Posted on 03/14/2016 12:00:17 PM PDT by OddLane
America has reached a point where political discourse is close-to-impossible. Nowhere are our views as immutable as on the issue of guns. From one perspective, guns are an enormous social harm that must be relegated to trained professionals and law enforcement. In this context, the stigmatization of guns is a wise one. A population that is comfortable around guns is a population that is comfortable using them—and sometimes using them on innocent people. Therefore, the number of guns held by the general populace should be driven as low as possible (and, hopefully, eliminated entirely). Australia, Australia, Australia.
The other perspective is the complete opposite. Guns are what keep communities safe, either from criminals or (God forbid!) government overreach. Gun-free zones are invitations for madmen and terrorists to attack a population that is advertising its defenselessness. Guns are what freed this country from the British, have stopped many would-be assailants, and are a constitutionally protected right not up for discussion. Heller, Heller, Heller.
(Excerpt) Read more at observer.com ...
The first ten amendments don’t grant rights, they recognize inherent rights. The only thing subject to being “Regulated” (either in its 18th century meaning or current meaning) is the militia. The weapons the militia or the rest of “the people” may choose to keep and bear are specifically exempted from regulation.
No. For one thing, the idea of mandating anything in the name of freedom is self-contradictory. For another, forcing someone to carry a deadly instrument against his will is certain to place it into the hands of the irresponsible. “You bought the thing, now it’s your responsibility” is a cogent argument. “But you made me” is a cogent rejoinder.
“...It’s far better to stigmatize gun ownership and render it taboo, in one of the myriad ways that progressivism reveals itself to be domestic imperialism.
“The White Man’s Burden” remains unchanged, but now it is those who are poorer and whiter who are in desperate need of civilizing. The gun-owner culture is allegedly primitive and dangerous, and it falls on “right-thinking” people to show them the error of their ways.”
Hard to tell where he’s coming from. But calling progressivism “domestic imperialism” is food for thought, IMO.
Doesn’t that describe how largely rural states have liberal politics imposed on them by one dominant city?
The author’s portrait as North Korean dear leader is a hoot.
The Author actually makes good points. He sees the debate very clearly.
We are moving in his direction, and winning.
The facts, the Constitution, and the culture are with Second Amendment supporters.
There are only a few urban centers that promote citizen Disarmament. Remove New York City and New Jersey, Los Angeles and San Francisco, and the citizen disarmament falls apart. Its ideas are intellectually bankrupt.
We will not have to mandate that citizens carry guns; we need only insist on the right to do so being respected.
Gun sales are breaking records; gun carry is breaking records. Gun crime is at all time lows.
“We will not have to mandate that citizens carry guns; we need only insist on the right to do so being respected.”
Ding! Ding! Ding!
Folks, we have a winner!
:^)
He appears (in the excerpt) too have stated both positions in the debate. Where's the bias in that?
Any permit or licensing requirement is an infringement on our rights as recognized by the second amendment.
I see this as anti-gun people bias. I'll cede that he may have intended it to look like such for the sake of arguement...but I doubt it.
I've read about a dozen books on the subject of the DPRK and Korean War, but Dear Reader is wholly unique.
I actually did a writeup of the book when it was released a few years ago.
I’ve “been comfortable around guns” for over 25 years now, and I have yet to shoot anybody. Huh, I must be atypical or somethin’.
CC
No, let’s start with mandatory basic training for all enlistment quality males, then we can talk about mandatory firearms...
Fair enough.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.