Devastating New Argument Against Gun Control

[Jumping Frog]

Gun Rights Advocates Have A Devastating New Argument Against Gun Control. Here It Is.

I'll note the key thought is gun control is not so much about guns, but rather about power. It also points out the uselessness of arguing with liberal gun-control advocates because their argument is never in good faith ("feelings").

(As a language courtesy, the article references a fastener that is using attached with a screwdriver and what the person can do with said fastener. There is no actual profanity.)

The article pretty well sums up my attitude: I am done with any form of compromise that further erodes my rights.

[J.R.@A&M]

Here is another version of this argument: http://www.npr.org/2015/07/24/425966334 ... ister-guns

[MechAg94]

Who does the titles of these articles? In any other venue, I would have assumed it was a junk link.

[ShootDontTalk]

I think the country as a whole has reached a tipping point on a whole range of repressive "laws."

This is one state. Having a nationwide decision by citizens not to abide by a certain law or laws may create a de facto state of revolution, something self-serving politicians have had coming for quite some time.

This foolishness didn't work out well in Canada. It will not work out here. Enough is enough. It's about time the government starts to worry about how far they can go.

[LSUTiger]

Enough is enough. It's about time the government starts to worry about how far they can go.

[misterlarry]

Enough is enough. It's about time the government starts to worry about how far they can go.

too!

[treadlightly]

I noted this morning, via those dashing young men and women at the Chicken News Network, that some fuzzle-headed nitwit legislator in New York wants to require movie theaters in his fair state to seine their audiences with entryway metal detectors.

Once I finishing pondering the idea, I suspect I'll be against it. And.... Yes, I think it's dangerously unAmerican. That opinion probably marks me as a clinger or hater or maybe just a garden variety redneck.

But while musing that mush-minded plan, it occurred to me how much fun it would be to ask the legislator about his plan to centralize the means for production of violence with the government.

I wonder - in his Orweillian utopia what other means of production should be centralized in the government?

[chasfm11]

Don't forget Connecticut.

http://dailycaller.com/2014/02/13/law-a ... r-weapons/

If I were to predict a place where the lid could blow off as a result of sudden and vigorous enforcement of the registration requirement, it would be CT. Some in LE there have gotten into verbal sparing with gun owners about kicking in their doors at 6am. That it has gone this long suggests that neither side is anxious to bring the situation to a confrontation.

[The Annoyed Man]

I'm totally onboard with the two-word reply suggested by the article. I'm totally willing to have the discussion with a fence-sitter, but I won't hesitate when being lectured by a control-freak tell him that he should go have carnal knowledge of himself.

[VoiceofReason]

I think the country as a whole has reached a tipping point on a whole range of repressive "laws."

This is one state. Having a nationwide decision by citizens not to abide by a certain law or laws may create a de facto state of revolution, something self-serving politicians have had coming for quite some time.

See the second line of my signature. (bolding of your statement, mine)

[ShootDontTalk]

If I were to predict a place where the lid could blow off as a result of sudden and vigorous enforcement of the registration requirement, it would be CT. Some in LE there have gotten into verbal sparing with gun owners about kicking in their doors at 6am. That it has gone this long suggests that neither side is anxious to bring the situation to a confrontation.

(Bold mine) I think there may be some rethinking by law enforcement about the threatened tactic of kicking doors open at 6am of law abiding citizens. It might come down to the old adage, "Choose carefully the hill you die on."

A lot of people may be induced to die rather than submit to oppression.
I wonder how many LEO's are willing to die to oppress? (not many I know)
I wonder who will win such a war of attrition?
I wonder how many states can afford the expense of prisons and color TV sets to house 2 or 3 million more criminals?
I wonder what happens to the economy when 1/3 of the population that pays 1/2 of the taxes doesn't pay because they're in jail?

[powerboatr]

the Australian plan makes me laugh
my parents returned last year from living there for the previous 5.
the police are powerless agaisnt criminals.
thugs rob and beat to a pulp people and the citizenry just stand there with the ostrich stance..
mom said it go so bad, the company started using car services to keep employees off the trains and in harms way

[v-rog]

Yes, this basic premise is applicable to most conversations where one is not willing to listen to the other.

[chasfm11]

If I were to predict a place where the lid could blow off as a result of sudden and vigorous enforcement of the registration requirement, it would be CT. Some in LE there have gotten into verbal sparing with gun owners about kicking in their doors at 6am. That it has gone this long suggests that neither side is anxious to bring the situation to a confrontation.

(Bold mine) I think there may be some rethinking by law enforcement about the threatened tactic of kicking doors open at 6am of law abiding citizens. It might come down to the old adage, "Choose carefully the hill you die on."

A lot of people may be induced to die rather than submit to oppression.
I wonder how many LEO's are willing to die to oppress? (not many I know)
I wonder who will win such a war of attrition?
I wonder how many states can afford the expense of prisons and color TV sets to house 2 or 3 million more criminals?
I wonder what happens to the economy when 1/3 of the population that pays 1/2 of the taxes doesn't pay because they're in jail?

As far as I remember, only CT, NY, MD and CO have laws for bans. Of course, CA has had limits on the types of guns and magazine size before this latest craze started.

Your questions were exactly what I was thinking as to why CT is still a standoff. I'm guessing that LE has been told to stand down on enforcement of many of the items on the ban. I think I remember NY arresting and prosecuting a couple of people who were detected in traffic stops. Beyond that, things are been much quieter that I expected. I don't know how militant that politicians are in CT but but they feed some of the ones in NY and MD raw meat.