His first stop should be Chicago
Posted on 10/05/2015 6:45:20 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
"Doesn't it sound logical? Doesn't it sound safe?"
Based on his latest column, it seems like Washington Post editor Fred Hiatt could get behind a rewrite of John Lennon's Imagine and release an updated version to reflect today's call for gun control.
[Imagine] Prohibition… [Imagine] Mass buyback… [Imagine] A gun-free society...
He liked that last line so much, he asked his readers to repeat it with him: "Let's say that once again: A gun-free society." Bliss, he thinks.
Those words -- prohibition, mass buyback, gun-free society -- are what Hiatt says the NRA has rendered "unmentionable." And so he believes its time American citizens take them back and leave being armed to the professionals:
Doesn’t it sound logical? Doesn’t it sound safe? Wouldn’t it make sense to learn from other developed nations, which believe that only the military and law enforcers, when necessary, should be armed — and which as a result lose far, far fewer innocent people than die every year in the United States?
And Hiatt isn't even the least bit concerned that his suggestion could be used by the NRA to prove what it has always defined as a slippery slope with government regulation: "You see? Background checks today, confiscation tomorrow."
Bring it on, says Hiatt:
I understand how difficult it would be. This is a matter of changing the culture and norms of an entire society. It would take time.
Hiatt, undoubtedly, would be one of the first to volunteer to man the flame underneath all of the gun-owning frogs, in order to slowly boil away their ownership rights one by one before they realized what had happened. He exhibits a belief that begins with incremental gun-control before moving into complete confiscation. That will have to include a cultural movement to push the government along, he argues:
There has to be a cultural shift. Only then will Congress and the Supreme Court follow.
As we’ve seen over the past 15 years with same-sex marriage, such deep cultural change is difficult — and possible. Wyatt Earp, the frontier mentality, prying my cold dead fingers — I get all that. But Australia was a pioneer nation, too, and gave up its guns. Societies change, populations evolve.
And people are not immune, over time, to reason. Given how guns decimate poor black communities every day — not just when there are mass shootings, but every day — this is a civil rights issue. Given how many small children shoot themselves or their siblings accidentally, it is a family issue. Given the suicides that could be prevented, it is a mental health issue. On average 55 Americans shoot themselves to death every day. Every day!
The Supreme Court, which has misread the Second Amendment in its recent decisions, would have to revisit the issue. The court has corrected itself before, and if public opinion shifts it could correct itself again. If it did not, the Constitution would have to be amended.
It sounds hard, I know," Hiatt continues. "But it’s possible that if we started talking more honestly about the most logical, long-term goal, public opinion would begin to shift and the short-term gains would become more, not less likely, as the NRA had to play defense. We might end up with a safer country."
Hiatt's final argument is that "with only kitchen knives at hand," a lot less people die.
Echoing Hiatt's beliefs is fellow WaPo contributor and government professor at Georgetown University E.J. Dionne, who released a similar article on the very same day. In it, he applauded President Obama for stressing the need to politicize the latest mass shooting in Oregon in order to finally make a move on gun-control laws. Dionne stresses that the president was "forcing us to face reality." He says that it is high-time that politicians begin losing elections because of their opposition to gun control and alignment with "gun fanatics." He, like Hiatt, lauds government confiscation and buyback, as happened in Australia after a mass shooting in that country.
But Dionne's biggest gripe lies with conservatives whom he rhetorically pondered, "Is a dangerous and harebrained absolutism about weaponry really the issue on which American conservatives want to practice exceptionalism?"
Perhaps The Washington Post could lead by example and collect all guns owned by its employees, willingly of course, and then disarm its security personnel. Imagine a gun-free Washington Post. Say that with me: A gun-free Washington Post.
The irony is that liberals want 5 unelected judges to rule America by judicial fiat and over ride the Constitution and congress.
Because they never think these tactics will ever be used against them.
Repeat after me: “don’t tread on me.”
Some light reading for the moron.
Gun control is a prerequisite to a totalitarian state, and is therefore to be avoided, because it is worse than any number of lunatics. (Which, it is my belief, are being loosed upon us by our government in order to bring that totalitarian state into being.) The two propagandists mentioned in the article are merely tools for that to happen.
Like gun-free France, where Muslims take over a town, riot, smash windows and burn cars, then establish No-Go zones under Sharia law..in gun-free France.
Or gun-free South Africa or gun-free Jamaica.
Liberals see the courts as a venue of policy, to be certain, it’s liberal policy they espouse.
Some proof:
Heller is a misinterpretation which requires correction, despite clear language in the constitution, and clear intent by the authors.
Obergefell is settled law to such an extent that we must jail those who refuse to comply. The fact that such an interpretation was clearly never envisioned by the authors is a societal footnote to be ignored.
So why not start there and he can advocate sending out strike squads to disarm the population of each city? Being Democrats, I'm sure they'll gladly welcome them inside to confiscate all of their firearms.
Still here by the grace of 2 x 240g Hollow Points to the chest. I’ll hold.
My dead, cold hands.
Wasn’t australia where gb dumped their less than desirable citizens?
His first stop should be Chicago
A Gun-Free Society is a Conquered Society
No one is forcing you to own a gun. You have the right to be a defenseless victim. Don’t want a gun? Don’t buy one. Just don’t expect everyone one else to be as stupid as you are.
If the government apparently can’t find and deport 12 to 30 million illegal aliens how could they possibly find and confiscate 150 million firearms? I know they will never find mine.
Repeat after me: An abortion-free society.
repeat after me, “a WashingtonPost-free society”
or, if you prefer brevity,
“a liar-free society”
We can dream, can’t we?
Hey bad guys, you know where to go now. The jewelry is on the dresser.
Won’t never happen. The masters will always have guns to keep the slaves in line. The media believe that they will be in the master class.
Won’t never happen. The masters will always have guns to keep the slaves in line. The media believe that they will be in the master class.
100% surveillance
100% background checks
100% personal liberty control
George Orwell knows a place like this.
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.