@JayCaruso no, out of touch with the avg maryland voter, who isnt some gun nut compensating for something missing. @JeffQuinton
Tweeted on March 23, 2014
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday!
H/T to Jay Caruso in his post The Liberal Mindset As It Relates To Guns And The Second Amendment—Joe]
There’s that “L-word” again. If “liberals” were liberal, they’d be open-minded and in favor of liberty, which they aren’t. So why do we keeping calling them “liberal”?
And this was interesting;
““@JayCaruso no, w women its the endless ads in gun magazines telling them some scary black guy is about to rape them.”
— Oliver Willis (@owillis) March 24, 2014
On one hand, we’re suppose to favor a ban on guns because “CRIME IS RAMPANT! OMG WE MUST DO SOMETHING!!” and on the other hand, you’re a blithering idiot and/or a dupe of the firearms industry if you think there is even the slightest possibility of ever becoming the target of a criminal.
It is of course totally illogical for one person to hold both of those beliefs simultaneously (one negates the other) and yet some people do. The explanation is very simple though; they’ve been carefully trained to react negatively whenever the subject of guns comes up. The post-hypnotic suggestion bypasses the ability to reason.
It’s a conditioned response, and you’ll never fix the situation by calling them stupid. Yes; they’re saying and doing stupid things, but it’s not really their fault, and it isn’t because their brains are defective. If you want to actually cure them you have to understand hypnosis (psychological warfare) and how to counter it.
A man gets shot on the battlefield, or torn open by a shell fragment, you don’t blame him for bleeding. You don’t yell at him or laugh at him, call him names or simply tell him to knock it off because bleeding is a stupid activity that helps no one. You deal with the bleeding in the best ways available, based on generations of accumulated field experience.
What “field experience” (or any experience at all) do any of us have in dealing with the victims, the casualties, of psychological warfare?
I’ve started referring to them as neo-feudalists, since they seem to share so much in common with the feudal lowlifes of the Middle Ages.
I don’t think the average ant-gun leftist sees gun control as an anti-crime measure. They seem to think gun violence is a separate issue unrelated to other crime or criminals. They see the gun as a cause of crime and violence, rather than as one of the means by which criminals inflict violence.
They mostly try to downplay the significance of crime and view caring about crime, other than gun violence, as simply racist. They think that those of us who would prepare to defend ourselves with guns, must really just want to kill someone. They think anyone who wants to carry a gun for self defense must want to act out the Death Wish movies.
I think you are probably right about these attitudes being derived from a sort of hypnotic indoctrination, but I don’t think they are quite so self contradictory as you portray.
WHAT ads???? Can he even show us a single gun ad that has a black man as the assailant? I haven’t seen one in years.