The missing link on gun control

posted at 9:21 am on July 24, 2012 by Jazz Shaw

Once again the long running debate over gun control is being beaten into the ground in the wake of the maniacal attack in Colorado. So why drag it out further? Even after writing about it this weekend and sitting through hours of largely unbalanced coverage on television, there was something stuck in my proverbial craw. Two things brought an additional point of clarity to me on the subject today and made me realize that I’ve been cowed by social conventions into dancing around, side-stepping and outright ignoring what may be one of the most fundamental truths which needs to be highlighted when dealing with those who seek greater restrictions on gun ownership.

One was this opinion piece at CNN, which goes beyond the normal let’s do this and let’s do that to get guns out of people’s hands and casts a far wider net over one of the fundamental “flaws” in the fabric of America going back to the revolution.

What is it about Americans and guns? How much time do you have?…

There are an estimated 270 million guns in the hands of civilians in the United States, making Americans the most heavily armed people in the world per capita. Yemen, a tribal nation with no history of strong central government or the rule of law, comes in a distant second…

America’s collective memory — of the Wild West in the 1800s, the assassinations of John F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King half a century ago and the front-page news from last week — is marked time and time again by guns…

But America seems to be the place the whole world thinks of when apparently ordinary people use guns for grotesque acts of violence. America stands alone in its historic and cultural attachment to guns. America stands armed.

(We’ll circle back to that in a moment, I assure you.)

The second was a radio interview I did in DC this morning with John McCaslin and Dana Mills on America’s Morning News. (A really great show weekday mornings, by the way, which is on in well over 100 markets now.) We were chewing this over again and Dana – playing a bit of Devil’s advocate – spelled out some of the common arguments you hear from gun control enthusiasts these days, asking for my reaction. The crux of the standard patter goes something like this, always delivered in a voice dripping in treacle and oh so reasonable:

Look, we’re not saying you can’t go hunting. (If killing helpless animals is your sort of thing.) And nobody is saying you can’t go shooting targets or skeet or clay pigeons or whatever you people call them. We’re not even saying you can’t defend yourself inside your own home! But honestly now… who really needs a semiautomatic handgun where you can just keep squeezing the trigger over and over again? Who needs a drum shaped magazine that can hold 100 rounds? Who needs an assault rifle? The deer will run away if you haven’t killed him with a couple shots. You can always stop and reload your clay pigeon thing. And you can defend your house if you keep the guns to a reasonable size and keep them inside your home! Can’t we all just get along?

Let’s face it… you only need those things if you’re planning on killing people.

That was the moment when it hit me. The combination of that premise taken by anti-gun groups with the previous historical perspective on our country reminded me of what may be the most important piece of the puzzle. When having this conversation, it’s far too easy to say, “Oh! Of course we don’t want to kill people! So let’s discuss your proposition.”

It’s time to come out with it and speak the plain truth which was born and bred into the very soul of the United States from day one:

There may yet come a day when you will have no choice.

I know.. I know.. heresy. But I submit the following premise to you. America was founded by and remains populated by people who, in many cases, realized that an armed population might be vital to our survival. There are three basic scenarios which are likely on the minds of many people, presented here in (hopefully) descending order of likelihood.

1. Some people have concerns that, in a very unstable world, things might eventually go completely pear shaped and the social fabric could be in danger of collapse. Nobody wants this and I’m not saying it’s even likely, but if that is one concern of yours, you’re going to have to be ready to defend yourself, your family and your property. And not against deer.

2. There has been a constant undercurrent of worry that the United States might still, some day, be invaded by a foreign power using a land invasion rather than a nuclear attack. And if such invaders overwhelmed the troops and the National Guard, there would still be an armed force of tens of millions of Americans to deal with. More than a few people wiser than me have opined over the years that this is a large reason nobody has tried to invade us.

3. The last, worst, and – I hope – most unlikely scenario is one which persons as “radical” as Thomas Jefferson fretted over. And that is the possibility that a vastly swollen and powerful central government could forget and abandon the promises made to the people and violate the fundamental rights promised to them. The Founders came from a land and a time when that was hardly science fiction. And while I see no indication that such a thing is imminent today, an armed populace remains a constant reminder to those in Washington that, should they ever dare go so far as to employ the military to suppress their citizens and break those promises… You only rule by the consent of the governed. We outnumber you vastly. And we are armed. This isn’t a threat. It’s a reminder.

