Quote of the day—Cliff Schecter

If you are looking for the literal embodiment of dysfunction in US political culture and the institutions that serve it, look no further than the National Rifle Association (NRA), and the deadly and divisive role it plays in shaping the political agenda. Specifically, the radically and reliably dishonest, dangerous and deranged legislation they foist upon the American people day in and day out through their purchase of most Republican and many Blue-Dog Democratic officeholders.

We’re talking here about people who shouldn’t be allowed to make their own beds, much less public policy.

Cliff Schecter
October 29, 2011
They have the right to remain silent
[I find it appropriate that someone who says this sort of thing about a civil rights group protecting a specific enumerated right used Al Jazeera as his vehicle for hate. And that he is a weekly columnist for them is no surprise.—Joe]

5 thoughts on “Quote of the day—Cliff Schecter

  1. Just a thought about your blog in general, and this post particularly:

    Joe, since whenever you write a “Q.O.T.D.” post, it could be either a gun-hater or gun-rights supporter, the clash of emotions in the reader, waiting for the moment it is defined, is too much to bear. Please re-caption your gun-hater posts. May I suggest “Civil Rights Denier of the Day”, or maybe Hater of the Day? I note these enemy cretins, of course, but I long for quotable quotes from gun-rights supporters even more.

  2. Well hi there Rivrdog!

    Hey, as long as you’re hanging around and asking other people for favors, could we get a sensible response to this, from you?

    * * *

    “It won’t CHANGE the sheep into sheepdogs, or reduce the population or distribution of wolves which prey on the sheep.”

    But apparently it does preemptively change the behavior of wolves for the better, as reports from OCers keep indicating, and therefore does functionally reduce the wolf population and distribution.

    Rivrdog, can you explain to me why the OC skeptics so consistently refuse to address that point? For example, the way your own narrative framing here not just completely but conspicuously ignores the potential affects of OC on wolves?

    Because AFAICT, the only justification any OCer needs is “I think I’m safer this way.” So far I have seen absolutely nothing from OC skeptics that can counter this, let alone trump it.

    But then I’ve never seen an OC skeptic try.

    Or even just acknowledge the point’s existence ITFP.

    I know what it usually means when people behave like that. Do you?

    * * *

  3. If you ask me (even if you didn’t ask me): I don’t care whether or not they’re labeled “QOTD” or “Best Thing I Heard Or Read Lately”. I don’t care whether they’re flagged ‘Red Team’ or ‘Blue Team’.

    And honestly, I can usually tell what kind of assumptions the person has on about word 5.

    But I read through to the end, hoping for something I haven’t read before.

    Most of the time, the anti-rights folks disappoint me on that front.

  4. Fair question, Acksiom.

    Here’s your fair answer. Of course, the sight of an OC firearm is going to generally deter crime, especially to the OC-er. I never said it didn’t. My anti-OC point is, and always will be, that the weapon unseen (CCW) is just as protective of the bearer, maybe more so since it is a tactical surprise. Given that (at least) CCW-equality, one looks for alternate advantages/disadvantages to decide the issue for or against OC. It’s in these alternate disadvantages where the toll starts to add up against OC: Scares the GFWs, CCW not as much. Forces anti-rights politicians to think of more opposition to gun rights, CCW not so much. What you can’t see, isn’t likely to become a target for a grab under most circumstances (except for cops OC-ing, and those grabs are usually in a life-or death struggle initiated by the cop in trying to arrest the grabber).

    If I’m a debate judge, I give the slight edge to CCW on the evidence, but maybe, just maybe, presentation of argument could win the day for the OC-er, if it was done right, which it usually isn’t as of now.

    How do you do OC right? Easy, win the legal right to do it, by persuasive argument, not bullying tactics.

    So, here’s the test for OC-ers. Are you CCW qualified and legal, but still prefer to carry openly? Why? If your answer is “to further the right to carry OC”, then you are reacting out of a sense of political activism, not desire to exercise the Second for self-protection as the SCOTUS decided we were all entitled to. Activism outside the scope of law may or may not be just, but following the law as recognized is always just.

    I’m happy to carry concealed, and wish everyone else did. In a better world, I might carry openly, when my choice of arms for that occasion is not concealable, but until it is a better world, I’ll pay the slight penalty of carrying only concealable weapons.

Comments are closed.