12 thoughts on “Quote of the day—Darcy @brooklinegirl

  1. I’ve proposed a similar Godwin corollary to Godwin’s Law which I have none-too-modestly dubbed “Knox’s Law.”

    As an online discussion of gun owners’ rights grows longer, the probability of an ad absurdum argument involving nuclear weapons approaches 1.

    Ecclesiastes 1:9King James Version (KJV)

    The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.

  2. Human rights are not dependent upon anyone’s penis size, nor upon race, sex, color, creed, wealth, place of residence, occupation or lack thereof, or political views.

    “Liberty and justice for all” is a clear concept, but one which authoritarians cannot tolerate. Lacking any rational position, they are forced to make up dumb shit to support their intolerance. Authoritarianism is a miserable existence, but it attempts to replicate itself at every opportunity.

  3. Will Darcy change her tune if she ever has a harrowing criminal experience while she is defenseless? It’s funny that they accuse gun owners of paranoia and never realize that sometimes bad things happen to good people.

    I have no issue with my masculinity and it is not defined by my firearms; rather by being a good husband and father. However, one role that I take very seriously is my ability to put 8 OO buckshot pellets into a head-sized target at down my main hallway distances. I can protect my family, but can she protect her body?

    • Sadly, not necessarily. My brother once was robbed at gunpoint while driving a taxi in Boston. That experience turned him rabidly anti-gun. He never could understand that a host of other weapons, including the thug’s fists, were also tools with which he could be threatened, and that having an appropriate tool of his own could help neutralize those threats.

      • Thanks for sharing. That amazes me. I can always understand someone lacking the desire to own firearms even after such an incident, but to go full on anti-gun is not logical.

        I hope your brother realizes that no matter his viewpoint, the criminals will always get weapons, including firearms. Best to be armed yourself.

        Oh, and I have family members who have not accepted my view either. One day and one step at a time…

        • It’s strange and irrational, but it should not be a surprise. Consider the fact that a large fraction of Jews oppose gun ownership, in spite of the Holocaust.

  4. Pingback: Quote of the day—Chris Knox | The View From North Central Idaho

  5. I’ve been trying to understand why liberals want to ban all guns, but they want shorter prison terms for felons convicted of gun crimes.

    My working theory is they believe what they say – it’s a sexual fetish for violent criminality. They believe law-abiding gun owners must have small penises, and therefore should be dismissed and disarmed. Violent criminals must have large penises, and therefore should be free despite their violence.

    • Or, perhaps, it’s just ignorance as deep as the sea and a complete unmooring of the concept of cause and effect as something different from magical thinking. I.e., as Joe so succinctly puts it, crap-for-brains.

    • I’ve been trying to understand why liberals want to ban all guns

      They don’t! They just want to ban your guns, and the guns belonging to people like you. They’re perfectly ok with all the minions of the government having guns.

      • They are also quite happy for their friends (“the right people”) to have guns. If you live in California, you may find it hard to have a legal gun — unless you’re part of the Hollywood elite. If you live in NYC, ditto if not more so — unless you’re Donald Trump or Ochs Sulzberger or some similar person with the ability and willingness to buy enough politicians.

Comments are closed.