Quote of the day—Travis Dodge‏ @MWTravesty

What about my right to not live in fear of my fellow citizens? Is that moot because you have a boner for guns?

Travis Dodge‏ @MWTravesty
Tweeted on October 16, 2014
[It’s (sort of) another Markley’s Law Monday! Via a tweet from Linoge.

Dodge obviously doesn’t understand rights when he says he has a “right to not live in fear”. There are people afraid of gays, blacks, and Jews as well as gun owners. But that fear doesn’t allow them to infringe upon our rights.—Joe]


24 thoughts on “Quote of the day—Travis Dodge‏ @MWTravesty

    • Let’s be careful we don’t descend to the petty insults. Leave that to the Progressives.

    • crotalus:

      “nippledicks.” i like it.

      i’ve been thinking of this “penis” thing for a bit, using my small brain, of course, and i think the accusations that liberals fling at gun owners as having guns to compensate for small penises, is “projected penis envy.”

      in short, “nippledick” syndrome. laughing.


      the progressive teach us, via marcuse and saul alinsky & the like, that petty insults are very effective tools for social manipulation. in short, i think you overly fastidious, and i think that we should use petty insults and ridicule against the liberals/progs at every opportunity, if it exposes them for what they are. “nippledicks” does so very effectively, in my estimation, and should be used at every turn. “projective penis envy” also does it, but, not so instinctively effectively as “nippledicks.” i yield the floor to crotalus, … , well done, sir.

      john jay
      whitman college, 1970, b.a. political science
      university of oregon law, 1977, j.d. law

      • How often have we said that when people have no argument, they’ll descend into crude insults, that doing so it is a sign of desperation? Sure, the left has that tactic explicitly in their play book, but that doesn’t mean we have to adopt it. We have far a more meaningful and powerful case.

        • The deal on that is Lyle, that the anti-gunners don’t seem to play by our Marquis of Queensbury rules and our doing so doesn’t seem to affect them in the slightest.

          They continue to lie, libel and slander. Since their argumentation is based on emotion rather than reason, the effective attack, specifically directed at them, is based on the premise of making them endure an emotional response.

          So, if they’re doing this because in their personal philosophy they see injury in this, I say cram it right back down their throat.

          Give THEM heartburn. Make THEM mad. Upset THEIR sleep with nasty invective.

          They may do it emotionally, but WE will do it with cold calculation.

          Now, we should be completely chock full of reason and fact based logic when addressing the fence-sitters. And, also make sure the fence-sitters know the antis are nothing more than a bunch of juvenile intellects as well.

  1. He has a right to “the pursuit of happiness” – but that doesn’t include infringement of my rights because he’s neurotic or psychotic. If he’s in fear, perhaps he should buy a gun – or a life.

  2. If you have no ill intent, you have nothing to fear from armed citizens. It is the Progressive/social engineer/redistributionist/criminal mind that fears and hates the Principles of liberty.

    • Criminals ARE citizens, aren’t they? Lots of psychopaths are citizens too. Personally, I’m not all that crazy about arming citizens who fall outside of the norm.

      • Me neither. But victim disarmers aren’t interested in disarming criminals (though they pretend to be); their goal is to disarm law abiding citizens.

          • That is how you see the people around you, isn’t it? Criminals that haven’t been caught yet.

          • No they don’t. Psychopaths are people who have never developed the basic human ability to empathize with others that leads to being well adjusted law abiding citizens. Criminals in general, and violent criminals in particular, share that failure to develop the norms of behavior that characterize “law abiding.” It is very rare that people change in the direction of criminal violence in adulthood. There are far more people who mature and grow out of a criminal phase as they get older.

          • The purpose of socialism is to basically characterize all normal working people as criminals, or to keep them in fear of becoming one. As Ayn Rand pointed out, the only way to *enforce* laws against citizens is if they are criminals. The whole point of many of these malum prohibitum laws is to create new classes of criminals, and as Joe has explained in the past, most gun owners have probably unknowingly broken the law at some point, just because there are so many stupid, pointless laws.

            You don’t have to be a sociopath or psychopath to be a criminal – if the “ruling elite” craft their laws carefully enough, even the most lawful citizen is sure to ensnared sooner or later – and then you can strip him of the rest of his rights because he’s a criminal.

      • Personally, I’m not all that crazy about arming citizens who fall outside of the norm.

        And who gets to determine “the norm”? Will “the norm” change with which party is in power?

        There’s a reason our Constitution was designed to keep that kind of power out of the hands of the government.

  3. Being properly equipped to defend the innocent, greatly alleviates my sense of fear. If there’s a ‘right’ to not live in fear, Mr. Dodge…what about mine?

  4. “We do not distrust each other because we are armed; we are armed because we distrust each other.”

  5. I wonder, how many people does he interact with who carry concealed?

    How about security guards and police who are openly armed that he sees while going about his business?

    Is he in fear of them? Probably not because they are “trained” and “official” so it is all about his fellow citizens. They are the terrifying ones when they are armed. Again, he lives among concealed carriers all the time and they are not shooting him over a parking space or brandishing at the playground. It is likely that many of his neighbors have firearms at their nearby homes and yet he is unaware and unaffected by them.

    So, he has no basis for fearing firearms and it is irrational and there we have met the definition of a hoplophobe.

    • Do we know where he lives? He could be a citizen of England or even (gasp) Hawaii.

      • I thought that Hawaii is a state of the USA, which would make a Hawaiian a US resident. Anyway…

        The problem with this person is that he suffers from a delusion: that he has a right not be be fearful. That’s not true and never will be. The right not to have your person and property invaded has to do with actions of others. You’re entitled to expect people not to do such things. If they do, you’re entitled to stop them, by force if needed. But you’re not entitled to have others abandon their rights to suit your delusions and prejudices.

        • Hawaii is one of the few remaining may-issue (which in practice turns out to be mostly-won’t) states.

        • Ha! So… plenty of concealed carriers around there. MN was a bit late to the party, but they by now have a fairly typical rate of CCW issuanc (~5% of the adult population.)

Comments are closed.