No, there is no reasonable person who wakes up in the morning hoping for the chance to kill another human being. But in times of war, ultimate disaster, chaos or – God forbid – the betrayal of those in power, killing another human being may, sadly, be part of the only path to survival. And to take a piece from the CNN article linked above:

America’s collective memory — is marked time and time again by guns..

You bet is is. And there were good reasons for that. Stop apologizing when you hear these arguments. They’re actually making your case for you.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

By the grace of God, I have never had to fire my weapon at someone. However I can name at least two occasions where the presence of my gun has warded of an attempted mugging/assault.

Blacksoda on July 24, 2012 at 12:02 PM

Only if you had something big enough to bring down the bear!

Otherwise you’ll just make him mad.

cozmo on July 24, 2012 at 11:55 AM

Haha! Of course.

Badger40 on July 24, 2012 at 12:02 PM

Scenario 1 is already happening. Mexican drug cartels can hold entire towns hostage in rural Mexico — only a few hours away from the US – Mexico border. The Mexican police are unable or unwilling to stop them. Why do you think they aren’t holding suburbs in San Antonio hostage too? Because of the bang up job our federal government is doing protecting the border? Hah. Everyone knows Texans are armed to the teeth and allowed to defend themselves without fear of repercussions from the authorities. Largely, the cartels are sticking to the side of the border where the government disarms the victims for them.

bitsy on July 24, 2012 at 12:03 PM

An armed society is a polite society.

ajacksonian on July 24, 2012 at 12:01 PM

Anyone who knows the ‘Wild West’ history knows that back then, even in the ‘wilderness’ society was very polite.

It took a stupid rare individual to attack an armed person.

Badger40 on July 24, 2012 at 12:11 PM

Only if you had something big enough to bring down the bear!
Otherwise you’ll just make him mad.

cozmo on July 24, 2012 at 11:55 AM

Classified, but I have it on good authority that Red Horse packs 2 ~ 4 M72 LAW.

DarkCurrent on July 24, 2012 at 12:12 PM

It took a stupid rare individual to attack an armed person.

Badger40 on July 24, 2012 at 12:11 PM

And the duel made you back up what you said.

Even women fought in duels… it was not a single gender practice. The practice wasn’t all that common… outside of Congress, that is.

This modern day ‘calling out’ stuff doesn’t work: look at the sniveling weasel ‘apologies’ offered these days, mostly by MFM news organizations and Leftists of all stripes. A real, heart-felt apology with making amends used to be the norm… because you could end up in an unbreathing condition if you didn’t do so.

Really the civilizing effects of arms and duels cannot be understated.

ajacksonian on July 24, 2012 at 12:21 PM

Wasn’t the Mountain Meadow Massacre over 20 years after the Mormons were driven out of western Missouri?

DarkCurrent on July 24, 2012 at 11:49 AM

Yeah, somehow that part always gets forgotten… You take a group of people who have been beaten, shot, raped and driven from every place they have tried to live (by government as well as by citizens), then they finally find a place of their own hundreds of miles away to live peacefully… Then you tell them that a large group of government militia, including many of the men who killed your most prominent leaders, is on its way to destroy you, and you expect this is going to end happily?

Not condoning anything that happened, but I can understand how some of those people could come unhinged.

sockpuppetpolitic on July 24, 2012 at 12:23 PM

Wasn’t the Mountain Meadow Massacre over 20 years after the Mormons were driven out of western Missouri?

DarkCurrent on July 24, 2012 at 11:49 AM

Oh, well than that’s okay to murder/massacre innocent people than, I mean the 20 year rule was in affect, I forgot about that rule.

What, they were driven out because they couldn’t follow constitutional law, the law of the land? That’s why they were driven out? Okay, hey what’s a little polygamy, child rape, no big deal…

right2bright on July 24, 2012 at 12:40 PM

“Some people have concerns that, in a very unstable world, things might eventually go completely pear shaped and the social fabric could be in danger of collapse. Nobody wants this and I’m not saying it’s even likely, but if that is one concern of yours, you’re going to have to be ready to defend yourself, your family and your property. And not against deer.”

Gotta say Aug 29 2005. I was reminded just how important my guns were.

