"Isn't that just like a wop; brings a knife to a gun fight."
I'll begin by pointing out the context of this new article from the Times slamming the NRA (sorry, it's a Times article so I should write N.R.A., right?). The gun control advocates have been losing the debate for decades. They've been trounced on every intellectual and moral point to the degree that it's actually quite impressive that they have been able to accomplish anything. It's probably the fault of the female voters that they even got that far, frankly.
They will do what they can to explain away this losing record. This time, it's attacking the NRA because, apparently, the majority of people actually want the same things as the gun control advocates. However, because the NRA is so powerful and deceptive, the "majority" side has never triumphed.
That's a compelling story for someone who buys into the myth that the State can provide your health, education, job, retirement, safety net, and physical security. But religious fanatics never could look at their faith with a critical eye. The rest of us know the reason they have lost the debate for so many years is because they don't have a shred of evidence or morality to stand on, manipulated numbers quoted by our president notwithstanding.
Amidst the emotionally-charged language (like, did you guys even know the NRA supports gun trafficking? no way!), the article does what every other gun control article does: list a bunch of "level headed, common sense" approaches to guns that any reasonable person should agree to.
In fact, it's the same tactics feminists use: "What, you don't believe women should be treated equally?" No, I just think every policy with third-wave feminist backing turns to dogshit.
But that's another matter.
The Times even cites surveys of gun owners to show how backwards the NRA's thinking is and how contrary to the opinions of its members.
Yes, I can imagine how those surveys were conducted:
"Have you ever owned a gun? Even a BB gun?" Gun owner? Check.
"Would you support background checks that cost practically nothing, are super easy, would boost gun store sales, and keep the guns out of the hands of criminals? And yes, such policies are so totally possible and we know for a fact they'd work." Gun owner who supports gun control? Check.
And now we write the article. Easy peasy.
[[Quick note: Where in the hell are they finding these gun owners? Is this the guy who bought his first gun at a Big 5 and joined the NRA because he just thought he should? I've known gun owners all my life. Recreational shooters, hunters, collectors, all of them. Not a one has thought anything these gun control supporters have thought up was a good idea. Now that I think about it, I'm calling bullshit on this entire survey. Hopefully some upstart conservative eager beaver with more time and energy than me follows up on my hunch.]]
If you've been out of the loop, I'll help you. The NRA position has been virtually unchanged for the past few decades. Observe:
- The laws we already have on the books are sufficient to prevent gun-related crimes, especially the ones you selectively appropriate for political gain. The laws only require proper enforcement.
- There is no reason to pass new laws because of this and therefore any new laws are harmful to law-abiding gun owners and are an affront to the Second Amendment.
- There is no evidence that any of the proposed gun legislation would reduce crime and there is abundant evidence that increased gun freedom is highly correlated with less crime.
- Every step in the direction of more gun restrictions and / or registration has led to eventual gun confiscation.
- Every nation in history that has restricted the ability of its citizens to arm themselves has devolved into tyranny.
- Simply from a morality standpoint, it is the God-given right of every sovereign individual to defend himself, his loved ones, and his property. We hold this right above all others and cannot surrender it to the State.
It's not that hard guys. The NRA just keeps hitting the same notes over and over. You may get confused because the other side keeps trying to re-frame the debate, but nothing has changed.
I'll leave you with the same reasoning I leave anti-gun nuts with: Even if this perfect world existed where if all you did was pass a law you could rid the world of guns, guess what? I would still want a gun. Because I am not a criminal. I use guns for my righteous defense. And I should never have to face a criminal in some kind of hand-to-hand combat when a gun is available to me. I am trained and I want my weapon. Go screw yourselves.
No comments:
Post a Comment