skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Muddy Waters
They
gun nuts are frenetically throwing out one thing after another to muddy
the waters, and sow confusion. They are quite good at that, having much
experience. It comes from constantly having to defend positions that are
basically indefensible. This shooting in Aurora is about as clear-cut
an argument for sane gun laws as you will ever find. Yet those opposed
to reforming the laws refuse to recognize facts, or even reality. Hence,
the widely-repeated comic-book scenario, involving an heroic armed
theatergoer, who would have miraculously stopped James Holmes in his
tracks. That is, if only the movie theater didn't force it's customers
to disarm themselves before attending a show.
Such an appeal,
as absurd as it might be, resonates strongly with a lot of Americans who
grew up absorbing a popular culture diet chock-full of such nonsense.
In particular, men are prone to fantasize about performing a deed so
heroic that it would instantly erase all of their feelings of impotent
rage. Feelings which stubbornly persist no matter how well-armed they
become. All those guns and no place to go. And, as we now know, the only
heroes in this colossal tragedy were the men who were themselves
unarmed, but sacrificed their own lives to save the lives of those they
loved.
Let me get this straight: In order to be a hero, one must helplessly hunch over other potential victims and just take the bullet?
ReplyDeleteWhy is it that liberals believe that "hero" and "victim" are synonymous?
If you want to cower in the corner and patiently await your turn to become the next victim, go right ahead. I, on the hand, prefer to carry a firearm and have, at least, a fighting chance.
Why does the left still live in a fantasy world where criminals obey the law? There is a reason we call some people criminals; because they are not concerned following the law.
Guns were not permitted inside that particular theater. How’d that work out for those helpless victims. Aurora Colorado does have plenty of laws designed to preclude such tragedies, it is against the law to shoot innocent people, and illegal to kill people, yet a criminal shot and killed lots of people.
What a shocker! A criminal broke the law and was so bold as to violate the gun ban instituted by the theater. And I bet you guys thought that of all things; a murderer would at least have respect for the rules of a movie theater.
I will bet this guy did not even silence his cell phone ringer during the film. I think we also need stricter cell phone ringer rules. Quick, put a call in to Nancy Pelosi and Michael Bloomberg!
What is the “reality” that us “gun nuts” refuse to recognize? Is it that gun crimes are far more prevalent in gun controlled areas (places like NY and Chicago with “sane” gun laws)? Is it that the Brady Bill had NO effect on the number of gun crimes? Is it that the anti-gun lobby cannot tell me what the hell an “assault rifle” is? Is it that most of the anti-gun nuts have never fired or even held a gun and are simply afraid of what they cannot understand?
I got it! Let's push for a new law that states that criminals must now obey all laws. Imagine, a world without crime, and so easy to achieve, if not for those damn conservatives.
I think you are stretching the definition of the word "criminal" just a bit to include James Holmes. The issue here is not crime; rather it is the ridiculous ease with which a unhinged individual can acquire an arsenal. Don't you think Holmes should have been made to answer perhaps a couple of questions before buying all of that shit? Preferably, by someone other then a goddamn sales clerk. How about making him talk to someone in law enforcement first? He still gets to buy his guns after he explains what he wants them for. Is that too much to ask?
ReplyDeleteAs far as your apparent desire to fill up movie theaters with armed individuals, I won't even dignify that with a rebuttal. I will point out however that a man was arrested in Ohio over this past weekend in a movie theater that was showing the Dark Knight. He walked in a half-hour before showtime and sat in the back row. An alert off-duty cop working security noticed the bag he was carrying and asked to look inside. The man complied and inside was a Glock 9 mm pistol and extra magazines.
He had no carry permit, and a search of his house turned up more guns, more ammunition, body armor, and a gas mask. Do you want this fucker sitting next to your kids next time you go to the movies? Will it make you feel safer knowing that everyone in the theater is armed? Irrespective of whether they have any business owning a gun in the first place?
Your logic escapes me entirely Warren. And, who gives a shit what you call the rifle Holmes used? Was it an "assault rifle"? Well, he certainly assaulted a lot of people with it. For the record, the rifle he used is a knockoff version of the AR-15 semi-automatic rifle, which is the civilian version of the M-16 military rifle. The latter weapon belongs to the family of guns known as assault rifles. The only significant difference between the two rifles is the automatic fire function. Holmes's rifle could not fire on full automatic because there is a ban on the civilian possession of machine guns in this country. Still, with a 100-round drum-style magazine he could have achieved a rate-of-fire of roughly 60 rounds-per-minute.
See that? An advocate of gun control just spoke about guns with complete authority. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.
"Complete Authority"? You still fail to define an assault rifle as did the Brady Bill. Either willfully or kust out of sheer ignorance, the left cannot define the guns it wants to ban. Perhaps because the real goal is to ban all guns.
ReplyDeleteAnyone with a basic understanding of a semi-automatic gun can create a pretty devastating automatic.
I know the AR-15 rather well, and will tell you that, while sporting an intimidating appearance, I have hunting rifles that are far more lethal, but are not yet branded as "assault rifles".
I give a shit what a gun is labeled because those labels are used in legal definitions when the government attempts to ban various guns. A simple revolver could easily fit into some definitions of assault weopons.
I do not want movie theaters filled woth guns, but I am not naive enough to think that they are currently gun free; therefore, I will be sure to not leave myself open to being a helpless victim.