Of Course… I’m just a dumb azz From New Orleans.

roflmao

donabernathy on July 24, 2012 at 12:40 PM

dirtseller on July 24, 2012 at 9:41 AM

Most assuredly dirtseller, that the theater was a “gunfree zone” figured heavilly in his target selection.

44Magnum on July 24, 2012 at 12:42 PM

What, they were driven out because they couldn’t follow constitutional law, the law of the land? That’s why they were driven out? Okay, hey what’s a little polygamy, child rape, no big deal…

right2bright on July 24, 2012 at 12:40 PM

I get the sense you don’t embrace the Mormons as your Christian brothers and sisters.

DarkCurrent on July 24, 2012 at 12:43 PM

Anyone remember back in the old wild west when everyone had guns? Remember how all of the cowboys were always courteous to women when they met them while walking on the streets? Always a little tap of the tip of their hats. They always showed this same courtesy to other men when they met other men on the streets. Do you know why? That was to show the other guy that they were not reaching for their gun.

Mirimichi on July 24, 2012 at 12:43 PM

“A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity”. –Sigmund Freud

Archivarix on July 24, 2012 at 12:46 PM

Anyone remember back in the old wild west when everyone had guns? Remember how all of the cowboys were always courteous to women when they met them while walking on the streets? Always a little tap of the tip of their hats. They always showed this same courtesy to other men when they met other men on the streets. Do you know why? That was to show the other guy that they were not reaching for their gun.

Mirimichi on July 24, 2012 at 12:43 PM

I’ve only seen it in movies.

DarkCurrent on July 24, 2012 at 12:50 PM

Not condoning anything that happened, but I can understand how some of those people could come unhinged.

sockpuppetpolitic on July 24, 2012 at 12:23 PM

Good, because if certain groups actually followed the law, than they wouldn’t be running from the law…oh, things like, polygamy were against the law, child brides against the law, you know those kind of things…Mormon’s were not “innocent” victims, they were following a polygamist, and child molester. Most people don’t embrace that kind of “worship”.
His (Smiths) “prophecies” were usurping the law of the land, and you can’t have two “laws” ruling the land.

The point being…plenty of blame to go around, plenty of victim’s…but one party is no more a victim than the other…the victim card is overused.

right2bright on July 24, 2012 at 12:50 PM

I get the sense you don’t embrace the Mormons as your Christian brothers and sisters.

DarkCurrent on July 24, 2012 at 12:43 PM

It’s the leaders, the group who formed the church that I don’t respect…Mormon’s themselves, individually, good and bad, just like everyone else.
And no, they are not Christian’s, I think that is pretty well established except by them…but they seem not to quite understand that. Using the same names, but different definitions, does not make them the same.

right2bright on July 24, 2012 at 12:54 PM

Always a little tap of the tip of their hats. They always showed this same courtesy to other men when they met other men on the streets. Do you know why? That was to show the other guy that they were not reaching for their gun.

Mirimichi on July 24, 2012 at 12:43 PM

I bet you loved John Wayne…

right2bright on July 24, 2012 at 12:55 PM

And no, they are not Christian’s, I think that is pretty well established except by them…but they seem not to quite understand that. Using the same names, but different definitions, does not make them the same.

right2bright on July 24, 2012 at 12:54 PM

As a Buddhist I never quite got that. Mormons proclaim Christ their Savior just like the other Christian denominations. It seems they are in fact Christians.

DarkCurrent on July 24, 2012 at 12:57 PM

It seems they are in fact Christians.

DarkCurrent on July 24, 2012 at 12:57 PM

Mmmm… not so much.

Rebar on July 24, 2012 at 1:09 PM

As a Buddhist I never quite got that. Mormons proclaim Christ their Savior just like the other Christian denominations. It seems they are in fact Christians.

DarkCurrent on July 24, 2012 at 12:57 PM

Than Buddhists and Christians are the same…Buddhists and Jews are the same…one can say something without understanding or seeing the differences.
One could say, that about most anything, that a sparrow and a penquin are both birds, therefore the same…

This is the major point, hundreds of years ago, to define Christianty, to put it in a “few” exact words (not complete, but a “Cliff’s notes of belief), they pounded out a couple of creeds. The Nicene and Apostle being the most prevalent.
These are stated in most every Christian service of most every single Christian denomination (I have never heard of a Christian church not stating these)…they define the basic tenets of Christian life and belief.
I know of no Christian faith that does not have or subscribe to one of these creeds, the variants are minor in differences.

