Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- What’s At Stake?
- Too Hot To Live
- What’s At Stake?
- “The world began to end on 12th May 2024”
- “Climate change is a myth”
- Racist Gas
- RFK Jr. Discusses The Green New Deal And Climate
- “world is on edge of climate abyss, UN warns”
- Ivy Echo Chamber
- Climate Homicide
- Much Ado About Nothing
- Homophobic Gas
- World Bank Expectations
- Trained Not To Learn
- Protecting Endangered Species
- Record Climate Cynicism
- Record Cynicism
- The Latest In Climate Science Rhetoric
- Climate Desperation
- Artificial Stupidity
- Climate Obsession
- The Climate Empire Strikes Back
- Climate Scam Parrots
- “I’ve dealt with him before ”
- “I’ve dealt with him before.”
Recent Comments
- spren on Too Hot To Live
- Conrad Ziefle on “The world began to end on 12th May 2024”
- Conrad Ziefle on What’s At Stake?
- Bill on What’s At Stake?
- arn on “The world began to end on 12th May 2024”
- Conrad Ziefle on “Climate change is a myth”
- Conrad Ziefle on Too Hot To Live
- Conrad Ziefle on What’s At Stake?
- Conrad Ziefle on “The world began to end on 12th May 2024”
- Francis Barnett on “Climate change is a myth”
Any Questions?
Looks like Kim and Mao have their hands raised, but Skeeter is just giving us the finger.
Additionally, we need to remember that the issue is not just “guns” but rather, the issue is “arms.” And yes, that includes full auto firearms, switch blades, shoulder launched missiles, blackjacks, hand grenades and ninja throwing stars.
Never any question in my mind except for how people can be so stupid as to believe their own safety will be enhanced by disarming their fellow law abiding citizens? I can’t count the number of times have I been portrayed as having a sexual fetish because I argue for the fundamental right to protect ones self with the “progressives”. I always take such childish ad hominem to mean that I have won the argument on the merits of the case and they have to recourse in their childish minds than to insult me for it.
Hey rah! You doubtless already know this, but arguing facts and principles with a gun-control nut is useless. One of the (increasingly rare) pleasures in my life is the following variation on how I now approach gun-control (and similar) nuts. (And no, it is not that my pleasures are getting rare overall, but merely that this particular form of pleasure is getting rare. All the GCN in my life have already learned not to bring it up anymore.)
It should be obvious whose side is whose in the following generic dialog…
“There is no reason why anyone should have a gun! We need to just outlaw them!”
“Well… I sort of half way agree with you.”
“Half way? How so?”
“Oh, I agree that YOU should not own a gun. Probably not your family either. You are obviously not responsible enough to be trusted with any sort of weapon. On the other hand, there is no reason why I should be disarmed. I am mature, reasonably intelligent — most of all I am emotionally stable and can be trusted not to do something stupid with a gun. After all, I am not the one with the weird ‘every-one-is-out-to-murder-me’ fantasy. YOU ought to be disarmed, but as for me and my family, we are exactly the sort of people who should have guns.”
“What the hell does THAT mean?! You think YOU are more stable than I am?!”
“No need for you to get all excited. That sort of emotional outburst is exactly the kind of thing I am talking about. Look, we all know ourselves better than anyone else can. When you say that ‘there is no reason why anyone should have a gun’ you obviously included yourself in that group. If you say that you need to be disarmed, well, I believe you! No argument there. You say that you can’t be trusted with a gun, OK, I support your judgement on that. On the other hand, I obviously know myself and my family better than you do. You DO agree to that, I hope. You aren’t really going to claim some sort of secret psychic insight into other men’s souls… are you? Anyway, I have never threatened anyone with violence. Hell, I’m a vegetarian! I am exactly the sort of person who can give some stability to society by convincing bad guys to NOT commit violence. How on earth is it bad for the most sane among us to help look out for those of you who can’t control your own thoughts and actions?”
OK… you see where that is going… 🙂
The other good anti-gun-control argument is the one that kicks them right in their obnoxious “holier-than-thou” gland. No matter what justification they use for disarming everyone, ask them how they will enforce it.
“Is this voluntary? Will you just persuade people to give up their guns — or will you take them by force?”
If you push them for the specifics of how they plan to implement their gun control, it always, always, always, comes down in the end to “If you do not do what we demand and give us your guns, we will send men with guns to kidnap you, put you in a cage, or kill you — whatever it takes.”
That is the truth of gun control. That is always, always, always, their bottom line. At that point, you tell them, “I can never support any plan that is based on murder and kidnapping. My ethical standards will never permit me to do something that evil. Murdering innocent, harmless people who never did me any wrong, all done just to satisfy some imaginary phobia I might have against them… NO! I can never support something so unethical and wrong!”
