{"id":9133,"date":"2012-12-18T06:01:40","date_gmt":"2012-12-18T06:01:40","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/2012\/12\/18\/on-calls-for-a-conversation-about-guns\/"},"modified":"2012-12-18T06:01:40","modified_gmt":"2012-12-18T06:01:40","slug":"on-calls-for-a-conversation-about-guns","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/2012\/12\/18\/on-calls-for-a-conversation-about-guns\/","title":{"rendered":"On Calls for a ‘Conversation’ About Guns"},"content":{"rendered":"

Liberals often call for 'a conversation' or a 'dialogue' about this or that.  Didn't Eric Holder a while back call for a 'conversation' on race?  What have we been talking about for 150 years?  Same with guns.  Our liberal pals must know that the gun debate has been raging for decades.  So what does a liberal mean when he calls for a 'conversation' about guns?<\/span><\/p>\n

He means: You conservatives and libertarians shut up and acquiesce in our position.  Kurt Schlichter gets it right<\/a>:<\/span><\/p>\n

. . . we\u2019re not supposed to have what people might commonly describe as a \u201cconversation\u201d at all. We\u2019re supposed to shut-up and listen as liberals, barely masking their unseemly delight at the opportunity, try to pin the murder rampage of one degenerate creep on millions of law-abiding Americans who did nothing wrong. The conversation is then supposed to end with us waiving our fundamental right to self-defense.
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

Because that is what the goal is \u2013 a total ban on the private ownership of firearms. There\u2019s always another \u201ccommon sense\u201d gun law which fails because it is targeted at law-abiding citizens and not criminals, thereby inviting another round of onerous new restrictions until finally no citizen is keeping or bearing anything more than a dull butter knife.<\/span><\/p>\n

Well, almost no citizens. \u201cGun control\u201d means all guns under the control of the government and available only to it and, of course, to politically connected cronies. Gun-grabbing poser Michael Bloomberg is going to be surrounded by enough fire power to remake the movie Heat<\/em>. He\u2019s always going to be protected. The purpose of gun control is to ensure that we aren\u2019t.<\/span><\/p>\n

So let\u2019s have that conversation, and let\u2019s lay the cards on the table. Modern firearms (which really aren\u2019t that modern) are highly effective weapons in the hands of an evil little freak who gets off shooting children. They are also highly effective weapons in my hands when defending my children from evil little freaks. <\/span><\/p>\n

Liberals ask why I need these weapons. The answer is simple. I\u2019m going to be as well-armed or better armed than the threat. Period.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

See also:  The U.S. Has Already Had a Conversation About Guns — and the Pro Side Won<\/a>.<\/span><\/p>\n

\n\"Shooting-victims-violated-twice\"<\/a><\/p>\n

\nRelated articles<\/legend>\n
\n
\"\"<\/a>Liberals Coming After Our Guns<\/a><\/div>\n
\"\"<\/a>The Government Cannot Take Away Our Guns<\/a><\/div>\n
\"\"<\/a>Mexico Shows That Tight Gun Control Laws Don't Guarantee Compliance<\/a><\/div>\n
\"\"<\/a>"There is, of course, no way to monitor the conversations that take place in living rooms around the country. But we can measure the frequency with which phrases related to gun policy are used by the news media."<\/a><\/div>\n
\"\"<\/a>On Newtown and Gun Control: The Difficult Response<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/fieldset>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Liberals often call for 'a conversation' or a 'dialogue' about this or that.  Didn't Eric Holder a while back call for a 'conversation' on race?  What have we been talking about for 150 years?  Same with guns.  Our liberal pals must know that the gun debate has been raging for decades.  So what does a liberal … Continue reading “On Calls for a ‘Conversation’ About Guns”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[112,32],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-9133","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-alcohol-tobacco-and-firearms","category-current-affairs"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9133","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=9133"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9133\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=9133"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=9133"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=9133"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}