The Mormon’s mock the creeds, they state they were made under duress, and other such nonsensical claims, they just forget they have been around for about 1,500 years, and you can see by the links, they are biblicaly supported. You can imagine it took some time to develop a complex belief system into just a few words, so it took some time to appease all, and different languages always present a problem.

If the Mormon’s adopted the creed, they would not be Mormon’s…if we adopted their beliefs, and turned our back on what the creeds profess, we would not be Christian…simple as that.

right2bright on July 24, 2012 at 1:11 PM

You know, a similar thought crossed my mind the other day in that the Second Amendment is the “right to keep and bear arms.” Arms–as in weapons. Hunters don’t “arm” themselves. Soldiers do.

UnderstandingisPower on July 24, 2012 at 9:38 AM

.
Hunters do “arm” themselves, even by your faulty distinction. My cousin shot a deer, and by the time he got to it, a big black bear apparently thought he shot that deer, and the bear wasn’t giving it up.

RBMN on July 24, 2012 at 9:44 AM
.

Hopefully your cousin didn’t shoot the bear-because if he did-he did TWO horrible things.
*Pro-Second amendment but VERY anti-hunting.*

annoyinglittletwerp on July 24, 2012 at 10:36 AM

.
(shaking head sadly) . . Oh ‘twerp . . . . are you going all “Walt Disney” on us again ?

listens2glenn on July 24, 2012 at 1:16 PM

Mmmm… not so much.

Rebar on July 24, 2012 at 1:09 PM

Bullshit made up 200 years ago still faintly smells like bullshit.
Bullshit made up 2,000 years ago smells like Gospel.

DarkCurrent on July 24, 2012 at 1:17 PM

Thomas Sowell cites data the MSM chooses to ignore;

Do countries with strong gun control laws have lower murder rates? Only if you cherry-pick the data.

Britain is a country with stronger gun control laws than the United States, and lower murder rates. But Mexico, Russia and Brazil are also countries with stronger gun control laws than the United States — and their murder rates are much higher than ours. Israel and Switzerland have even higher rates of gun ownership than the United States, and much lower murder rates than ours.

Even the British example does not stand up very well under scrutiny. The murder rate in New York has been several times that in London for more than two centuries — and, for most of that time, neither place had strong gun control laws. New York had strong gun control laws years before London did, but New York still had several times the murder rate of London.

It was in the later decades of the 20th century that the British government clamped down with severe gun control laws, disarming virtually the entire law-abiding citizenry. Gun crimes, including murder, rose as the public was disarmed.

Meanwhile, murder rates in the United States declined during the same years when murder rates in Britain were rising, which were also years when Americans were buying millions more guns per year…

Terp Mole on July 24, 2012 at 1:20 PM

han Buddhists and Christians are the same…Buddhists and Jews are the same…one can say something without understanding or seeing the differences.

right2bright on July 24, 2012 at 1:11 PM

I would grant that a lot of Christianity seems borrowed from Buddhism and grafted onto Judaism. But the Buddhist lack of a creator God of the Universe seems like a significant difference, don’t you think?

DarkCurrent on July 24, 2012 at 1:20 PM

Criminals are people.

Criminals break into homes and threaten families.

If I want to be able to protect my family from such a criminal, I need to have a gun that will kill him.

Therefore, in order to engage in my Constitutional right of self-defense, I need guns that can kill people.

Next?

Greg Q on July 24, 2012 at 1:24 PM

annoyinglittletwerp on July 24, 2012 at 10:36 AM

.
Be anti-hunting all you want.
But understanding how animals work, this bear will learn it can confront humans & win.

I kill animals to eat them, & if it’s for a trophy, I still eat it.
Nothing is wrong with hunting. Bcs it is why humans are alive on this Earth.
Your ancestors were hunters.

Badger40 on July 24, 2012 at 10:44 AM

.
Preach it, bro’.

And amen.

listens2glenn on July 24, 2012 at 1:26 PM

Mmmm… not so much.

