8 thoughts on “Quote of the day-Schwann Caomhanach‏”

  1. That’s a common anti-gun straw man. Let’s call it the “You don’t care about any other rights,” straw man. They love that one. Yes, other rights are under attack. Like I don’t hate that too. But how does one influence 4th Amendment jurisprudence? Or 14th Amendment jurisprudence? And I’d note, that we tried to fix some things with the latter when we had our turn at bat.

    So the fact that we’ve chosen, at this early stage in 2nd Amendment jurisprudence, to make sure we get an end result as true as possible, is somehow evidence that we’re just narrow minded morons who can’t look at the big picture. Maybe if people had been looking out for the 4th Amendment all along, we wouldn’t have armed paramilitary units breaking down people’s doors and shooting the family dog (if you’re lucky). I prefer to tackle the easy things first, and I think we all have to pick our cause.

    I fail to see how these people aren’t treating the Bill of Rights like a buffet line any less than the people they are accusing. Perhaps if they abandoned the stereotypes they bitterly cling to, they might actually see things for how they are.

  2. Funny, I thought that the Second Amendment was there as the final response to an assault on our liberties.

    Our congress-critters and courts can only go so far before citizens will rise up and retake their government.

    We deeply care about all of our rights; it’s just that we realize that if we are unarmed peasants then they can ignore our “…petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

  3. There are many more rights under far more pressure than any gun rights, yet you focus on these phallic symbols.

    Well, Schwannie, you’re kinda right, but consider how we got there. Let me sum it up for you in terms you can no doubt fully understand: there are many more rights under far more pressure than any gun rights because we focus on these phallic symbols.

    Thank you for playing, now let the grown-ups talk, okay?

  4. We focus on gun rights, because if we let the power-hungry stamp out gun rights, the others will follow even more quickly.

  6. This reminds me of the discussion frequently conducted between Jews and others about the Holocaust and “never again”. Invariably someone says something on the order of, you Jews only think about “never again” when it comes to Jews. What about what happened to us in the Armenian holocaust in 1915? The answer to that, of course, is that seeing to it that “never again” means that for the Jews is a big job, and it really is up to the Armenians to bring out what happened there so that “never again” means that for the Armenians. The same is true for any other ethnic or religious affiliation that is targeted for genocide, or whatever the proper term is nowadays, since the UN has defined it so narrowly the Holocaust probably would not qualify.

    The Second Amendment is to be protected by those with that interest. Whichever rights Ubu52 belives are under far more pressure, he or she is free to spend time and money to protect those rights, although considering his or her comments to this blog over the years, I am interested to read what those rights are, precisely, and why disputing the individual and uninfringed interpretation of Second Amendment rights is such a more pressing duty.

    Oh, and it wasn’t a phallic issue for the Partisans or for the Jews or Poles in Warsaw in WW2, to use examples that are generally not fraught with the confusion Soviet backing of either the insurgents or the state usually engenders.

  7. So ubu,

    why focus on gun rights. You’re time would be better spent focusing on those other rights under pressure rather then trying to reduce gun rights even more. In case you hadn’t noticed we are doing fine at pushing the line back.

  8. Interesting that the only people who can hear that racist dog whistle are also the only ones who see dicks everywhere they look.

Comments are closed.