Apparently there was a SCOTUS decision in the past week that held some significance to the US 2nd AMendment supporters and their ilk. I am not writing about that.
One of the blogs I came across had this photo as its header...
I won't identify the blog (I enjoy going there from time to time) but they sure as hell need to remember a couple things.
Like, first, I presume these are the people who have RKBA. They are the "responsible gun owners" of America.
Now, take a look at that photo again.
Quite apart from the fact that Dad and son are having a great time with dad's gun. What JOY on dad's face, what pride. Does he realise that son's left hand has at least one finger and likely two inside the trigger guard? Which side is the safety on? Not being a pistol guy I don't know. Is it on the left? Is it still on? Is that damned thing LOADED?
And is mum reaching out to smack his hand away from the pistol? Or to pat her darling son on the head?
America, these are the kind of people who have the right to keep and bear arms.
5 comments:
What you have is something similar to the way news teams find the most backward brain dead individual they can muster up after a natural disaster. They stick a mike in front of him as the camera takes it all in.
"They was daid bodies floatin down the street..." He pauses to spit some tobacco which drips down his cheek and onto his overalls, "I seen a arm bein et by a dog"... as he wipes the drool and tobacco with his shirt sleeve"...
Another fine example of humanity.
Our one hope is that the little child might accidentally discharge the pistol and take out his ignorant daddy.
Responsibility is a required for free people to remain self governing.
TF, that would be fair comment if the writer opposed the SCOTUS decision.
In fact he is quite enthusiastically in favour.
Probligo,
This was NOT a SCOTUS ruling, it came from a lower court ruling. There is quite a bit of concern that SCOTUS might take this case and their ruling, for good or not, would make quite a bit of a change in how gun ownership was viewed. I for one have very little faith in that courts sanity having seen how they have interpreted other cases.
I found the wording of the lower court ruling to be quite satisfying, that the God given right belongs to the individual, that it was so before this country was formed, before the Constitution was written, that it does not hinge on any civil ties such as a militia. It left little room for doubt as to what the ruling meant.
Correction accepted TF.
I have abandoned all debate upon the God-given right of Americans to possess the means of murdering their fellow citizens. It is a lost cause. It has no impact upon my life unless (in the very remote possibility that) I visit the United States. If that were ever to happen, it is extremely unlikely that I would be pursuaded of the need to carry a weapon for any purpose other than a slingshot for pinging rattlesnakes.
I am extremely fortunate to live in a land where the cult of the gun is limited to a very few; where those very few are required by law to take responsibility for the care and safe keeping of their weapons; where it is illegal to carry a weapon in public unless the firing mechanism is disabled.
I am extremely fortunate to live in a country where the police are routinely unarmed; where I can walk the streets in comparative safety given that there are some places that are "unsafe"; and where I know the most likely people to knock me off are family and acquaintances.
I am at a complete loss to understand why God should give the right to carry weapons, but then to put God and I in the same sentence is an oxymoron at best.
TF has posted a reply on Sat. 17 March on his page. I can not link it directly as he uses Haloscan and I have all manner of problems with it...
If my response is short enough, it may well appear there, otherwise there will be a Part 2 to this post.
Post a Comment