Canada should really ease the laws about guns so that more people can have them and eventually kill each other with them.
April 14, 2015
Comment to Supreme Court strikes down mandatory minimum sentences for gun possession
[Why are anti-gun people so violent?
Oh yeah! Now I remember. It’s because it’s in their nature.—Joe]
Unfortunately, law abiding citizens start offing home invaders & robbers. It doesn’t take long for such crimes to drop to the level that people asking why we need more gun control laws.
“It doesn’t take long for such crimes to drop to the level that people asking why we need more gun control laws.”
I could try to guess what you’re trying to say there, but it would only be a guess.
“Canada should really ease the laws about guns so that more people can have them and eventually kill each other with them.”
This is what happens when you embrace lies– You end up using the lies as a basis of formulation and extrapolation. Lies building upon lies, you thus become more and more detached from reality.
Take the foundational lie in this case, “Perfectly honest and peaceable humans, if allowed to have weapons, will morph into violent criminals due to the mere possession of said weapons.” This assigns a metaphysical or spiritual power, and a will, to the inanimate weapon, giving it control over its bearer.
Based on the above lie we have the next, equally insane lie;
“Mere words, if passed into law by certain individuals, will negate the metaphysical or spiritual power of weapons, nullifying their control over the human mind, and/or said words will create a magical force field around said weapons, preventing humans from acquiring them.” Beyond that, you must believe that the force field effect will be at least as powerful over criminals as it is over the more peaceable and law-abbiding, i.e. you must believe that criminals are more likely to obey gun restrictions, compared to regular folks who will be less likely to obey gun restrictions, and thus the magical force field will tip the balance of power in favor of the non violent who break the law.
So you have to believe that criminals are more law-abiding than the law-abiding. Otherwise the gun restrictions cannot result in the supposedly desired effect of reduced crime.
In short; if you believe that the wholesale violation of rights in the form of gun restrictions will make a society better, you must be out of your mind. If you’re out of your mind, you should be prevented from serving in public office. You are the problem from which the rest of us must protect ourselves.
“Perfectly honest and peaceable humans, if allowed to have weapons, will morph into violent criminals due to the mere possession of said weapons.” — clearly that is a false notion. However, there is a variation that appears to be true:
“Superficially sane-looking progressives, if allowed to have weapons, will morph into violent criminals due to the mere possession of said weapons.”
Also note the lack of any qualifiers.
Often the antis will say they’re against “the wrong people” from having guns.
But here we that they are against people owning guns in and of itself.
Also note that they often assert that the “common sense” laws they want aren’t about keeping law-abiding people from owning guns. But here we have express support *on the basis* that these laws make it such a hassle that they act as a barrier to keep ownership low.
Pingback: SayUncle » Why are anti-gun activists so violent?