Gun control nuts support their beliefs because it gives them a plausible way to imagine themselves wise and good. They are neither. Those two Walter Mitty dreams are their Achilles heel. Forget logic. They are immune. Dismantle their fantasies.
Sorry to go so long in this rant — but it is one of the most important subjects out there.
IMO it is, in the end, the MOST important subject out there when it comes to the future of this nation. Citizens can bear their own arms, subjects cannot. There is a reason why the NRA/ILA has a publication titled: America’s 1st Freedom. http://www.nranews.com/americas1stfreedom
The bottom line is all the other fundamental freedoms depend on that 1st Freedom.
Guns (force) are the only thing that has a chance of keeping would be dictators ‘honest.’ Without the ability to defend themselves citizens are nothing but serfs/slaves of the nearest bully.
All these gun-control nuts need to be dumped into an inner city gang infested neighborhood after dark. IF they manage to survive they might have a better appreciation of Bully-Slave dynamics.
If we are nice we could offer them a weapon before hand…..
Washington D.C. with its gun ban would have been the best place to drop these people. I vote Boxer, Pelosi, Rosa DeLauro, Carolyn McCarthy and Hitlery Clinton as the first five for the experiment.
Outstanding! (citizens vs subjects)
Do not forget to hit them with the Supreme Court’s decisions that US police have NO DUTY to protect citizens. Therefore they are on their own against the criminals.
Oh yeh, been there and done that Gail. But gun grabbers are even less logical and more thoroughly indoctrinated than climate alarmists are, if that’s possible! It is after all, for many of them, a phobia an “Unreasonable fear”.
Some time back I made the mistake of offering facts to a gun-control nut. I explained that something on the order of two hundred million disarmed people were killed by their own governments during the twentieth century alone. He completely ignored the 200,000,000 murders and responded “Yes, yes, but if if gun control saves even ONE life….”
These people are insane on the subject. Literally not rational.
GO FOR IT AND YOU BLOG AS YOU WISH, YOU DO NOT LET ANYONE TELL YOU WHAT YOU SHOULD BLOG AND WHAT YOU SHOULD NOT BLOG. IF THEY WANT A DIFFERENT BLOG, THEY CAN START ONE THEMSELVES, MEANWHILE THIS IS YOUR BLOG.
http://www.dcclothesline.com/2014/07/14/obama-preparing-give-away-8-50-states/
But don’t drink and blog…
And turn off that Caps Lock.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFCQvvXSwx4&feature=player_embedded
The people who think you should own guns – they are all white people!
oh, wait –
.
Martin Luther would be surprised to know that he was white 😉
And Ghandhi would also be surprised….
You too, what do you suppose the “oh, wait –” was for?
What do you suppose the “oh, wait –” was for?
I keep a list of ppl who need a sarcasm closing tag (/sarc), should I add you?
“to beguile many and be beguiled by one”
… or two? They got it, Jim.
You left out another guy who supports gun ownership for defensive use:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/dalailama.asp
Did the students understand that a Buddhist holy man told them how to begin their journey but not where it must end?
I’d like to imagine the Dalai Lama would keep godlike composure while facing death but his defensive strategy seems to have come from Hollywood movies Wolf Blitzer sent him:
CNN Wolf Blitzer: Why don’t cops shoot to wound?
Instead, His Holiness should imagine how amidst a screaming panicked crowd in an Aurora movie theater a high school student is straining to aim a small handgun to hit the leg of detached James Holmes who is calmly walking up aisle to kill her and her friends with his rifle.
Unlike Wolf Blitzer, the reincarnated lama of the Gelug must have the mental capacity to see what bullshit it is.
… up the aisle …
You might also have mentioned George Orwell.
“That rifle on the wall of the labourer’s cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there.”
good quote (Orwell’s)
http://abcnews.go.com/Weird/wireStory/principal-seeks-food-cans-defend-school-intruders-28191214
http://lissakr11humane.com/2015/01/13/drones-mentioned-in-the-bible-book-of-revelation-antichrists-robotic-army/
Did she really say “…sense of empowerment…?” I’m sure she did but if there were a Nobel Prize in Psychobabble she’d win it hands down. (My mistake, there is such a category. It was won recently by al-Gore and the GOTUS.)
Only police and the military should be allowed to have corn and pea cans. Stockpiling these weapons in the classrooms would lead to a massacre. The principal must be institutionalized.
We need a ban on large capacity cans, nothing over 4 ounces. And we must have mandatory background checks, even at food pantries, no exceptions.
Wonder if possession of a can of sardines in my cupboard can get me into trouble?
And none of those nasty “cop killer” steel cans. They must be aluminum.
I have some bad news for you Sheeple: MLK did not approve of white people having weapons, only the arming of blacks.