Rebar on July 24, 2012 at 1:09 PM

Bullshit made up 200 years ago still faintly smells like bullshit.
Bullshit made up 2,000 years ago smells like Gospel.

DarkCurrent on July 24, 2012 at 1:17 PM

.
Did you have some bad experience(s) with Christians during your developmental years, or were you just born defiant ?

All of the above ?

listens2glenn on July 24, 2012 at 1:31 PM

I would grant that a lot of Christianity seems borrowed from Buddhism and grafted onto Judaism. But the Buddhist lack of a creator God of the Universe seems like a significant difference, don’t you think?

DarkCurrent on July 24, 2012 at 1:20 PM

I think Judaism is about 2,500 years older than Buddhism, and that is the basis of Christianity, so I don’t think Buddhism was “grafted” onto Judaism. However if you link Buddhism to Hinduism, you got us by about 500 years. The fact is, they are two distinct religions.

Judaism, Mormon’s, Christian, Islamic, etc., all are Abrahamic religions. But from post Abraham on, they differ, in shorthand.

I am not equating Buddhism to Christian, just pointing out if one doesn’t know the difference one could assume they are the same. As you saying you did not see the difference between Mormon’s and Christians…now you do.

right2bright on July 24, 2012 at 1:34 PM

Did you have some bad experience(s) with Christians during your developmental years, or were you just born defiant ?

All of the above ?

listens2glenn on July 24, 2012 at 1:31 PM

Just born defiant

DarkCurrent on July 24, 2012 at 1:34 PM

Bullshit made up 200 years ago still faintly smells like bullshit.
Bullshit made up 2,000 years ago smells like Gospel.

DarkCurrent on July 24, 2012 at 1:17 PM

So let me get this straight, you think religion is based on seniority, kind of a union job type of belief?
Funny how we didn’t attack your religion, but you seem to want to attack ours…how “Buddhist” of you…

right2bright on July 24, 2012 at 1:37 PM

“A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity”. –Sigmund Freud

Archivarix on July 24, 2012 at 12:46 PM

That one’s on the list of “Quotes Attributed to Liberal Icons Likely To Make a Modern Airhead Liberal’s Head Explode”, whether Freud actually said it or not (disputed), because the observed reality bears it out. Liberals do have warped views of sexuality, but they think they’re the ones who are sexually enlightened, which is also warped.

That quote is right up there on the same list with this one:

“Another source of conviction in the existence of God, connected with the reason and not with the feelings, impresses me as having much more weight. This follows from the extreme difficulty or rather impossibility of conceiving this immense and wonderful universe, including man with his capacity of looking far backwards and far into futurity, as the result of blind chance or necessity. When thus reflecting I feel compelled to look to a First Cause having an intelligent mind in some degree analogous to that of man; and I deserve to be called a Theist.” – Charles Darwin, from his autobiography.

To interpret and simplify this for those liberals out there with thought-impairments: after a long life of thinking about this and many other things, as well as natural selection, your hero Darwin would consider you MORE rational and evolved if you believed in God.

And for those of you who can think, who tend to lean right, since it’s the way of Common Sense:

Think how appalled evolution-theory leftist-hero-icon Darwin would be at the very idea of legal abortion: “What species,” he might say, “would CHOOSE to deselect itself? That’s so freakin’ warped.”

Well, a little Curved-speak there at the end, but really, there’s nothing natural about abortion. It’s a denial of science and a refutation of a life with a cute little small l and of Life with the big important capital L.

And now there’s a brand new entry on the list, this from just today (h/t Daily Caller): “We’ve seen George W. Bush and conservative American politicians pledge tens of billions to save the lives of Africans with HIV. Think of all the love.” – Elton John

Ka-boom!

curved space on July 24, 2012 at 1:41 PM

So let me get this straight, you think religion is based on seniority, kind of a union job type of belief?

Funny how we didn’t attack your religion, but you seem to want to attack ours…how “Buddhist” of you…

right2bright on July 24, 2012 at 1:37 PM

No, I think they’re both ridiculous in fact.

DarkCurrent on July 24, 2012 at 1:43 PM

The implication in the liberal mind is that you are not ‘fully human’ if you are mentally/emotionally equipped to defend yourself, your household, or (under ‘alter or abolish it’) our way of life.

