Quote of the Day
We could reduce gun crimes by 75% just by banning Democrats from owning them. And since both Democrats and Republicans are in favor of disarming Democrats, I think we have a path forward.
Scott Adams @ScottAdamsSays
Tweeted on February 4, 2022
Interesting hypothesis. There is some merit in this. But there is a huge difference between banning something and preventing access.
And more importantly, as long as you regard Democrats as humans, which I do, they have a specific enumerated right to keep and bear arms just as much as anyone else.
How about this: we let localities ban guns, or some guns or whatever they think “assault weapon” means.
BUT those bans only apply to people that live in that locality. Doesn’t apply to non-residents. Your home gun possession rules follow you everywhere.
And by “locality”, I mean geographical locations with no more than 10000 residents and no more than 4 square miles. No gun ban can be enacted at any higher level. 2/3rds majority required to pass, and must pass again every 2 years.
Oh, and this would be a required disclosure for real estate agents. A placard will be provided to be placed on the inside of the front door of every residence, paid for by a special property tax.
Oh, and armed security is treated the same as bearing arms yourself, so banned in the locality.
Oh, and no exception for government agents. Leave your guns on the job if you live in such a locality.
Gun bans would really mean something if they meant “you first, Gabby and moms that need some action”. Stick to your principles, anti-gunners!
I’m not saying “no”… I’m saying what it will cost you.
Well, good commies already are disarmed. If not physically then mentally.
Even if they have a gun they would turn it over on demand. Just like they have in every communist country when asked to.
That’s the beauty of freedom. If you don’t like guns. And can’t see the necessity of them in society. You can leave. Plenty of places in this world that don’t like guns, just like you. Move. And we wish you all the best, truly.
What democrat/socialist/commies need to hear is that the argument is over. Legal, moral, philosophical. There is no longer an argument to be made. And never has been.
The proof is empirical. The law, ironclad as supply and demand, it’s gravity if you will.
Were done talking. Find something else to go whine about you whiny bitch-lib-commie-fags.
They always threaten to move, they should. I’m positive Zimbabwe would love, and welcome with open arms all the Mikey Bloomberg/Hogg/Demanding Mommie types America has to offer. And Liberia you probably give you your own little section of beach to go shit on.
We don’t need to do anything special for anyone. Just let freedom ring!
I would view this as another one of Mr. Adams’ “modest proposals”.
He’s not really trying to disarm Democrats. He’s trying to move the Overton Window. And frankly, the Overton Window needs moving.
So what he’s really saying is: “Democrats, gun violence is your problem, not America’s; deal with it.” He’ll get some pushback, if anyone is paying attention… but that would change the national conversation.
“We could reduce gun crimes by 75% just by banning Democrats from owning them.”
We could probably eliminate 75% of all problems by banning Democrats; to clear up the remaining 25% we’d need to ban Republicans.
Not even Franco or Pinochet succeeded in banning socialists. But we can work to get the mass of them in a different country.