| Submit your comments on this article | |
| -Land of the Free | |
| Gun ownership a personal choice | |
| 2017-10-16 | |
So, in the author's mind, using insults in a public debate is evidence of an IQ greater than shoe size. What rationale is crucial to condemning the vilest act of premeditated murder since Wounded Knee, or to respond to criticisms of a stricken nation’s understandably emotional appeals to government to end this senselessness regardless of the cost politically? Statistics are a poor barometer of a nation’s despair. Statistics are the tools of the statist. Very well put. By the way: the nation wasn't stricken. 159 people were hit with bullets fired from an individual who sought to do as much damage as he could before he checked out. You may want to take the Las Vegas shooting personally, and you may want to display your pain/anger for the world to see, but it doesn't take away from the fact that a crime was committed. Even the NRA reacted to this outrage with a sympathetic (if meager) softening of its rigid code! The board at the NRA will pay for their statements post massacre, with resignations. Very, very few people I know of, in and out of the NRA think the statement recommending the banning of a firearm accessory was a great idea. Because not a single argument for the proliferation of guns in America will hold water anymore. This, then, may come as a shock. Following the election of a pro gun president, individuals dumped firearms onto the market, on the understanding they no longer had the government to fear. Silly, it is true, but it does point out that in some cases disarmament took place conoletely without government intervention. Who would liberals enslave? And why? 1) Everyone. 2) They're a buncha control freaks. Well, maybe one would barter a gagged Rush Limbaugh (or someone of that ilk) for a hamster. And yes, if anybody were to threaten that one’s family with violence, he would defend them with a gun, if one were within reach. Some occasions are not suitable for over-thinking. Many liberals own firearms; many conservatives don’t. But we’re nothing but bi-partisan among the list of casualties. Because no one is safe anymore, anywhere, at anytime. Freedom is a dangerous concept, fraught with dangers from dangerous people who can only can be stopped by other people with firearms. But the option of rejecting guns as opposed to owning one calls for a personal decision, not a political one. In that one sentence, this writer has encapsulated the thinking of 90 percent of the population with regard to firearms: the 2nd Amendment only applies to me and to no one else. Some, tragically, are not able to wait with the survivors ‘til the day that choice is hopefully no longer available. Noe Serna, Lima | |
| Posted by:badanov |
| #1 Not really a personal decision when one has been raised in the ‘shadow’ of WW2. Aside from the colonial traits of filling the winter larder many of US are not necessarily driven by choice as much as haunted by our father’s memories of the horror of no recourse. |
| Posted by: Skidmark 2017-10-16 13:09 |