Let's Control the Bullets!!!
I start my Sunday mornings, every week, with a program called CBS Sunday Morning. It's one of those "magazine" type shows with a smattering of everything....culture, politics, arts, sciences and humor. There are also video "editorials," by several different contributors. One such, a Miss Nancy Giles, did her editorial on guns and the recent SCOTUS ruling that the citizens of the District of Columbia have a right to protect their homes and themselves by personally owning firearms. She whined about how scared she is of guns, and how she jumps at the sound of a firecracker. Man, she must be a real fun gal at a fireworks show! Her solution was don't control guns...control the BULLETS! Yeah! That's the ticket! Control the bullets!
Why do I get the feeling that I'm watching a Saturday Night Live sketch every time a liberal opens their mouth? I keep expecting Jon Lovitz to jump out and grin into the camera....
Guns, themselves, don't kill anybody or anything. I've had a shotgun sitting in my closet, loaded, for over 2 years and it hasn't killed anybody yet. Myself and my 2 cats are still breathing. Why can't liberals understand that controlling the weapons doesn't mean you will be controlling the behavior that leads to somebody using a gun? Why is it, that they need to blame an inanimate object for the behavior of some people? It's not the gun that kills anybody, it's the person pulling the trigger. Why do they ignore the fact that Man is a violent being and will do violence to his fellowman with whatever weapon is available? Why, for example, are prisoners being stabbed on a daily basis in a place where there are not supposed to BE any weapons at all? Why? Because Man is a violent being who will commit violent acts with whatever he can use....be it a gun or a toothbrush that's been sharpened into a weapon.
And how will taking the guns from the hands of the law abiding citizens do anything to reduce crime? Do these naive liberals think that the criminals are suddenly going to have an epiphany, realizing that guns have been outlawed and turn both themselves and their unlawful weapons in to the authorities? I can see it now....the light bulb going on over the robber's head and his face falling in despair when he realizes....oh my GOD....guns are illegal!! I could get.....arrested!!! Yeah, riiiiight.
An armed populace is a polite one. If you take guns from registered gun owners (for you libs out there, that would be, uhm....the law abiding citizens), then only the government and the criminals would have them, and the rest of the population would have no way to defend themselves against either the petty tyranny of criminals or the major tyranny of a possible dictator forcing the unarmed populace to his will.
It was not the possibility of a spike in crime that led to the decision in the SCOTUS case, but the second possibility. The populace should be able to form extemporaneous militias, i.e., armed neighborhood watches/defense committees, for the purposes of defending our way of life and our Republic against the depredations of a possible takeover of our government by a person or group of people bent on destroying our elective representation and installing a president for life or dictator. How can the people form militias if they have to wait to be armed? Where would the neighborhood munitions be stored if they did? Who would be in charge? It makes perfect sense to have the munitions already scattered among the people, because there would be no central place to neutralize by capture or destroying it, and to completely disarm the populace would require a door to door search....very risky if the population isn't of a mind to cooperate.
So instead of controlling the bullets, or the knives or the sharpened toothbrushes, why not control the behavior of the criminals? Let them think twice about robbing MY house because they may be shot, not knowing that they can tyrannize and terrorize me with impunity because the liberals, in their eternal arrogance, have decided that my home is not worthy of defense and neither am I.
In the meantime, I'll hang onto my shotgun in case my neighborhood militia needs me for defense against the tyranny of a dictator!
Why do I get the feeling that I'm watching a Saturday Night Live sketch every time a liberal opens their mouth? I keep expecting Jon Lovitz to jump out and grin into the camera....
Guns, themselves, don't kill anybody or anything. I've had a shotgun sitting in my closet, loaded, for over 2 years and it hasn't killed anybody yet. Myself and my 2 cats are still breathing. Why can't liberals understand that controlling the weapons doesn't mean you will be controlling the behavior that leads to somebody using a gun? Why is it, that they need to blame an inanimate object for the behavior of some people? It's not the gun that kills anybody, it's the person pulling the trigger. Why do they ignore the fact that Man is a violent being and will do violence to his fellowman with whatever weapon is available? Why, for example, are prisoners being stabbed on a daily basis in a place where there are not supposed to BE any weapons at all? Why? Because Man is a violent being who will commit violent acts with whatever he can use....be it a gun or a toothbrush that's been sharpened into a weapon.
And how will taking the guns from the hands of the law abiding citizens do anything to reduce crime? Do these naive liberals think that the criminals are suddenly going to have an epiphany, realizing that guns have been outlawed and turn both themselves and their unlawful weapons in to the authorities? I can see it now....the light bulb going on over the robber's head and his face falling in despair when he realizes....oh my GOD....guns are illegal!! I could get.....arrested!!! Yeah, riiiiight.
An armed populace is a polite one. If you take guns from registered gun owners (for you libs out there, that would be, uhm....the law abiding citizens), then only the government and the criminals would have them, and the rest of the population would have no way to defend themselves against either the petty tyranny of criminals or the major tyranny of a possible dictator forcing the unarmed populace to his will.
It was not the possibility of a spike in crime that led to the decision in the SCOTUS case, but the second possibility. The populace should be able to form extemporaneous militias, i.e., armed neighborhood watches/defense committees, for the purposes of defending our way of life and our Republic against the depredations of a possible takeover of our government by a person or group of people bent on destroying our elective representation and installing a president for life or dictator. How can the people form militias if they have to wait to be armed? Where would the neighborhood munitions be stored if they did? Who would be in charge? It makes perfect sense to have the munitions already scattered among the people, because there would be no central place to neutralize by capture or destroying it, and to completely disarm the populace would require a door to door search....very risky if the population isn't of a mind to cooperate.
So instead of controlling the bullets, or the knives or the sharpened toothbrushes, why not control the behavior of the criminals? Let them think twice about robbing MY house because they may be shot, not knowing that they can tyrannize and terrorize me with impunity because the liberals, in their eternal arrogance, have decided that my home is not worthy of defense and neither am I.
In the meantime, I'll hang onto my shotgun in case my neighborhood militia needs me for defense against the tyranny of a dictator!
posted by Duchess Of Austin at 7:16 AM
1 Comments:
Have you noticed the trend in the UK to the use of knives? And the predictable response? Regulate knives!
Post a Comment
<< Home