Of course, there is an opposing point of view that considers one ‘less than well-equipped’ if one is not so mentally/emotionally prepared.

ElRonaldo on July 24, 2012 at 1:49 PM

Firearms serve two vital purposes in a free society: they make criminals nervous, and they make government authorities nervous.

Hunting, while a fine and necessary thing, is not the reason we have a Second Amendment.

MidniteRambler on July 24, 2012 at 2:38 PM

From Irwin Shaw’s “Act of Faith.” Obviously, the setting is WWII:

Many gray faced men had stopped him humbly, looking searchingly at him, and had asked, peering at his long, lined, grimy face, under the anonymous helmet, “Are you a Jew?” Sometimes they asked it in English, sometimes French or Yiddish. He didn’t know French or Yiddish, but he learned to recognize the phrase. He had never understood exactly why they had asked the question, since they never demanded anything from him, rarely even could speak to him, until one day in Strassbourg, a little bent old man and a small, shapeless woman had stopped him, and asked, in English, if he was Jewish.

“Yes,” he said, smiling at them.

The two old people had smiled widely, like children. “Look,” the old man had said to his wife. “A young American soldier. A Jew. And so large and strong.” He had touched Seeger’s arm reverently with the tips of his fingers, then had touched the Garand he was carrying. “And such a beautiful rifle…”

And there, for a moment, although he was not particularly sensitive, Seeger got an inkling of why he had been stopped and questioned by so many before. Here, to these bent, exhausted old people, ravaged of their families, familiar with flight and death for so many years, was a symbol of continuing life. A large young man in the uniform of the liberator, blood, as they thought, of their blood, but not in hiding, not quivering in fear and helplessness, but striding secure and victorious down the street, armed and capable of inflicting terrible destruction on his enemies.

Owen Glendower on July 24, 2012 at 2:40 PM

No, I think they’re both ridiculous in fact.

DarkCurrent on July 24, 2012 at 1:43 PM

Great…I can see where it would be difficult for you to embrace or understand faith…it’s complex, simple minds struggle.

right2bright on July 24, 2012 at 2:42 PM

There are an estimated 270 million guns in the hands of civilians in the United States, making Americans the most heavily armed people in the world per capita. Yemen, a tribal nation with no history of strong central government or the rule of law, comes in a distant second…

I would love to find out what the percentage is per guns owned that peopel are killed in different countries. In other words, we apparenlty have 270 million guns in teh hands of our civilians. How many muders-by-guns out of those do we have? Then how many guns are in such-and-such European country’s civi’s hands and how many gun murders to tthey have?

DethMetalCookieMonst on July 24, 2012 at 2:45 PM

I’ve only seen it in movies.

DarkCurrent on July 24, 2012 at 12:50 PM

Maybe so, but that was an accurate portrayal of real life.

I bet you loved John Wayne…

right2bright on July 24, 2012 at 12:55 PM

Yes, and a bunch of others: Randolph Scott, Glenn Ford, Gary Cooper, Audie Murphy,..

Mirimichi on July 24, 2012 at 2:45 PM

I’ve only seen it in movies.

DarkCurrent on July 24, 2012 at 12:50 PM

Maybe so, but that was an accurate portrayal of real life.

I bet you loved John Wayne…

right2bright on July 24, 2012 at 12:55 PM

Yes, and a bunch of others: Randolph Scott, Glenn Ford, Gary Cooper, Audie Murphy, etc.

Mirimichi on July 24, 2012 at 2:48 PM

One person has a “vote for Romney” sign in his yard. Another has “vote for Obama” sign. Which do you think a criminal is more likely to burglerize?

DethMetalCookieMonst on July 24, 2012 at 2:51 PM

Great…I can see where it would be difficult for you to embrace or understand faith…it’s complex, simple minds struggle.

right2bright on July 24, 2012 at 2:42 PM

I would so like to have an enlightened mind like yours, able to accept the first stuff poured into it.

DarkCurrent on July 24, 2012 at 2:52 PM

Greg Q on July 24, 2012 at 1:24 PM

Not sure why Jazz ignored the first and foremost reason to bear arms, simple self-defense.

Your right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness means nothing if you don’t have the right to defend yourself.

These rights are not granted by the gubmint, and the gubmint cannot infringe those rights lawfully.

The Second Amendment isn’t about rabbit hunting.

