you stand with this handsome lawn sign. This will also
assure you that if there is a gunman in the neighborhood,
your neighbors won't be bothering you for help.
From The Gun Free Zone, parody products.
Posted on 03/08/2002 5:46:12 AM PST by babyface00
LET'S be honest. He's scared of the thing. That's understandable--so am I. But as a girl I have the luxury of being able to admit it. I don't have to masquerade squeamishness as grand principle-in the interest of mankind, no less.
A man does. He has to say things like "One Taniqua Hall is one too many," as a New York radio talk show host did in referring to the 9-year old New York girl who was accidentally shot last year by her 12-year old cousin playing with his uncle's gun. But the truth is he desperately needs Taniqua Hall, just like he needs as many Columbines and Santees as can be mustered, until they spell an end to the Second Amendment. And not for the benefit of the masses, but for the benefit of his self-esteem.
He often accuses men with guns of "compensating for something." The truth is quite the reverse. After all, how is he supposed to feel knowing there are men out there who aren't intimidated by the big bad inanimate villain? How is he to feel in the face of adolescent boys who have used the family gun effectively in defending the family from an armed intruder? So if he can't touch a gun, he doesn't want other men to be able to either. And to achieve his ends, he'll use the only weapon he knows how to manipulate: the law.
Of course, sexual and psychological insecurities don't account for ALL men against guns. Certainly there must be some whose motives are pure, who perhaps do care so much as to tirelessly look for policy solutions to teenage void and aggressiveness, and to parent and teacher negligence. But for a potentially large underlying contributor, psycho-sexual inadequacy has gone unexplored and unacknowledged. It's one thing to not be comfortable with a firearm and therefore opt to not keep or bear one. But it's another to impose the same handicap onto others.
People are suspicious of what they do not know-and not only does this man not know how to use a gun, he doesn't know the men who do, or the number of people who have successfully used one to defend themselves from injury or death. But he is better left in the dark; his life is hard enough knowing there are men out there who don't sit cross-legged. That they're able to handle a firearm instead of being handled by it would be too much to bear.
Such a man is also best kept huddled in urban centers, where he feels safer than he might if thrown out on his own into a rural setting, in an isolated house on a quiet street where he would feel naked and helpless. Lacking the confidence that would permit him to be sequestered in sparseness, and lacking a gun, he finds comfort in the cloister of crowds.
The very ownership of a gun for defense of home and family implies some assertiveness and a certain self-reliance. But if our man kept a gun in the house, and an intruder broke in and started attacking his wife in front of him, he wouldn't be able to later say, "He had a knife--there was nothing I could do!" Passively watching in horror while already trying to make peace with the violent act, scheduling a therapy session and forgiving the perpetrator before the attack is even finished wouldn't be the option it otherwise is.
No. Better to emasculate all men. Because let's face it: He's a lover, not a fighter. And he doesn't want to get shot in case he has an affair with your wife.
Of course, it wouldn't be completely honest not to admit that owning a firearm carries with it some risk to unintended targets. That's the tradeoff with a gun: The right to defend one's life and way of life isn't without peril to oneself. And the last thing this man wants to do is risk his life-if even to save it. For he is guided by a dread fear for his life, and has more confidence in almost anyone else's ability to protect him than his own, preferring to place himself at the mercy of the villain or in the sporadically competent hands of authorities (his line of defense consisting of locks, alarm systems, reasoning with the attacker, calling the police or, should fighting back occur to him, thrashing a heavy vase).
In short, he is a man begging for subjugation. He longs for its promise of equality in helplessness. Because only when that strange, independent alpha breed of male is helpless along with him will he feel adequate. Indeed, his freedom lies in this other man's containment.
From The Gun Free Zone, parody products.
Stay well - Stay safe - Yorktown
You don't regard a concern for your own life a worthy 'obsession'? You life has that little value? The other things are just toys. Your life isn't a toy. There's no moral equivalence here.
Check you premises. Then check your priorities.
They also seek moral superiority via the fallacy of attempting to establish the moral equivalency of any act of violence, whereby resistance to tyranny and atrocity occupies the same moral sphere. It's a desperate excuse required to evade the truth of their own cowardice.
