If I've got this right, then the way yesterday should have gone down would have been something like this, right? At 11:00 a.m., when two masked and armed gunmen walked into the Inland Regional Center in San Bernadino, fourteen people would not have been murdered and seventeen more been wounded if the holiday revelers at an institution serving clients with disabilities had been armed. These folks. Not all of them maybe, right?--but at least some of them.
Since the two attackers did their horrific work with assault rifles, legally bought and purchased by the way, that horrible tragedy (one of two yesterday), coming just a week or so after a similar bloody assault in Colorado Springs, would have been boldly thwarted had those who were victims of the assault been similarly armed with their own AK-47s.
Is that what most every Republican is arguing? Am I hearing them right? If the hosts of the Inland Regional Center's annual Christmas party had at least hired guards with assault rifles, then we'd have had no horror because the only thing that stops two bad guys with AK-47s--whatever their cause--is two good guys with AK-47s.
Since the two attackers did their horrific work with assault rifles, legally bought and purchased by the way, that horrible tragedy (one of two yesterday), coming just a week or so after a similar bloody assault in Colorado Springs, would have been boldly thwarted had those who were victims of the assault been similarly armed with their own AK-47s.
Is that what most every Republican is arguing? Am I hearing them right? If the hosts of the Inland Regional Center's annual Christmas party had at least hired guards with assault rifles, then we'd have had no horror because the only thing that stops two bad guys with AK-47s--whatever their cause--is two good guys with AK-47s.
That's the argument.
Yesterday, I walked into a local high school. What I or any other visitor really needed to know in a place like that is that someone somewhere has an assault rifle down his pants or in his jacket because should a similarly armed madman or madwoman killer come in to wreak havoc, the student body has to be wielding at equal power, if not more, because the more weaponry good people have, the safer good people are. Isn't that right?
Yesterday I would have been able to feel most safe in that high school (this one happened to be a Christian high school, but that's no matter), if lots of students were carrying guns--and most safe if everyone carried at least something--sawed-off shotguns for freshman, sidearms for sophomores, rifles for juniors, but you got to be a senior to tote an AK-47. How's that?
It is, of course, absurd to think that people with disabilities, including mental disabilities, should be given assault rifles, but isn't that the ruthless end of the logic? There would have been no blood at the Christmas party if all 400 people were armed.
Reductio ad Absurdum, we call it, right?--in order to counter the argument, I'm reducing it to absurdity.
Yesterday, an ex-lawmaker from Arkansas named Jay Dickey admitted he was wrong about thwarting legislation to have the Center for Disease Control study the issue of gun violence in America. The Republicans, led by their superheroes in the NRA, nixed funding for any such research way back in the 90s already, Dickey himself putting his name on the legislation. You know what study might lead to--gun control.
Yesterday, I walked into a local high school. What I or any other visitor really needed to know in a place like that is that someone somewhere has an assault rifle down his pants or in his jacket because should a similarly armed madman or madwoman killer come in to wreak havoc, the student body has to be wielding at equal power, if not more, because the more weaponry good people have, the safer good people are. Isn't that right?
Yesterday I would have been able to feel most safe in that high school (this one happened to be a Christian high school, but that's no matter), if lots of students were carrying guns--and most safe if everyone carried at least something--sawed-off shotguns for freshman, sidearms for sophomores, rifles for juniors, but you got to be a senior to tote an AK-47. How's that?
It is, of course, absurd to think that people with disabilities, including mental disabilities, should be given assault rifles, but isn't that the ruthless end of the logic? There would have been no blood at the Christmas party if all 400 people were armed.
Reductio ad Absurdum, we call it, right?--in order to counter the argument, I'm reducing it to absurdity.
Yesterday, an ex-lawmaker from Arkansas named Jay Dickey admitted he was wrong about thwarting legislation to have the Center for Disease Control study the issue of gun violence in America. The Republicans, led by their superheroes in the NRA, nixed funding for any such research way back in the 90s already, Dickey himself putting his name on the legislation. You know what study might lead to--gun control.
Nope. Allowing the CDC money to study guns in our culture is nothing more than a slippery slope. No money to fund a study, just a study. Just some smart people doing research. No, saith the demi-gods at the NRA. No, saith the Republican faithful.
Except the man whose name is on the legislation. NOW Jay Dickey himself regrets it. According to the Huffington Post, Dickey admitted that he wished he had the opportunity to do it again because he'd reverse ground. "I wish we had started the proper research and kept it going all this time," Dickey said. "I have regrets."
The thing is, he can have regrets today: he's no longer in Congress or running for office. But don't look for any such reversals on the part of any Republican candidates for President.
I just hope that when they whip the Democrats in next year's Presidential election, President Cruz or Trump asks for legislation to arm all of us. That's what we need--free guns for a free people. What needs to happen in the land of the free and the home of the brave is that we stop this epidemic of mass killings by arming every man, woman, and child because the only thing to stop a bad man with a gun is a good man or woman or kid with a gun.
Who needs free guns? We're well on the way on our own. The Associated Press reported the FBI “processed a record 185,345 background checks” on Black Friday this year. Do the math--that roughly two per second that day. I'm feeling safer already. We're the only country in the world where there are more guns than people.
Reductio ad Absurdum.
Except the man whose name is on the legislation. NOW Jay Dickey himself regrets it. According to the Huffington Post, Dickey admitted that he wished he had the opportunity to do it again because he'd reverse ground. "I wish we had started the proper research and kept it going all this time," Dickey said. "I have regrets."
The thing is, he can have regrets today: he's no longer in Congress or running for office. But don't look for any such reversals on the part of any Republican candidates for President.
I just hope that when they whip the Democrats in next year's Presidential election, President Cruz or Trump asks for legislation to arm all of us. That's what we need--free guns for a free people. What needs to happen in the land of the free and the home of the brave is that we stop this epidemic of mass killings by arming every man, woman, and child because the only thing to stop a bad man with a gun is a good man or woman or kid with a gun.
Who needs free guns? We're well on the way on our own. The Associated Press reported the FBI “processed a record 185,345 background checks” on Black Friday this year. Do the math--that roughly two per second that day. I'm feeling safer already. We're the only country in the world where there are more guns than people.
Reductio ad Absurdum.
7 comments:
Hey Jimmy:
Did you ever hear of the concept of sin or total depravity? It requires no study and research dollars... sinful men pull triggers... the secret service carries guns needed to protect our president...by the way, California has the strictest gun laws in the country... it does not require more study to figure-out that Islamic terrorists believe in a culture of death and they plan on killing all of us infidels...
JT
King James 2000 Bible
Then said he unto them, But now, he that has a purse, let him take it, and likewise his bag: and he that has no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.
thanks,
jh
Pacifism?
I have 8 grand children, 4 children and 4 son and daughter in laws, as a father and grandfather I believe they need to be protected and defended! that is the primary goal of our government and me as a parent. I do not think the Bible teaches that we sit by while our loved ones are tortured, killed and raped. I am thankful for the 2nd amendment.
I thought I heard it all when you blamed guns for the San Bernadino slaughter.
However, Erin Burnett, CNN suggested post-partum depression as a cause that sent the two terrorist into a killing spree rampage. She seemed to have over-looked a few bits of telling evidence like pipe bombs and the Facebook ISIS praise, to name a few.
Post-partum....?
Heck, my wife slammed a few cupboard doors.... come on!
Homepage why not find out more informative post try this navigate to these guys visit our website
w5e26e6c32 h0y27r6k62 n4v50z3e41 d5s43z9g60 a0f82p8e95 y6j17q8k68
Post a Comment