Gun control that doesn’t annoy the NRA isn’t considered proper gun control at all. We could be putting violent criminals away for gun-related crimes for longer terms and monitoring them more aggressively through an improved parole system. We could do that before they graduate to murder — remember how many of those charged with possession offenses have prior arrests and convictions. But this isn’t on any gun-control agenda.
For one thing, it probably would mean locking up a lot of young black men in Chicago rather than hassling a lot of old white guys living out weekend-warrior Rambo fantasies in Tulsa. And for the Democrats, that isn’t an option. The enemy is the enemy, and, guilty or not guilty, he must be punished.
For years, feminists have labored to educate people that rape is not about sex, but about domination, degradation, and control. Evidently, someone needs to inform the law enforcement establishment and the media that kidnapping, robbery, carjacking and assault are not about property.
Crime is not only a complete disavowal of the social contract but also a commandeering of the intended victim’s person and liberty. If the individual’s dignity lies in the fact that he is a moral agent engaging in actions of his own will, in free exchange with others, then crime always violates the victims dignity. It is, in fact, an act of enslavement. Your wallet, your purse, your car many not be worth your life, but your dignity is; and if it is not worth fighting for, it can hardly be said to exist.
Jeff Snyder 2001 Nation of Cowards page 16. [Yes. Enslavement. The perpetrator is using force, without moral or legal right, to take that which you have labored for. Lethal force is justified against those who are in the act of enslaving others.—Joe]
A summer camp operated by the al-Quds militant group has trained more than 30,000 children this summer to carry out terrorist attacks using various knives and firearms, according to a new report by an organization that monitors activity in the Middle East.
He does not simply teach them to assume all firearms are loaded or to keep the muzzle pointed in a safe direction. Instead, he tells his students, “Assume the bullet is traveling down the barrel right now.”
Since at least 1950, every single one of Europe’s public mass shootings has occurred in a place where general citizens are banned from carrying guns. In America, there have been only four exceptions to that rule.
Following the massacre of first graders at the Sandy Hook Elementary School, NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre infamously said that the lesson to be learned was: “The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.” That phrase perfectly captures a core premise of Trumpism: that the nation is neatly divided into “good guys” (who have been forgotten by the elites controlling our government) and “bad guys” (Muslims, undocumented immigrants and “the others” who have been allowed to threaten the safety and well-being of the “good guys”). LaPierre’s slogan likely will animate the entirety of the NRA’s Trump Administration agenda.
This is “a core premise of ‘Trumpism’”? Really? It’s implied the good guys are difficult to distinguish from the bad guys and the bad guys are based upon immigration status, religion, etc. But it is extremely clear from the context LaPierre identified the bad guy as the one murdering the children and their teachers. The good guys would have been anyone in a position to take a clean shot at the bad guy.
The rest of the article has similar distortions and half-truths. It is very skillfully worded so as to be almost true but extremely misleading so as to put gun owners and the NRA in a bad light. As I was reading the article I wondered, “Who is this person?”
Upshot: it’s voluntary…. with an implied *for now attached. Leave it to the government to call for a way to make a perfectly reliable, simple, mechanical system, and apply a high-tech solution to a social problem that a) won’t fix the problem, b) discriminates against the poor, c) will make good systems less reliable, d) etc [insert all the usual litany of problems with this specific tech here]
With a gun, a 100 pound woman can successfully defend her life from a vicious assault by a 170-pound man On the other hand, if she is careless or foolhardy, the gun will more readily manifest and magnify the result of that behavior. Being more effective, it is less forgiving of error, impulse, mindlessness. Yet in one case and the other, the gun has not done good, the gun has not done evil. As a tool it enables a man or woman to do greater good or greater evil. Take it away, and you have reduced man’s capacity to do harm, yes, but you have also reduced man’s capacity to do good. That we entertain serious discussions about eliminating guns, speaks not so much to the “evil” nature of the thing itself – it has not moral nature – or to our revulsion over the harm wrought with it, as it does about our beliefs in our own capacity and willingness to do good, to undertake those actions in service of the good that would require or recommend the use of that tool. We see no good in guns because we have drawn a line through performing those good deeds for which a gun would be necessary or advisable and, what is more chilling, doubt our own capacity to do so. For this reason more than any other, there is no salvation through gun control.
Jeff Snyder 2001 Nation of Cowards page 10. [If I understand what he is saying correctly I think I can extrapolate a bit and make things more clear:
If you believe mankind is so flawed that gun control is necessary to protect us from ourselves then we are so flawed that we will destroy ourselves without guns as well.
Nelson was replying to someone who demanded the repeal of the Second Amendment. Apparently they are ignorant of U.S. v Cruikshank which says, “This is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence.”—Joe]
The Collaborative Firearms Education Initiative involves two steps. First, a push to get the CDC funding to actively catalog and study gun related violence much as it does motor vehicle fatalities and a push to increase the educational requirements for firearm purchases with the NRA being the main organization for implementation and provision of this education.
We need reliable, unbiased information and understanding of it. Without a complete understanding of the problem we are left only with speculation and theories.
Secondly, instead of looking to limit accessibility to firearms in efforts against the NRA and other political groups, increasing the level of education necessary to purchase firearms in conjunction with the NRA.
To drive a vehicle on streets, hunt on public land , or carry a concealed weapon, every individual is required to attend formal and regulated training and be licenced.
Sean O’Reilly October 12, 2016 A third way on gun control allows both sides to win [Most of the vehement opposition to gun ownership comes in the aftermath of a mass shooting atrocity. Nearly all of those have a strong mental illness component. The major source of gun deaths are due to gangs and the illegal drug trade. While I can see some policy changes making a significant difference there I can’t see how requiring training could help. And training and licensing for hunting and concealed weapons is already the norm for nearly all states.
And if he thinks these restrictions are acceptable for the specific enumerated right of gun ownership I don’t think he envisioned the slippery slope of applying similar restrictions on religion, speech, freedom of association, and abortion.
I suspect O’Reilly doesn’t really understand the current situation and hasn’t thought through what he does know.—Joe]