Saturday, March 26, 2011

Sensible gun control

Sensible gun control laws. A phrase I hear from cowards all the time.

When I say "cowards," about 90% of the time I'm referring to liberals. And to me, the term "Liberal" is synonymous with "Pacifist," with "Coward," with "Logically Challenged," with "Employment Deficient," and anyone with a San Francisco zip code.

So, when I hear appeals for sensible gun control laws from liberals and liberal politicians, I can't help but chuckle.

This is where the "Logically Challenged" label comes in. Liberals mistakenly believe that if there were sensible gun control laws, there would be no senseless violence.

Only a liberal could honestly believe that. But that's where the label of "Coward" comes in because cowards like to play make-believe a lot and like to deny reality.

I was listening to a conservative talking head on the radio last night on my way back into town. The topic was illegal drugs and the drug war.

Stupid me, I thought we already had sensible drug laws--yet we have a drug war going on. A war that we're losing. We're not losing it because it's not winnable. We're losing it because the Liberals are in charge of it.

When it comes to the drug war and things like that, Republican and Democrat have nothing to do with being liberal or conservative. Fact of the matter is, most politicians--of any stripe--are cowards, as well as being logically challenged.

The solution, according to a slew of politicians and their learned supporters from great bastions of courage and freedom like Harvard, Yale and Stanford was that Education is the key to winning the drug war.

If we just educate people about drugs, then nobody will want to do drugs is what they're asking us to believe.

But when I ask these same numbnuts how about Education for all Americans in regards to firearms and firearms handling and ownership and if that wouldn't decrease the senseless violence they're moaning about. . . the room gets awful quiet, awful quick.

Then I point out that we've been "educating" generation after generation of Americans about illegal drugs since the early 60's. We've also made a lot of laws against illegal drugs.

Yet, we still have illegal drugs everywhere.

So I then ask the Logically-Challenged why sensible gun control laws will stop the senseless violence they're fretting over--if the majority of the violence is being committed by the same segment of society that we've been "educating" for one generation after another about illegal drugs?

You see, the concept of "criminal" doesn't enter the thinking of a Liberal because a Liberal thinks that education will solve everything.

But wait a minute. . . aren't our public schools all run by liberals?

Hard for a Liberal to make an effective argument for sensible gun control laws when every single other solution to society's ills that they've put forth have failed dismally.

And that senseless violence? The overwhelming majority of it is crime-on-crime violence, and I don't consider it senseless. Instead, I consider it much like when wildfires burn out of control in California--where the liberals have enacted sensible environmental laws to protect against clear-cutting and the clearing of underbrush.

In other words, when nature runs its course, it will eventually clean out its own undergrowth. Back during my days in law enforcement, we used to consider it only a misdemeanor murder when one gangster shot and killed another gangster. We never broke a sweat over it. The liberals cried that "there would be a gang war."

Again, there's that analogy to forest fires again and clearing out the underbrush of society.

No crime in our neighborhood. We all have jobs, we know each other, we watch out for each other, and we're armed. To the teeth.

That's what's sensible to me.


Anonymous said...

Yep. Like I said at my own blog, it's such a funny thing about liberals — they want to teach you how to handle your naughty bits in school so bad things don’t happen, but if you mentioned teaching kids gun handling in school they’d all go into shit fits about how “bad things might happen, somebody might accidentally get shot!”

An Ordinary American said...

The irony and hypocrisy of academics, educators and liberals. . .

I'm glad we're about to pass Concealed Carry for our college campuses here in Texas. Of course, the private schools of fairness and wisdom, like SMU, TCU, Rice, Baylor, et al, will probably say "no" to letting students legally protect themselves.

And that will be an advertisement for serial rapists and muggers.


Thor said...

Perhaps the next time that some violent crime happens at an "Institution of Higher Learning" that bans the right to self defense by banning guns those schools will get sued. After all, if a person is in my house, I feel obligated to protect them and anybody else in my house from criminal activity. Perhaps were there enough lawsuits to find these colleges at fault, they would change their ways?

An Ordinary American said...

You'd like to think so, except that here in Texas, the public schools can claim "sovereign immunity" from prosecution (civil) and virtually any and every elected state judge will grant it.

Besides, the liberal academics would simply moan, whine and then publish another piece of paper suitable for hanging in the men's room of a prison as to how arming people is always a bad idea. . .

That's why they're liberals and academics--no common sense and no experience in the real world.