Quote of the day—Justin Stakes

Gun control is not about saving lives. It never has been and never will be. It is about control, even to the point that it causes innocent persons to lose their lives to violent crime. To the antis such deaths are an acceptable, maybe even a necessary, means to an end.

Justin Stakes
March 9, 2016
Are We Protecting Victims or Are We Playing Gun-Control Games With Their Lives?
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]


6 thoughts on “Quote of the day—Justin Stakes

  1. Succinct. Accurate. Dismaying.

    I no longer allow the excuse of ignorance with good intentions. The evidence is plain. Their attempts to limit or take away my ability to defend innocent life is an act of evil.

    • Calling what they do by its proper name — “Victim Disarmament” — helps make this clear. Ditto “Disarmed Victim Zone” (or “Defenseless Victim Zone” might be even clearer) instead of the lie “gun free zone”

    • I no longer allow the excuse of ignorance with good intentions.

      Hear, hear.

      I don’t remember who said it, but I’ll paraphrase: When someone who is honestly mistaken is corrected, one of two things will happen. He or she will either cease to be mistaken, or cease to be honest.

      We (collectively, if not personally) have been correcting anti-gun rhetoric for decades. Every new serious academic study supports our point of view. We have SCOTUS rulings supporting our point of view. Every law passed easing gun restrictions results in the future we predict (i.e.: nothing will happen), not the one the antis predict (e.g.: shootouts over parking spaces, blood in the streets, etc.). We have history on our side.

      Nobody can be honestly mistaken about the validity of “gun control” beyond their first debate. Thus, anyone who continues to support it despite all the evidence has ceased to be honest.

      And when one must lie to promote one’s viewpoint, one can no longer legitimately claim “good intentions”; that, in itself, becomes another lie.

  2. Another large component is their urge to put a thumb in the eye of people they hate.

  3. It should be kept in mind also that Progressives, and authoritarians in general, believe that there are too many people on the planet, that the “health of the planet” is more important than human rights. They were teaching us that crap since I was in elementary school in the early 1960s. I remember one of our teachers driving home the point, saying that if we were to feed the starving in Africa, for example, that all we’d get is more mouths to feed (never considering the reality that a more affluent society tends to have a lower birth rate) thus teaching kids of single-digit age to be callous about mass starvation.

    They actually believe this shit, but what is worse is that they believe it gives them the right to use the coercive power of government to control global population.

    I find all this to dovetail nicely with the gun control movement. We’ve often said that the Holocaust for example would have turned out very differently if the Jews and other “undesirables” had had a healthy gun culture. That and other purges have always been preceded by gun confiscations.

    We used to expect such arguments to sway the Progressives away from their anti gun positions, but we know now that such an expectation was born in ignorance. Now we understand; mass death and other pressures against the flourishing of Mankind, to the Progressive mindset, are features and not bugs.

Comments are closed.