Self-defense isn’t about killing people, it is about stopping threats.

I’m not trained to kill, I am trained to end threats. It is true that the shot most likely to end a threat is also most likely to cause fatal injury. But I don’t aim at center of mass to kill, I aim at center of mass because it is most likely to result in striking my target and ending the threat.

People who ask “Why do you need (insert skeery firearm)? have turned the concept of civil rights upside down. I have a right to own firearms. This “gotcha” question is irrelevant and only serves to confuse the issues. The proper question is: Why should the government be allowed to infringe my rights?

Once these people have to defend their proposed restrictions on a rational basis, the game is over, because the proposed restrictions cannot be justified in practice.

novaculus on July 24, 2012 at 3:03 PM

You know right2bright, I don’t exactly embrace islam, but I also don’t call them all child rapists etc.

As far as your obvious bigotry toward LDS folks, I believe you’re the individual who ‘helps’ LDS people ‘escape’ from their religion, is that not so?
Your prejudice is very glaring.
In fact, I would say it really borderlines on hatred.
I think it is very disturbing, in fact.
There are no Mormons running around chopping people’s heads off, Mountain Meadow massacring everybody, and there are not tons of Mormons defying the Constitution & law of the land.
The Mountain Meadow Massacre is an incident in the church’s past, like many incidents the Catholic church has had in its past.
And when did anyone on here CONDONE what happened in this massacre?
NOBODY.
Your disgusting hateful display of bigotry NEVER fails to show itself anytime the word Mormon is uttered.
GET A F$%^ING LIFE.
You need to worry more about LIBERALS & COMMUNISTS & SOCIALISTS more than you need to worry about Mormons.
Bcs Mormons are some of the most law abiding Americans you will ever come across. And CONSERVATIVE.

Badger40 on July 24, 2012 at 3:20 PM

So let me get this straight, you think religion is based on seniority, kind of a union job type of belief?
Funny how we didn’t attack your religion, but you seem to want to attack ours…how</em> “Buddhist” of you…

right2bright on July 24, 2012 at 1:37 PM

WTH?! Clearly, hateful bigots don’t understand IRONY.

Badger40 on July 24, 2012 at 3:23 PM

And no, they are not Christian’s, I think that is pretty well established except by them…but they seem not to quite understand that. Using the same names, but different definitions, does not make them the same.

right2bright on July 24, 2012 at 12:54 PM

Huh. And here I always thought Jesus saves, not your brand of theology or what you think you know.

The Rogue Tomato on July 24, 2012 at 3:31 PM

Great…I can see where it would be difficult for you to embrace or understand faith…it’s complex, simple minds struggle.

right2bright on July 24, 2012 at 2:42 PM

And I really think you should engage with someone who is more to your levels, like perhaps inthemiddle, GrowFins, & other associated nutbags.
Bcs DarkCurrent is no simple minded fool.

Badger40 on July 24, 2012 at 3:31 PM

Bcs DarkCurrent is no simple minded fool.

Badger40 on July 24, 2012 at 3:31 PM

DarkCurrent on July 24, 2012 at 3:53 PM

Hey, right2bedull, be careful with basing your belief in those creeds…they aren’t Scripture you know…

And faith isn’t complex at all. Jesus saves those who believe in Him. Are you Catholic, btw?

ladyingray on July 24, 2012 at 4:03 PM

et’s face it… you only need those things if you’re planning on killing people.

…great point, and it’s reality. YES, I do own some guns that I SPECIFICALLY have to …:GASP:!! ….. KILL PEOPLE WITH. It’s called self defense.

TX-96 on July 24, 2012 at 5:56 PM

Hey, right2bedull, be careful with basing your belief in those creeds…they aren’t Scripture you know…

And faith isn’t complex at all. Jesus saves those who believe in Him. Are you Catholic, btw?

ladyingray on July 24, 2012 at 4:03 PM

No…what part of the creeds are not based on scripture?

Just to make sure…Him has to be Him, not a “whatever”…get it? That’s the difference between Christians, Jews, Muslims, Mormon’s, they all have a different Jesus…you didn’t know that?

You notice I didn’t say they were scripture, I said they were the “Cliff Notes” of faith…
Wish I could come up with a clever way to insult your name, gee, that’s so grand of you, so clever.

right2bright on July 24, 2012 at 6:14 PM

Bcs DarkCurrent is no simple minded fool.

