Tolerant, open-minded gun-control fans wish for murder against NRA head and members

Posted by: Phineas on December 17, 2012 at 7:20 pm

**Posted by Phineas

Because, of course, the NRA, which was founded to promote marksmanship and responsible firearms practice, is somehow to blame for the actions of a madman:

And that’s not the only one, believe me.

Like Jonah Goldberg, I’d suggest “Angry Democrat” and anyone sharing his fantasy think twice about attacking NRA headquarters. Unlike the “gun-free zones” liberals think will magically keep people safe, I can guarantee there are no defenseless victims waiting for an avenging angel there.

PS: Just to clarify, before someone accuses me of being a gun-nut. I do not own a firearm, nor do I have the desire to own one. I do however, believe in a natural right to self-defense and I believe the authors of the 2nd amendment were wise in recognizing that right. (Note: “recognizing,” not “granting.”) I therefore have no problem with responsible adults owning firearms for self-defense, sport, or hunting. And I have no problem with responsible, law-abiding adults carrying weapons, whether concealed or open. Society might well be safer if more people did. I do, however, have a huge problem with people who encourage the denial of those rights to millions of responsible, law-abiding adults –a form of collective punishment– because of the horrific actions of a few individuals.

RELATED: Fellow Californian Kurt Schlichter says “Sure, let’s have that conversation about guns.” It is must-reading. Contrary to popular gun-control fantasies, research shows mass shootings are not on the rise. And there is some evidence that both violence and gun ownership are on the decline in the US. Dana Loesch looks at Sandy Hook and other recent mass-killings and argues why gun-control is not the answer. Australia’s Tim Blair argues that more guns means fewer deaths. Finally, Glenn Reynolds has a series of excellent questions for gun-control advocates. My two favorites:

If you’re a media member or politician, do you have armed security? Do you have a permit for a gun yourself? (I’m asking you Dianne Feinstein!) If so, what makes your life more valuable than other people’s?

…and…

Have you talked about “Fast and Furious?” Do you even know what it is? Do you care less when brown people die?

Can’t wait for the answers.

(Crossposted at Public Secrets)

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Trackbacks

10 Responses to “Tolerant, open-minded gun-control fans wish for murder against NRA head and members”

Comments

  1. Here’s one of those anti-gun liberals urging the murder of Americans with different views. He’s a member of the State Democratic Executive Committee here in Texas — which means he is one of the top party officials in the state! John Cobarruvias is quite a piece of work — http://rhymeswithright.mu.nu/archives/335732.php

  2. Drew the Infidel says:

    The sensationalism the left tries to attach to isolated tragic incidents like this is despicable. They wallow in the blood of innocent Americans while advocating for the abrogation of Constitutional liberties of other innocent Americans. It is a statistical lie on the same order as the fact that thousands of airplanes land and take off safely at O’Hare Airport every day about which nothing is said but let one single-engine Cessna spin in with no casualties and it is sprayed all over the media as “Plane Crashes at O’Hare!”.

  3. Sefton says:

    As usual, liberals are knee-jerk emotive reacting to an issue. And, as usual, they’re wrong on what they think will be the desired result.
    I commented on the earlier topic regarding this; they’re going the wrong direction with this. Fewer guns will not equal a safer environment. Israel arms their elementary teachers because they know the world they live in. I know this is anathema to liberals to even broach this topic, but this is exactly what we need to do. If nothing else, it provides a deterent to any lunatic who might be considering a school for his target.
    Illegal weapons, whether they are automatic or semi-automatic will still be obtained by those who intend to carry out these shootings regardless of the laws currently on the books or the ones the Democrats want to add. (What if the next mass shooting involves a shotgun or someone with a sniper rifle {U.T. Tower or the D.C. shootings anyone?}). Criminals are so named because they don’t care about laws.

  4. Carlos says:

    Some notes: The “nutjob” The Angry Democrat proposes will be either some apolitical nutjob like in the Arizona killings or, more likely (as is the case with most mass killings, apparently) a lib/socialist loose nut acting out his projections.

    : The reason for the Second Amendment was for self-protection – against the GOVERNMENT! And the longer the posier stays in the Peoples’ House, the more that self-protection is needed.

    : The old adage, “When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns” may be more true already than folks think. How many congresspeople (Senate and House) carry concealed or have permits? (Hello, Dianne!)

  5. myballs says:

    The 2nd Amendment gives us the right to own a gun, not the right to be stupid, foolish or careless with them. Anyone owning one has an absolute obligation to care for, handle and store them safely. This guy, as well as the Arizona guy, were both mentally ill, but still had access to guns. That is what should be addressed….the access. And to teach a chile with Asberger’s to handle and use a gun…this falls into the stiupid or foolish file.

  6. Tom TB says:

    Think of how many laws that this monster broke BEFORE he entered the school. Unlawful use of a firearm by a minor (21 is the legal age for a handgun in CT), killing his own Mother (matricide has been illegal always), stealing his now dead moms guns and her vehicle and driving on the public road without a carry permit…we need more laws? Why; for criminals to ignore?

  7. Carlos says:

    Yeah, the kid had Asberger’s or autism, and apparently mommy owned a semi-automatic.

    Why did mommy own a semi in the first place? Was she an avid outdoors person or an avid target shooter trying to impress some guy with her studliness? The only reason I can see to own such a weapon is for the original intent of the Second Amendment, to protect myself against an oppresive government, to have arms as powerful as theirs.

    And unless THAT is true, she surely falls into the beyond-help-stupid category, having such a weapon around a child with the mental/psychological/physical problems the killer had, let alone having the other guns available to him, also.

  8. Liz says:

    It always goes back to we, as a society, must teach nonviolence and peaceful solutions to our problems. The gun was not the issue. As was reported here…even Ghandi believed in the second amendment. But he also believed in nonviolence. Yes, my fellow liberals, you can believe in both!!Look at childrens video games, TV shows, movies and even books. There is no religion or mention of God in our schools. There has been elimination of the 10 commandments…thou shalt not killl, anyone?… so the moral compass is up for grabs and we degenerate with each passing moment.

  9. Zippy says:

    The issue is mental health and immediately it becomes gun control and anyone who supports GC is a nut job. I’m tired of liberal eegits who think punishment of the masses is a cure to the disease. The disease is liberal stupidity..that’s another mental disorder!

    FYI anyone see reports that FB will suspend accounts who refute the MSM reporting on this massacre? Rumor..?