Quote of the day—Ken Levy

The entire reason we have 300+ million guns to defend against is because decades-long efforts to stop this proliferation (mostly by Democrats) have been defeated by public officials (mostly Republicans) insisting that these efforts conflict with the Second Amendment. In this way, the Second Amendment is being used to solve the very problem that it was instrumental in creating.

Ken Levy
March 22, 2018
The (Current) Gun-Control Debate Is Not Really About Gun Control

[Apparently Mr. Levy is unaware of a large number of facts that anyone with a firm grasp on reality knows, such as:

Hence, one has to conclude that Mr. Levy has crap for brains and/or is deliberately lying.—Joe]


8 thoughts on “Quote of the day—Ken Levy

  1. The comments on that article were darkly hilarious. Invocations of white supremacy, the NRA, Trump… but not a single word about the failures in Parkland.

    We’re so gonna wind up in a civil war, aren’t we?

    • It’s easy to see that a likely possibility. I see three other potential paths:

      1. We hold the line long enough for them to run out of steam (moderately likely)
      2. One or more originalist decisions at the Supreme Court (moderately likely, at best)
      3. A constitutional convention which unambiguously affirms the 2nd Amendment (unlikely)

      I’m preparing for the civial war by reloading thousands of rounds of .223 and making my own AR-15s.

      • Oh, I also upgraded my NRA membership, doubled my yearly donations to SAF, and started donating to Firearms Policy Foundation.

      • Re C: maybe. But the trouble with Constitutional amendments is — why would you expect them to be obeyed any more than the existing articles are?
        Maybe if there were an amendment that gives any citizen standing to bring criminal charges against an official for violation of the Constitution, things might get slightly better. Even then I’d expect judges to come up with some weasel wording to defeat the intent, just as they have been doing for well over 200 years with every existing article in the Constitution.

  2. Let’s render the sentence down a bit;
    “The reason we have guns to defend against is because efforts to stop their proliferation have been defeated by public officials insisting that these efforts conflict with the Second Amendment. In this way, the Second Amendment is being used to solve the very problem that it created.”

    Rendering further;
    “We have to defend against guns because the second amendment prevents disarmament. Thus the Second Amendment is being used to solve the very problem it created.”

    I don’t know about you all, but as a stand-alone quote I can’t make any sense of that. I understand the narrative of communists, Progressives, anarchists, Fascists, and all other manner of authoritarians. I was raised a leftist, I was dragged through the Catholic Church, I’ve hung out with leftist professors, I’ve listened to Pacifica News, Radio Havana and Radio Moscow during the Cold War. I not only adopted their narrative, I was better than most at articulating it. Still, that quote simply doesn’t parse with any meaning.

    After reading into his article of course it becomes clear. He’s basing false assumptions upon false claims and coming to his conclusion (that the second amendment is to blame for criminal violence) based on his false assumptions and false claims.

    He fails to acknowledge that there is evil in the world that can’t be legislated away, fails to understand that legislators themselves, and their enforcers, are sometimes evil, fails to acknowledge that the power he wants concentrated in government only attracts more of the evil into positions of power, and fails to acknowledge the concept of God-given rights. That’s just a few of the highlights of what he fails to acknowledge. He also fails to acknowledge the hard-learned lessons of history.

    As you’ve said; we can only conclude that he is, a) evil himself, b) unwittingly controlled by evil, or c) insane.

    In almost all cases it is b) unwittingly controlled by evil. Being sequestered in the university system is most likely the major factor in his pathology. It doesn’t matter the cause however; a criminal is still a criminal, an anti-American agitator is still an anti-American agitator, sedition is still sedition and must be dealt with accordingly. Millions of lives may depend on it. The justice system can sort out the nuances during the sentencing phase.

  3. Let us repair the concluding sentence in Levy’s quote;

    “Leftists would have us use official, wholesale coercion programs to solve the very problems that official, wholesale coercion was instrumental in creating.”

    I wonder if Ken Levy will ever be allowed to understand that.

    The disconnect arises in part from projection, and in part from group bonding. To a leftist, all problems arise from the what they view as false assertions of “liberty” and are solvable only through government authority. So when authoritarian policies cause problems, liberty is to blame, and the solution is more authoritarian policies. They have it perfectly backwards, but they believe that stuff as fervently as any gang member ever believed in standing up for his a brothers in his gang, even unto death.

    Government coercive power is their god. It made them. It gave them everything they have or ever will have. Only through government coercion can the world be brought into salvation, into judgement day.

    That belief system is extremely deadly.

  4. They very much want revolution. It’s the final phase in Progressivism. To wit;

    “We are sick and tired of the inaction here in Washington and around the country” by politicians who are “owned by the NRA,” David Hogg, a senior at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, said on “Good Morning America” this morning. “Today we are going to start a revolution.”

    “We will change America with or without these politicians,” continued Hogg,

    That’s from a current ABC News article here;

    “Change America [against the Bill of Rights} with or without these politicians”? That’s revolution. Sedition.

    The comments are interesting. It doesn’t take long for a leftist to assert that Jesus Christ and his followers are communists. I don’t recall Jesus lobbying the Roman government to institute coercive redistribution on behalf of the poor. I recall the opposite; the powers that be, the authoritarians, they felt threatened by Him and they killed Him because of it.

    Rather, proper Christians are very much community oriented in taking care of the truly needy, but that’s a far cry from political communism which is a coercive and murderous system. Real Christians would never advocate coercion. The Pope certainly does, and that makes him anti-Christian.

    The political left then, including Democrats, Republicans, the Vatican and the global ecumenical movement, is truly horrendous. They use the language of love and mercy, to sell us on a morbid system of coercive redistribution and Fascism. I don’t think there can be any worse evil than that.

Comments are closed.