Badger40 on July 24, 2012 at 3:31 PM

You are right, he is not your average simple minded fool…

right2bright on July 24, 2012 at 6:15 PM

Huh. And here I always thought Jesus saves, not your brand of theology or what you think you know.

The Rogue Tomato on July 24, 2012 at 3:31 PM

It’s not “my” brand, it’s 100% of all the Christian religions belief…they all advocate the creeds.
Does your church, if not, which one is it? Mormon, Muslim, or Jewish.

I am not dissing them, I am saying they are all different…duhhh, that’s why they have different names, different worship, different biblical texts.

It’s quite amazing how someone can say a religion, by definition, is not Christian, and they get offended. Jews aren’t Christian, say that to any Jew and they will look at you as if you are crazy, of course they are not Christian, Muslim’s, same thing, different biblical texts, Mormon’s, should be the same, different biblicals references, different definitions, poly-theists vs. mono-theists, the differences are many…doesn’t make them worse, better, just not the same…good grief.
The only beef I have said against Mormon’s, ever, is their founders…I am not too thrilled with Luther being an anti-Semite either.

right2bright on July 24, 2012 at 6:21 PM

3. The last, worst, and – I hope – most unlikely scenario is one which persons as “radical” as Thomas Jefferson fretted over. And that is the possibility that a vastly swollen and powerful central government could forget and abandon the promises made to the people and violate the fundamental rights promised to them. The Founders came from a land and a time when that was hardly science fiction. And while I see no indication that such a thing is imminent today, an armed populace remains a constant reminder to those in Washington that, should they ever dare go so far as to employ the military to suppress their citizens and break those promises… You only rule by the consent of the governed. We outnumber you vastly. And we are armed. This isn’t a threat. It’s a reminder.

LOL, ‘no indication that such a thing is imminent’. Well, perhaps you’re right – imminent means it’s coming soon, as opposed to having already happened, continuing to happen all around us every f@#$ing day.

So no – ‘imminent’, it isn’t. Here already, it is.

Midas on July 24, 2012 at 6:38 PM

Just born defiant

DarkCurrent on July 24, 2012 at 1:34 PM

Hehe, ‘defiant’ is a self-aggrandizing adjective that doesn’t aptly describe your comments or behavior, bub.

You think way too highly of yourself.

Midas on July 24, 2012 at 6:44 PM

A simple list … please remember them:

Our Liberty is Defended By Three BOXES:

The Ballot Box

The Jury Box

The Cartridge Box

Missilengr on July 24, 2012 at 6:50 PM

Me and eighty-million of my very close, personal friends are not going to allow our property (our firearms, etc.) to be confiscated nor our liberty to be voted away by any group large or small.

bubba on July 24, 2012 at 11:18 PM

1) Loads of people already live in that unstable world, Jazz. Some names for it: Chicago, Detroit, L.A…….

2) Can you say Red Dawn? I knew you could. WOLVERINES!

3) Honestly, this is why many liberals want you unarmed. (The rest are just afraid of big, bad things that go boom! and hurt people and Bambi.)

4) Some people just need killin’.

GWB on July 25, 2012 at 10:08 AM

The guns are there to prevent a Syria situation here. Everything else is irrelevant.

John_G on July 25, 2012 at 10:26 AM

Hehe, ‘defiant’ is a self-aggrandizing adjective that doesn’t aptly describe your comments or behavior, bub.

You think way too highly of yourself.

Midas on July 24, 2012 at 6:44 PM

I simply selected the most appropriate of the two options provided in the question I was responding to, sweetheart.

DarkCurrent on July 25, 2012 at 12:12 PM

Jazz fails. He does not get it.

Guns with big magazines are the People’s check against tyranny, a plain and simple part of our system of checks and balances. The People will not be outgunned.

exdeadhead on July 25, 2012 at 7:24 PM

As usual the Lib ranter ignores one of the commonsense but lesser-publicized principles of modern warfare: shooting an enemy but *not* killing him may be more valuable than offing him, since it gives his side a wounded man to care for & take up resources. Then again the Libs probably don’t know that.

Olo_Burrows on July 26, 2012 at 3:10 AM

Comment pages: 1 2