spanokopita
Member
- Nov 3, 2012
- 68
I know a number of intelligent liberals. And talking with them about gun control is painful.
Everything that comes out of their mouths is that gun control is "common sense", and that any argument against gun control is invalid or can be dismissed for no reason other than it is supposedly not true, without objective criticism. Or that it's a bridge too far. It's not about debate to reach a goal, a safer and more free America, it's about ram-rodding an ideology down the throats of Congress. Maybe it's revenge for the way the Tea Party handled the tax issues.
So to the gun control advocates -
You want me to give up a Constitutionally-recognized civil right because you don't want your kids to see a police officer or security guard, and maybe know that there's violence and bad people in the world. How privileged of you.
You want me to give up a Constitutionally-recognized civil right because you're scared of firearms, despite never having been threatened by one, never having fired one, never having used one in defense of your self, family, or nation, and despite the fact that every night you sleep peacefully, it's because people with firearms have given their lives to give you what you now have.
You want me to give up a Constitutionally-recognized civil right because, in a home invasion, when I come out of the bedroom with my single-shot hunting musket (after spending two minutes loading it), the invader (there will be only one) will stand there with a stupid grin in the entryway, waiting for me to chase him off.
You want me to give up a Constitutionally-recognized civil right because there is a race of people, separated from us mere mortals at birth, who are known as the police and military. Internationally, and in American history, these elite people have never used their weapons or authority to harm "ordinary citizens". They have ALWAYS protected EVERYONE.
You want me to give up a Constitutionally-recognized civil right because democracy means you get what you want. When my rights are inconvenient to you, they cease to be relevant.
You want me to give up a Constitutionally-recognized civil right because I did not do enough to prevent gun violence and mass murders in the US. As a gun owner, I should have realized it was my personal responsibility to root out and turn in criminals and the deranged.
You want me to give up a Constitutionally-recognized civil right because I have no need to defend myself. That's what the police are for. And no matter how advanced my tactics, weapons or home advantage, I would never have any hope of defending myself anyway.
You want me to give up a Constitutionally-recognized civil right because the circumstances under which the Constitution was written are no longer relevant. Our rulers no longer detain their enemies in prisons on foreign soil without due process; our rulers would not levy taxes, to pay their interest and debts, to the detriment of and against the protest of citizens. Our rulers would not use weapons of war against their own citizens. Our rulers would not seize our property. Our rulers would not limit our ability to speak or peacefully organize. Our rulers would not force citizens to enlist in military service against their will. Our rulers would not violate our domestic privacy. Our rulers would not evade prosecution or fair sentencing for crime. Our rulers would not balk at the protests of the citizenry, and would gladly step aside if they were ineffective or unpopular.
It's just common-sense, right?
I blame it on the Scotch.
Everything that comes out of their mouths is that gun control is "common sense", and that any argument against gun control is invalid or can be dismissed for no reason other than it is supposedly not true, without objective criticism. Or that it's a bridge too far. It's not about debate to reach a goal, a safer and more free America, it's about ram-rodding an ideology down the throats of Congress. Maybe it's revenge for the way the Tea Party handled the tax issues.
So to the gun control advocates -
You want me to give up a Constitutionally-recognized civil right because you don't want your kids to see a police officer or security guard, and maybe know that there's violence and bad people in the world. How privileged of you.
You want me to give up a Constitutionally-recognized civil right because you're scared of firearms, despite never having been threatened by one, never having fired one, never having used one in defense of your self, family, or nation, and despite the fact that every night you sleep peacefully, it's because people with firearms have given their lives to give you what you now have.
You want me to give up a Constitutionally-recognized civil right because, in a home invasion, when I come out of the bedroom with my single-shot hunting musket (after spending two minutes loading it), the invader (there will be only one) will stand there with a stupid grin in the entryway, waiting for me to chase him off.
You want me to give up a Constitutionally-recognized civil right because there is a race of people, separated from us mere mortals at birth, who are known as the police and military. Internationally, and in American history, these elite people have never used their weapons or authority to harm "ordinary citizens". They have ALWAYS protected EVERYONE.
You want me to give up a Constitutionally-recognized civil right because democracy means you get what you want. When my rights are inconvenient to you, they cease to be relevant.
You want me to give up a Constitutionally-recognized civil right because I did not do enough to prevent gun violence and mass murders in the US. As a gun owner, I should have realized it was my personal responsibility to root out and turn in criminals and the deranged.
You want me to give up a Constitutionally-recognized civil right because I have no need to defend myself. That's what the police are for. And no matter how advanced my tactics, weapons or home advantage, I would never have any hope of defending myself anyway.
You want me to give up a Constitutionally-recognized civil right because the circumstances under which the Constitution was written are no longer relevant. Our rulers no longer detain their enemies in prisons on foreign soil without due process; our rulers would not levy taxes, to pay their interest and debts, to the detriment of and against the protest of citizens. Our rulers would not use weapons of war against their own citizens. Our rulers would not seize our property. Our rulers would not limit our ability to speak or peacefully organize. Our rulers would not force citizens to enlist in military service against their will. Our rulers would not violate our domestic privacy. Our rulers would not evade prosecution or fair sentencing for crime. Our rulers would not balk at the protests of the citizenry, and would gladly step aside if they were ineffective or unpopular.
It's just common-sense, right?
I blame it on the Scotch.