RE: Why More Americans Want to Own Guns
February 20, 2016 at 11:58 am
(This post was last modified: February 20, 2016 at 12:14 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
As I said, liberties with fact and context..not wrong, because they aren't meant to be accurate, they're meant to be funny. Not -even- wrong, to borrow the phrase.
People don't actually have guns for home defense. Their use tells you, with better accuracy, what people have guns for... than what they say they have guns for on an NRA poll or internet convo. I don't have guns for home defense, but I have many guns, and my ownership of those guns is not predicate on a justification of home defense in any case, nor is the ownership of those who -do- have guns for self defense predicate on that justification. It's a complete non-issue in context to the gun debate, so how can it -possibly- be a point in that debate? If the "home defense" crowd is wrong and being ridiculous, it doesn't matter. If the home defense crowd is right and absolutely not silly.....it still doesn't matter.
Gun bans probably would be effective against mass shootings (they have been elsewhere)..though I doubt that their effect wuld be as total as it;s been seen to be in some other nations, but they wouldn't do anything to our gun problem..which is that people are committing suicide and getting murdered, while it would come at a great fundamental cost in liberty and a gross disservice to anyone -not- currently engaged in or previously convicted of criminal acts. It's an emotionally charged issue where one can appeal to a statistically insignificant "problem" as a means of painting their opposition in a corner where they might be labeled as callous. It's a lever, the "problem" is not actually that mass shootings occur, the problem is that people have guns..and that's the problem which proponents of this sort seek to rectify- because they will plainly -not- address the problem of suicide and murder. There are even better ways to solve the mass shooting problem specifically, and they don't require a challenge to the 2nd amendment...but those aren't suitable, because they don't address the -actual- problem those people see. Guns. This is emotional blackmail, not sound debate or policy making.
It can be made very funny as a caricature of our gun problem, gun policy, and gun debate..though, which is what jeffries did. I'm sure this surprises no one, that a comedian made a funny.
People don't actually have guns for home defense. Their use tells you, with better accuracy, what people have guns for... than what they say they have guns for on an NRA poll or internet convo. I don't have guns for home defense, but I have many guns, and my ownership of those guns is not predicate on a justification of home defense in any case, nor is the ownership of those who -do- have guns for self defense predicate on that justification. It's a complete non-issue in context to the gun debate, so how can it -possibly- be a point in that debate? If the "home defense" crowd is wrong and being ridiculous, it doesn't matter. If the home defense crowd is right and absolutely not silly.....it still doesn't matter.
Gun bans probably would be effective against mass shootings (they have been elsewhere)..though I doubt that their effect wuld be as total as it;s been seen to be in some other nations, but they wouldn't do anything to our gun problem..which is that people are committing suicide and getting murdered, while it would come at a great fundamental cost in liberty and a gross disservice to anyone -not- currently engaged in or previously convicted of criminal acts. It's an emotionally charged issue where one can appeal to a statistically insignificant "problem" as a means of painting their opposition in a corner where they might be labeled as callous. It's a lever, the "problem" is not actually that mass shootings occur, the problem is that people have guns..and that's the problem which proponents of this sort seek to rectify- because they will plainly -not- address the problem of suicide and murder. There are even better ways to solve the mass shooting problem specifically, and they don't require a challenge to the 2nd amendment...but those aren't suitable, because they don't address the -actual- problem those people see. Guns. This is emotional blackmail, not sound debate or policy making.
It can be made very funny as a caricature of our gun problem, gun policy, and gun debate..though, which is what jeffries did. I'm sure this surprises no one, that a comedian made a funny.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
