I’d rather live in a society where the old, small and weak can own an “equalizer,” than in one where thugs and gangs rule by numbers and brute strength.
Guns put teeth into liberty.
It’s difficult to have an uprising with another weapon.
It always comes down to the PERSON. A gun doesn’t hop into your pocket and shoot people by itself. The same applies to a knife, rock or any other weapon. So banning guns won’t stop murders.
Actually, one could argue that “gun violence” demonstrates a lesser degree of depravity than other kinds of violence. Which is “worse,” a teen gang banger who pulls a trigger in an instant of detached, impersonal impulse, or someone who abducts a victim and rapes, tortures and kills him or her over a period of days using a variety of non-gun implements?
The concept of “gun crimes” is nothing more than an attempt to disarm people and create a victim class who will be more than ever dependent on government for protection. “Gun crimes,” the concept of criminalizing the use of the tool rather than the act, is designed to make gun ownership, in general, riskier and more trouble than it’s worth.
Let’s cut the BS. TPTB don’t give a crap if we all bludgeon, stab, beat, etc. each other to death. They just don’t want us to have weapons in our hands which would give us a chance to resist their tyranny.
The propagandists in the DBM and their leftist fellow travellers prefer the term “gun violence” because it establishes a negative connotation about guns. In addition, the juxtaposition of “gun” with “violence” establishes the impression that ALL gun activity is, by necessity, borne out of an act of violence.
Through terminology such as “gun violence”, the left is trying to convince someone that all guns are bad and should be banned.
However, the writer makes a great point about “pharmaceutical violence” and “gravitational violence”.
Gun “violence” is much more impersonal. One doesn’t have to touch the victim, nor be particularly physically close. Running away tends not to work.
This is a valid point that many of us here on FR have been making for many, many years.
Why is "gun" violence treated like something special? Because the very term "gun violence" is nothing less than propaganda with the end-game being a state-owned monopoly on force.
It's not hard to figure at all once one realizes what the true purpose is.
“Would you rather they were all pushed out of windows?”
Enjoyed this article because it wasn’t the same old usually written.
Nice job.
“I would say that violence is neutral, like gravity. It can be used for good or evil. It is simply one aspect of reality.”
True enough, and I’m a major gun advocate. I suspect if guns were somehow confiscated in the US, easily made homebrewed explosives would become popular to create mayhem. All that said, though, the difference between a gun and every other method mentioned is the potential for innocent bystanders to get hurt, due to the range capability of guns.
So, here’s my public service announcement for today:
1) Always treat the gun as if it’s loaded.
2) Keep the gun pointed in a safe direction.
3) Keep your finger off the trigger until ready to shoot.
4) Know your target and what’s beyond.
The good news is that in a recent poll I saw, more than half of Americans support gun rights, an all time high.
The bad news is that I saw some folks shooting the other day, and a few of them had trouble keeping half their shots on a full size silhouette at ten feet. Not good if you’re downrange. If you’re going to carry, learn to shoot well!
(BTW Mark, love your work! heh)
These seemed like unpleasant ways to go. Once in a while someone would be shot, but guns are not so common Down Under, so most murder victims aren't so lucky there.
Irrationalism only comes into play as long as we have some semblance of a constitutional republic remaining, and the masses must be worked into a frothing frenzy in order to further their agenda of firearm prohibition.
True. If they take away the guns they’d better take away the kitchen knives. They’re no less lethal.
**The implication is that Mayor Bloomberg’s anti-gun jihad has been successful, despite an increase in murders, simply because fewer of those murders were committed with guns.***
Many years ago some lib run city instituted a handgun waiting period to buy a firearm. the purpose was to “prevent suicides”.
IT WORKED! The law was declared a success because several suicidal people tried to buy handguns but had to wait.
Each of those people still killed themselves, they just didn’t do it with a gun.
At least there are ‘winners’ of gun fights. There are usually no winners in a knife fight.
A swan-dive is sometimes followed by a belly flop, which isn’t a pleasant experience at all.
Reminds me of the old Archie Bunker comment. When Gloria is decrying the number of people killed by guns, Archie asks her “Would ya’s feel better if they was pushed outa windas?”
Passing such laws does little to change human behavior. The old saw, "The road to Hell is paved with good intentions", still applies.