Skip to comments.The "Who Needs a Ferrari, Anyway?" Argument for Gun Bans
Posted on 04/11/2013 10:28:56 AM PDT by backwoods-engineer
Biden made a huge admission this morning on MSNBC, network of gun banners:
"It used to be we were dealing almost exclusively with hunters," Biden said on MSNBC.
"There's a whole new sort of group of individuals now who, I dont know what the numbers are, that never hunt at all but they own guns for one of two reasons: self protection or they just like the feel of that AR-15 at the range. They like the way it feels. You know, its like driving a Ferrari," [Biden] said, raising his arms as if shooting a gun.
Biden's comments illustrate they now know they have lost the "nobody need an AR-15 to go 'a' huntin'" argument, because Gun Culture 2.0 is not primarily about hunting. Given Bloomberg's ham-fisted attack ads with the New-York-actor caricature of all gun owners as hunters, it figures that our enemies would soon get some better intel. And they have.
The Left has switched tactics to "you need to give up your little hobby horse. Who needs a Ferrari, anyway?"
This is good, and bad, for us, defenders of the fundamental right to keep and bear arms.
One good thing is that the opposition now admits that the 2nd Amendment is as US v. Heller describes, that is, not just for "sporting purposes." That's an admission we've been waiting for from the left.
The bad thing is that Biden's "hobby car" argument will almost certainly be swallowed whole by the low-information voter and low-intelligence senators. After all, Biden says:
What is the inconvenience? ... What are we doing to impact on a gun owners right if he only has a clip with ten rounds in it instead of 30 rounds in it? [Biden] asked.
'Inconvenience' describes something you give up that you can live without, and that's the Biden's point: it's just another hobby, like stamp collecting. Every time the gun banners try to ban guns or magazines, which do nothing to address violence (quite the opposite), they act like we should just roll over, because the 'inconvenience' is minor. After all, Biden says, it's just a hobby, like driving a Ferrari. "Who the hell needs a Ferrari?", Biden is saying.
Oh, and for bonus Marx points, Biden employs class envy. The green envy monster. Biden is employing envy to turn the lower classes against those "Ferrari" owners.
Look, Biden's premise is completely wrong. 'Inconvenience' is not something that should be discussed in the context of fundamental rights. We the People have a fundamental right to keep and bear arms-- determined by US v. Miller to be "militia weapons" and US v. Heller to be those "in common use" -- and those rights "shall not be infringed" by the government.
But, the hysterical rantings of a superannuated, fish-out-of-water-in-the-burbs, backwoods hillbilly from West Virginia do not matter. The Senate will vote to ban these Ferraris. Who needs one, anyway?
Full text posted on FR as always for my FRiends. Not "pimping blogs" here, but I do appreciate a click, and give you value for doing so: multiple links to relevant stories and court cases buried in the text, and some nice pictures of Ferraris and AR-15s to look at.
(And I haven't seen "bus" in the Constitution anywhere.)
Where does it say in the constitution I can’t have a Ferrari?
It’s The Bill of RIGHTS, not the bill of needs.
LOL! I am using that symbol! Thanks!
Precisely. They have turned “to secure the blessings of liberty” into “from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs [determined exclusively by the State]”
It is to a Marxist. “Abilities” and “needs”, determined by the State, is the only way they see the world. “Freedom? What’s that?”, the Marxist asks.
It is not a Bill of “Needs” as determined by the government. It is a Bill of Rights to let the individual decide how to implement them.
That's what needs to be weighed in the balance - rights versus some dubious but no more than tiny increase in safety.
As usual, Joe hasn’t thought it through. “If you can’t prove to me that you need one, you can’t have one,” are the words of a dictator no matter what the object is.
Who needs more than two terms in any government office?
I clicked your link BECAUSE you posted full-text
Full text posted on FR as always for my FRiends. Not “pimping blogs” here, but I do appreciate a click, and give you value for doing so: multiple links to relevant stories and court cases buried in the text, and some nice pictures of Ferraris and AR-15s to look at.
A full auto SAW would be the Ferarri. An AR-15 with 30 rd magazines is just a Lexus, an SUV, or a Caddy. Let’s rephrase this in terms that the LIVs can unnerstan’.
I think a good refutation to this is to use Biden’s own analogy. That is, not specifically a Ferrari, but “Who needs a car?”
Joe Biden doesn’t think you need a car. You can walk, ride a bicycle for miles every day, or take a public bus seated between a foul smelling wino and a man who keeps trying to show you something he’s carrying in a greasy paper bag.
Joe Biden thinks that cars should only be for those that need them, like politicians and those who work for them.
They *need* cars. Ordinary people don’t.
Watch out, they are going to ban Ferraris next.
I have shot an M-16, it was nothing like driving a Ferrari, or even a Harley. What a doofus.
So if I crash my Ferarri (i don’t really have one) then should you have your F150 banned?
Silly Billy Biden mixing apples and oranges again.
Focus, Joe Bob!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.