Iraq vet: Newtown changed my mind on gun control....

[ChrryBlstr]

"The Second Amendment stopped giving the insurrectionists among us a chance as soon as military technology advanced beyond the rifle. No modern Shays? Rebellion is viable, militarily speaking, unless the Second Amendment is read to protect an individual?s right to bear surface to air missiles, personally owned Abrams tanks and state-sanctioned depleted uranium artillery."

This statement succinctly addresses Golden Taint's (and others') rationale for bearing arms.

http://www.salon.com/2012/12/28/iraq_vet_newtown_changed_my_mind_on_gun_control/

 

[ChrryBlstr]

"As I reconsidered my logic and let go of my previous rationale, the only remaining argument in my mind was the old standby,?Guns don?t kill people, people kill people.? That is undeniable. But given the fact that the UK, France, Germany, Japan and Australia collectively have more people than the U.S. and only .05% the gun deaths, it is now obvious to me that the complete story veiled behind the ?guns don?t kill people? half truth is: ?Guns don?t kill people, but when people have access to guns, they kill a lot more innocent people than they otherwise could.?

 

[GoldenTaint]

"The Second Amendment stopped giving the insurrectionists among us a chance as soon as military technology advanced beyond the rifle. No modern Shays? Rebellion is viable, militarily speaking, unless the Second Amendment is read to protect an individual?s right to bear surface to air missiles, personally owned Abrams tanks and state-sanctioned depleted uranium artillery."

This statement succinctly addresses Golden Taint's (and others') rationale for bearing arms.

http://www.salon.com/2012/12/28/iraq_vet_newtown_changed_my_mind_on_gun_control/

Guns are so useless and ineffective that...we need to disarm civilians pronto. I understand you're an education major, CB, hence rational thinking does not come easily, but perhaps if you ponder my words for a few hours you will see the disconnect in your argument.

 

[GoldenTaint]

"As I reconsidered my logic and let go of my previous rationale, the only remaining argument in my mind was the old standby,?Guns don?t kill people, people kill people.? That is undeniable. But given the fact that the UK, France, Germany, Japan and Australia collectively have more people than the U.S. and only .05% the gun deaths, it is now obvious to me that the complete story veiled behind the ?guns don?t kill people? half truth is: ?Guns don?t kill people, but when people have access to guns, they kill a lot more innocent people than they otherwise could.?

Two points:

1) he's avoids mentioining that governments that disarmed their citizenry killed over 100,000,000 people last century. He's only talking about private citizens, he has no problem with government employees owning guns. In other words, he is trying to recreate the exact conditions that have historically led to the greatest numbers of slaughtered innocents - by trying to disarm innocent and otherwise defenseless private citicens.

2) the difference between the US and, say, Germany, or ever better Switzerland, is not gun control, it's that we have 80 million blacks and browns in our population, and their rate of violence is much higher than is found among whites, whether Germans, Swiss or Americans. In fact, if you look it up, the white American rate of violence is lower than the crime rate in the UK. Crime is basically a function of race. The media won't say that because it dosen't fit their PC taboos.

 

[GoldenTaint]

 

[yyz]

I agree 100%

 

[Cie]

No brainer.

 

[ChrryBlstr]

I understand you're an education major, CB.

= incorrect

Crime is basically a function of race.

= incorrect, problematic, sad, simplistic, ignorant