I do, however, exempt from any condemnation those pacifists who are willing to risk life and limb in porder to render aid and assistance on the battlefield. while I may fault their logic I can not fault their courage and courage is worthy of respect.
Stay well - stay safe- Stay armed - Yorktown
Many men are likewise afraid of power tools -- especially the more fearsome of the breed, such as radial cut-off saws, and arc-welders. In the same vein, It has occurred to me that a large number of men are afraid of women -- not having developed a 'working familiarity' with them in developmental years.
There is no "Gun Fear Gene" . There is however, a very natural tendency to feel uncomfortable with firearms until you have developed an advanced level of proficiency with basic procedures -- loading/unloading, handling, etc.
This is why a person is usually better off with a revolver or single/doouble breakdown type of firearm to start with. It is inherently safer and less complicated.
I could care less if a man doesn't sppreciate guns, as long as he doesn't try to use the law to take mine away.
Pacifism does not necessarily preclude self-defense. If some people wish to be victims, then that is their right, but they have no right to demand that all of us dictate that our lives are subject to the whims of criminals. And anyone who will not act in their own self-defense, yet expects others to come to their aid simply because it is "their job", hold a point of view that is, at best, morally bankrupt.
I respectfully suggest, nay, urge, everyone here to read Jeff's Snyder's "Nation of Cowards". This collection of essays goes far deeper than the mere "right to own guns", and cuts to the ethical quick of the ideas and philosophies that underly all of our inalienable rights. Once you have read this book, you will never view the "gun debate" or the "gun grabbers" in the same way ever again, nor for that matter, the actions of our government in it's utlitarian desire to strip us of our rights and liberies.
Click on the graphic or HERE to purchase this excellent treatise on the moral obligations and responsibilities that are part and parcel of being a free people. The price is only $15 a copy and the book is a very quick and worthwhile read. It also makes for a great birthday or Christmas gift. Please note that I have no affiliation with the publisher or author of this book. My only motivation here is to inform and empower those of us who still know, honor, cherish and protect our human freedoms and dignity.
For a sample, I have the main essay from which the book is titled on my website in PDF format HERE .
Not only that, but we hear how we must be tolerant and compassionate. We must understand his rage, born of years of oppression at the hands of evil conservative Republican fat cats.
Sophistry in support of the disarming of American citizens will get you nowhere.
Suggest you rest and stay away from lunar radiation that can impact brain function and result in poor logic. A tin suit may help.
Nonetheless, have a nice day. 
You are consistent, I'll give you that.
I have a gun enthusiast friend who once asked me to participate in a little friendly target shooting. I was actually starting to get into it, when the last gun I tried tore off a healthy bit of skin from the recoil because I was holding it wrong.
You see, this puts the lie to your claim of wimpdom. You actually were getting into it. Then you got hurt due to a faulty technique. Could be you weren't instructed in the proper grip. Could be you just did it wrong that one time. But you were getting a certain amount of enjoyment out of it.
Some food for thought: Take a good training course in fundamentals. If you would care to email me privately, I would be happy to provide you with some organizations that do a very good job at this. Then go out to the range again. I'll bet you just love it. And then you'll be hooked. And I'll bet you dinner on this at the San Fernando Valley eatery of your choice if this isn't so.
Perhaps the key to this is that I acknowledge that I'm not a macho gun guy.
Maybe so. But I think if you'll look a little deeper, you'll discover a certain amount of machismo built in. It just comes with all that testosterone.
PS I love high-density urban areas because they make for great restaurants.
Can't hardly argue with you there. Although us suburban types have made some great strides in this area in recent years. -:)
A/K/A Soccer moms dads
LOL! Poor saps!!!
Jsut so. Pacifism is morally and philsophically indefensible. There is no high ground there - just a morass of contradictions...
Where on eath did you ever get the idea I was supporting disarming American Citizens. Anyone who has that idea has not read my post(s) and anyone who thinks disarming the American citizenry ois a good idea is an enemy of liberty, a nutcase such as the original author described , or a total fool. They could also be a combination of the three.
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.