there is a method to their madness .
Qi Ji Guang - I meant to say ... there's skyrocketing street violence going on over in London and all completely without guns . A gunless society - a criminals best dream come true !
Knives and machetes are ever present and used with relish upon the victims they stalk daily .
Naah , I'll keep my
.45
Re: Jeff.
Yes thanks for the info on Orwellian London. That city is truly a nightmare come true, and of course, when one get stabbed by a gangbanger in London, it will all be captured on cctv tape. HAHA! Like that would do any good! I actually meant Soviet Russia in my statement. Sure, Stalin's era had no reported petty crimes, but every day thousands of people just happen to disappear from the face of the earth, never to be seen again. Hmmm.....I wonder why?
Post a Comment