I'm impressed. And now it's your turn. Mr. Blanchard has agreed to take questions from you, the readers, over the next few hours. [More]The Gun Rights Examiner online interview where you can ask a question is now up and open for business.
Please tell your friends, and please check back throughout the day for Q&A updates.
Other posting may be light today. I need to monitor and moderate this, and that can be time-consuming.
UPDATE: (9:00 pm EST) Interview over. Further questions will not be taken.
I really like the way Kenn answered this question, that's pretty insightful:
ReplyDeleteDC: Why are so many African American political and religious leaders dead set against keeping and bearing arms? How does that tie in with other parts of their message?
KB: It is easy. There are few topics that are as “evergreen” as gun control. Leaders and clergy that adopt the anti-gun stance have an easier role. The path of least resistance is favored over a deeper dive into the truth. Do you tell the children that there is no Santa Claus coming down the chimney or do you keep up the illusion till they figure it out?
------
ReplyDeleteForgot to paste in the rest of Kenn's answer
------
Secondly, if they ride the anti-gun fence long enough they will up their status and be afforded personal protection, bodyguards and a lifestyle where they won’t need to protect themselves. They become pastors with entourages. Politicians get police protection. Celebrities with bodyguards don’t need to carry a firearm for their home. They have gated communities and things we can’t afford.
And lastly, some are in the habit of influencing people so much that they believe we are incapable of controlling our impulses -- that we are not thinking humans but lesser animals that need to be controlled. It’s a superiority piece; that is just plain wrong.
Gee. Sounds like Ted Kennedy, who would disarm you but has plenty of bodyguards for himself.
ReplyDeleteToo bad more people didn't participate. At least you got a pretty good digg count.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous: what are you talking about?
ReplyDeleteMML--yes, I was somewhat disappointed in the turnout.
Well David, you shouldn't be disappointed. The paucity of questions was a reflection of your success. Your interview was outstanding, Rev. Blanchard's answers were excellent. There wasn't much left unsaid or unaddressed. Of what little there was the first few questioners covered just about everything. That didn't leave much for the rest of us to do.
ReplyDeleteLack of visible participation is a testament to the excellent job that was done. I, for instance, followed it all day. As you know, I am confident in my ability to see the picture,I trust my own judgment, and I am firm in my opinions, yet I could not think of anything I could have said or asked that would have been qualitatively beneficial to the enterprise. You, Rev. Blanchard and the first few questioners just didn't leave anything unaddressed.
It is very difficult to improve on perfection. This enterprise was just damn near perfect.
Be proud.
Hell, I couldn't even find a tragic atrocity to complain about. Or is that an atrocious tragedy?
ReplyDeleteI couldn't even find a nit to pick. And I am an expert. (expert=unknown pressurized drip from out of town and the last to know)