Quote of the day—Matthew Yglesias

Continuing to insist on new rules while shying away from enforcing existing ones, meanwhile, burns credibility with conservative voters, who see a left that’s eager to penalize their hobby and reluctant to punish criminals.

Matthew Yglesias
June 3, 2022
The flaw in the progressive stance on guns
[Via email from Chet.

Reading the entire opinion piece you can see he has a glimmer of self awareness about the weakness of the gun control position. But if he actually believes the 2nd Amendment, the specific enumeration of a basic human right, is just a hobby then he has no clue why so many people are opposed to restrictions on personal arms.

The mindset of the opposition is much closer to “people that wish to disarm me must be intending to inflect violence upon me and/or innocent people I care about.” This completely changes any attempts to get even minor concessions

Why would anyone grant someone they believe to be intent on murdering them to tie one hand behind their back? If, after saying “No!”, the person attempts to forcibly tie the hand it seems entirely justified to use lethal force to stop them.—Joe]


12 thoughts on “Quote of the day—Matthew Yglesias

  1. He writes “[E]ven nonfanatical gun owners … acknowledge that, in principle, a gun-free America would be safer than the current gun-filled America.”
    I’m a nonfanatical gun owner, but I do not acknowledge, in principle or fact, that a gun-free America would be safer than the current gun-filled America.

  2. He writes “And as liberals sporadically realize, when lots of people carry guns around, it’s very dangerous.”
    He should have written: “When lots of criminals carry guns around, while the law-abiding are forbidden to do so, it’s very dangerous.”
    But I guess liberals never even sporadically realize this.

    • Hank, I don’t think you’re quite getting the leftist mindset. First, what you refer to as “liberals” should be understood as “the criminal class” or “criminal sympathizers”, or better yet, “the fraternity of the mind of Cain”. Everything leftists believe and advocate is predicated on the use of wholesale coercion as their system of getting things done. It’s as if they get up every morning and think to themselves, “How can we exercise coercive force today, thus puffing up our leader’s false authority, and what clever excuses shall we use to justify it?”

      Therefore you’ll have a much better time understanding the leftist mindset (properly understood in this age as the Romish/Greek/MedoPersian, Babylonian mindset) if you rephrase the quote thusly;
      “…when lots of law-abiding people carry guns around, it’s very dangerous for us and our criminal operations, and it furthermore stets a terrible precedent and has terrible implications for the future of our glorious, world-wide criminal movement.”

      Only then do we begin to fully understand the left’s (Rome’s) otherwise perplexing, visceral hatred of the law-abiding, peaceable and faithful gun owner whilst turning the other way and whistling Dixie as real crimes, violence and even mass murder are being committed.

      Not that there’s anything we can actually do about it, mind you, but it is better to understand what’s going on in the world than being frustrated and confused by it.

      For one thing, Lucifer lived in Heaven for ages, and spoke directly with God. We need faith, he doesn’t. He was there. We need continuing education and reminders. He doesn’t. He experienced it already, long before we came on the scene. You’re not going to change the Romish (Marxist/leftist) movement by educating them. They’ll just laugh at you in a way you may never understand. They already know more than you. You might be able to pick off a few of their followers, and that is well and good. It’s the best we can ever do, and it is our responsibility to do it. But the leftist movement is older than you suspect, more knowledgeable than you suspect, and more clever than you suspect, it has more resources than you suspect, and it never, ever changes.

      It will be utterly exterminated soon enough, of course. Count on it, but not by our hand and not until it’s done its damage. Our job is to be part of the loud cry, to call as many “out of Babylon” as possible, and not fall in the process. But are we up to it? That’s the question.

    • Thanks for that Hank. Glad to see people like her waking up. But that being said. Here’s some dystopia she missed.
      “I did not buy the handgun, as I need a class and a permit and four references. That is as it should be.”
      If that as it should be? The government she so worries about could just deny/delay her permit? As they do all over the world.
      How ’bout a $10,000.00 non-refundable application fee for the permit? !,000% taxes on ammo?
      It amazes me how easy brainwashing turns into a lifestyle.
      But once again. It’s good to see progress.

  3. it’s absolutely true that the reluctance of the left to actually enforce the laws they generate breeds contempt among us for those proposing new laws. Look at the Universal Background Checks laws now being pushed – and already enacted in Washington and elsewhere. How often is a felon actually arrested and prosecuted for attempting to buy a firearm? Nearly never. How about Biden’s big push to penalize FFL’s, does that include any prosecutions of crims who attempt to buy? Of course not. Seeing this lack of prosecution, does anyone actually believe that I won’t figure out a way to get standard cap mags for the guns I own, in a state that passed legislation banning such sales?

    From another perspective, how is it that the strident anti-gunners who crow loudly for public disarmament were also those who wanted to defund the police? And now crow for more gun control when the defunded and demoralized police stand around a school room with an active shooter and refused to intervene? They want to strip your self-protection, emasculate the police, turn loose the crims, and simultaneously claim that all this will make “it” safer? For whom?

    • It’s certainly fair to criticize universal background check as ineffective. But the main reason for opposing it is that it makes for a gun owner registry, which is the list of people to visit for confiscation. That is the best argument against it.

  4. Something else that seems to have been missed by the author is the “culture of criminals”.
    Just as we stop at the bar after work and discuss how to do this and that over a beer. Criminals do the same. Only for crime.
    By, “get tough on crime”, he seems to forget that criminals have been in power for so long. They ain’t going back in the cage.
    Instead of “stop and frisk”, it’s going to be “gun fight on sight” when cops come around. Use to be police could bring overwhelming force to any situation. Not anymore.
    Criminals have grown to the point they can bring more chaos than the police can handle.
    Progressives being true to form. Are never going to figure it out in time to save crap though. As LA high rollers are finding out. Criminals can follow you home and do whatever they want, as the police are an hour out. That is if your call is not on hold at 911?
    “When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns”.
    Is a progressive’s dystopia. A patriot’s nightmare. And a criminal’s fervent prayer.

  5. Joe, saw an interesting graph the other day. Which changes the way the gun debate is framed.
    It was deaths per 100,000 GUNS, in the countries of the world. Mexico topping the list at 1200+. America at 5.5.
    Your the first to point out. Show me where gun control works? And this seemed to express that perfectly.
    Couldn’t find it again. Thought maybe you could.
    Hope it helps. Thanks for all you do.

  6. Considering it’s Matt Yglesias, a man who is frankly dumber than a bag of doorknobs, this level of dim awareness is actually impressive.

Comments are closed.