Quote of the day—Daniel Greenfield

Helpless people must find something to think about while waiting for their kings and princes to do something about the killing. Instead of doing something about it themselves, they blame the freedom that left the killer free to kill, instead of the lack of freedom that prevented them from being able to stop him.

Daniel Greenfield
September 22, 2013
The Central Planning Solution to Evil
[H/T to Caleb.

Another way to think about it is that the political jurisdictions in this country that heavily restrict firearms and have high crime rates are in an awkward position between freedom and a centrally planned police state. You may be able to achieve low crime rates in a benevolent police state but run a high risk of poverty, political corruptions, gulags, reeducation camps, and genocide. Or, you can have the appearance of chaos, the uncertainties, and the insecurities of a free society.

The question is, “Which way will those states, and this country, teetering on the edge of a police state, trend toward in the next few years?—Joe]

8 thoughts on “Quote of the day—Daniel Greenfield

  1. Wouldn’t it be even better if we had the freedom to stop him before the killer even got a chance to kill? Think of it as “prophylactic killing.” The freedom to kill someone who is even thinking about killing others.

    Of course, someone would have to kill the person who was thinking about preventative killing because that person would be thinking about killing someone — and then, that person, the one thinking about killing the prophylactic killer would have to be killed because he was thinking about killing also. And so on and so forth…

    Where would it all end? Would it finally end when only one man was left standing and there was no one left to kill him? Would that man finally have the most freedom any man can have?

    • You are suspiciously close to trolling.

      We already have “the freedom to stop him before the killer even got a chance to kill”. Try taking the most basic firearms self-defense class. You would learn you have the right to use lethal force to defend innocent life if the aggressor has the means, opportunity, and intent to cause grievous bodily injury or death. There are subtleties that vary from state to state in the definition of “grievous” and duty to retreat, provocation (are you really “innocent” or did you provoke the attack?), etc. but the bottom line is you usually have the right to protect innocent life using lethal force to stop the attack.

      This is slightly different than “the freedom to kill” the attacker. You may use lethal force to stop the attack. As soon as the attack is stopped you must stop the use of force and may not “finish them off”.

      • Trolling? I guess I got carried away reading the essay you linked to. It’s the kind of essay that reminds me of high school/college writing assignments. Sorry.

        • You got that from reading Greenfield’s careful essay? What does your therapist think of that?

    • I have a question.

      Does it not pose a statistical pattern if a large number of mass shootings occur in so called ‘gun free zones’?

  2. Trolling the trolls;

    If it could save the life of just one child, shouldn’t we all have guns?

    Having posted that probably 25 times on various sites over several years, no one from the left has endeavored to answer it, so far as I’ve seen. I don’t suppose we’ll ever witness an anti gun rights activist admit that, for instance, the people at the Kenyan mall would’ve been generally far better off if their country had had something akin to our second amendment.

    The oft used cry from the left; “Never again!” seems never to apply to the long string of mass killings in disarmament (fish in a barrel) zones.

    Is it really all that difficult to understand that when guns (or any other weapons) are outlawed, only outlaws will have the guns (or any other weapons)? Is mass delusion so prevelant and strong that millions of disarmed people’s deaths can’t phase someone, can’t get them to even raise an eyebrow and think of the difference between what feels good or is popular at the moment and what works?

    Maybe it’s just plain old fashioned hate– Hate disguised as compassion, which would be the most deliciously evil kind.

  3. My guess is, no simple answer. Certain states are in the crucible, burning off their sane. Some of us are burning off the criminally insane. A few are a.mixed bag. Western Maryland, upstate New York, Northern CA, trying to break a piece of nurmalcy and keep the nutburgers out
    The coming days will look like nothing seen elsewhere before. What that means? Dunno. I’m just a knuckle-breather. Not capable of strategical ideees at all, No Suh!

Comments are closed.