Quote of the day–Gun Guys

They haul out the tired mantra of “government intrusion on their rights.”

But those are just code words for being selfish and lacking empathy.

Gun Guys
November 8, 2007
Another Child Shot Accidentally as the Gun Lobby Selfishly Refuses to Help Protect Our Kids
[I’ll bet you didn’t know the Bill of Rights was just code words for being selfish and lacking empathy. I didn’t either. Maybe he thinks people with black skin should stay out of white restaurants, whites only swimming pools, and not use drinking fountains intended for whites. Does that mean black skinned people should understand that whites like the Gun Guys shouldn’t be exposed to using the same eating utensils that have been in the mouths of blacks. And swimming in the same water? Isn’t that real lack of empathy for whites? And I’m sure it was being selfish and a lack of empathy for the Aryans when the Allies went to war with Germany just because they were trying to implement a Final Solution for the Jewish Question in Europe.

It seems to me there are a large number of people that seem to believe, at some level, that Governments can’t intrude on rights–that it’s a logical impossibility. They seem to think that governments grant rights and hence if the law changes the right no longer exists. The truth of the matter is, of course, that rights exist irrespective of governments and governments can only infringe, guarantee, and/or protect rights. The Gun Guys mindset is but one example.–Joe]


2 thoughts on “Quote of the day–Gun Guys

  1. When will they start attacking the “powerful bicycle lobby”, blaming them for every bicycling accident? Then there would be the “match and butane lighter lobby”, the swimming pool lobby, the AAA, and the cleaning chemical lobby, etc..

    (For those of you who haven’t ever looked at any accident statistics your whole lives, the death rates for children in each one of my above example accident categories far outnumber gun accident deaths. Hence, if death rates are to be the measure for what should and should not be allowed by our benevolent and all-caring parents in government, then we would never be allowed to drive, we wouldn’t be allowed fire making tools, or swimming pools, etc.. Automobiles would be at the top, and guns would be far, far down the list.

    “But wait”, you may say, “cars, fire, swimming and such, all have benefits associated with them, and we have a right to do these things even if other people screw up and hurt themselves doing them.”

    And to that I will say, “Bingo.”

    The point here of course is that while the antis pretend to be concerned about all the wonderful, darling, innocent little children of the world, they reveal their dishonesty by focusing on a relatively minor accident category while totally ignoring the major ones.

    Don’t dare accusing me of insensitivity either, as is the tactic of the anti freedom activist. I’ve lost family members and I know full well the impact that has. The farthest thing from my mind in such a case would be the desire to limit the Constitutional rights of innocent people in response to a tragedy.

    Socialism is one of the most prolific killers of all time, and these antis tend toward socialism.

  2. Furthermore, why does empathy factor in to the argument in the slightest bit? Or, from a different perspective, why can one apparently not be empathetic to the plight of those murdered by morons, while still firmly believing in individuals’ rights?

    At least the “Gun Guys” were honest… their argument really does boil down to nothing more than emotional ploys.

Comments are closed.