How To Know When The Gun Controllers Are Lying
BY Herschel Smith
8 years, 3 months ago
This incredible paragraph appeared at Jacobin:
A few things are clear: guns are a murderous problem; the NRA is racist and reactionary; and liberals are deluded if they believe that sentencing more black men to prison for gun crimes will do anything other than send more black men to prison. Government must disarm America, including NRA members, including the police. And it is government too that must end the war on guns.
Daniel Denvir, the writer of this pitiful piece, is so confused one wonders if they have any editors at this web site and how they let such a paragraph slip through. A good editor might have thought to ask the writer, “So how are we going to disarm America is we disarm ourselves, and who will do the disarming, since, if government disarms itself they won’t have the necessary arms to disarm anyone? And as for that matter, how does creating such a war end a war?”
But they apparently don’t have good editors. At least you can give this to the author. He’s honest about his confusion, to the point that he is willing to embarrass himself writing about it to the world. The folks at Bloomberg – not so much.
The NRA is not suggesting that every aspiring gunslinger become an expert. Quite the contrary. The organization talks a lot about gun safety and runs training programs. But its priorities lie elsewhere — such as its demand that virtually every American have immediate access to firearms, without training or qualification or cause or background check, and that they be authorized to carry those firearms in public no matter how unskilled or reckless they may be. That’s one reason that there are countless cases of accidental shootings, rage-induced homicides and alcohol-fueled attacks for every rare instance of a good guy with a gun stopping a killing.
It’s always dangerous to read too much into a slogan, even a catchy one. Still, it bears repeating: A guy with a gun and good intentions is not enough to stop a bad guy with a gun. As Jason Falconer showed, it also takes a guy who’s good with a gun.
The writer is being dishonest, and he knows it. The catalog (even at this web site) of the awful muzzle and trigger discipline and behavior with guns is staggering: wrong home raids, pulling shotguns on a ten year old, pointing a pistol at a seven year old, being known as dog butchers, abusive treatment of innocent victims during a botched raid, dangerous gun play with other cops, lack of knowledge of the state of their weapons, negligent discharges, negligent discharges in an airport, killing dogs for sport, negligent discharges in police precincts, shooting each other while cleaning their weapons, hitting people on the head with guns, 600 rounds discharged in a rolling gun battle through the inner city, mistakenly shooting a gun instead of a taser, killing a man, firing a gun on a junior high campus, more negligent discharges in police stations, accidentally killing each other, shooting men in the back during raids, killing innocent men because of negligent discharges, throwing flash-bangs into baby cribs, pointing guns at city councilmen during meetings, firing rifles in court, negligent discharge of an AR-15, losing guns, 23 police officers firing 377 rounds at two men with no guns, losing machine guns, shooting each other while trying to kill dogs, and in the author’s own city, shooting 84 rounds at a man, missing with 83 of them.
The author isn’t calling for the disarming of cops, just others. That’s how you know he’s lying. He is advocating the collectivist belief in monopoly of force. He just doesn’t want you to have a gun. I did quite well the last time I was at the range, and I’ll put my ability with weapons up against most cops any day. Either way, it’s a lie to say that people who haven’t been trained in stress management can’t defend themselves. The author knows it. The author of the editorial just isn’t being as honest as the Daniel Denvir, who admitted to us that he has no idea what he’s talking about.
Here’s something else about which the author(s) should be honest. Attempting to confiscate guns or even place further controls on them risks bloody civil war. If they didn’t know that before, they do now. They’ve been told.
On September 22, 2016 at 7:01 am, Onlooker from Troy said:
They lie. They do not negotiate in good faith. They are mendacious, evil people. No compromise, no quarter.
On September 22, 2016 at 11:21 am, Douglas Mortimer said:
It has been said many times: If the cause of the anti-gunners is so righteous, they would not have to lie at every turn to promote it.
On September 22, 2016 at 12:51 pm, Haywood Jablome said:
“How To Know When The Gun Controllers Are Lying”
How? Their lips are moving!
On September 23, 2016 at 2:07 pm, Archer said:
Beat me to it. :)
On September 22, 2016 at 1:15 pm, MattBracken said:
“As soon as we get rid of the guns, we can impose our perfect utopia on all you morons.”
Good luck with that.
On September 22, 2016 at 1:25 pm, GA Patriot said:
How does starting a war with 100 Million armed people make peace?
On September 22, 2016 at 1:57 pm, Fred said:
“The NRA is not suggesting that every aspiring gunslinger become an expert.”
Socialists always give themselves away. If everybody is the same honey, then there are no experts and you are a collectivist.
On September 22, 2016 at 2:12 pm, Herschel Smith said:
Interesting point Fred, one that had escaped me when I first read this. One would expect abilities to follow a Gaussian distribution, and thus everyone cannot be an “expert,” otherwise that denies the whole concept.
On September 22, 2016 at 2:01 pm, SGT.BAG said:
A magazine named after French revolutionaries who engaged in the Reign of Terror and the War on the Vendee’ would be laughable if the slaughter hadn’t been so extensive.
I doubt if they know the true meaning of Jacobin.
On September 22, 2016 at 10:44 pm, guest said:
I don’t think we can assume they’re ignorant or just joking with the name they’ve chosen for themselves. I think it’s a clear and obvious signal that shows exactly how they view the world, and exactly what they intend to do with any power they may gain. It couldn’t be any clearer if they called their house organ “Chekha Magazine” or “Khmer Rouge Magazine.”
On September 22, 2016 at 4:16 pm, Don Calderalo said:
Perhaps Mr. Denver would have the courage of his convictions and, rather than dispatching the goons of the state to disarm me, come to my house and do it himself.
On September 22, 2016 at 10:41 pm, guest said:
“Jacobin?” Well named. Jacobins were the Khmer Rouge of the French Revolution.
It’s always convenient when your enemy chooses such a label, one that lets you know exactly how they view the world and their place in it, how they view us, and how they wish to proceed.
Plan and prepare accordingly, and remember what happened to the Jacobins in the end.