Mr Pallaras asked whether the community would be safer without guns, including those owned by legitimate gun club enthusiasts. "Can anyone seriously question the proposition that the community pays far too high a price to continue to indulge gun owners in their selfishness?" [More]Thanks for candidly showing us the end game. It'll come in handy next time some snotty anti ridicules the "slippery slope" argument.
Keep your eyes open for the "selfish" argument to be used more and more. I've seen it raised in the past, and if they think the meme will work to further alienate and discourage, well, it's not exactly like subversives are actually "above" anything.
5 comments:
Yes, selfish, humm.
So if I want something for me and its' of course legal I'm selfish.
They aren't selfish in imposing their will on me. They say that not selfish.
They are definitely suffering some mental brokenness or having a terminology breakdown.
Eck!
If someone wants to have a gun, let them join the SS... as civilians having guns doesn't serve the State. Right, Mr. Pallaras?
Almost there, in one of a handful of countries that most resemble ours.
I seriously question the position that the community pays anything to "indulge" me. I rather think they will all end up in my debt, during the Coming Madness.
I know how to solve this problem of rival "bikie" gangs firing into restaurants and residences in Australia - outlaw all vehicles with less than four wheels. That will show them who is really in control. Plus it is just as "reasonable" as outlawing the guns.
Word verification: "crymoo" - indeed!
That exact same meme was used in Britain with tremendous success.
It requires a robust collectivist (that is progressive/fascist)state to apply it in the law, which we don't have here, yet.
We'll likely here it first in either New York or in California since both of those states are thoroughly collectivist already.
Post a Comment