Deep Thoughts from ‘The New Internationalism’

Further Thoughts on Gun Control

…just because gun controls are likely to be politically unpopular does not make them any less necessary. It is true that the United States possesses a much stronger gun culture than that found in Europe, and once guns have been purchased, it appears incredibly difficult to see them removed from circulation, and this is a real shame. The assault weapons ban should be reinstated because it reduced the overall number of assault weapons in circulation (even if it didn’t eliminate them altogether) while the elimination of open-carrying laws would limit the number of hand-guns within public venues. People should not be allowed to brandish weapons in public places, and the whole idea of allowing concealed weapons is, at best, an utterly insane idea because it places the general public at a whole of increased risk.

Comments

  • Squidpuppy says:

    Is this guy somebody? Why do I care what he thinks? There isn’t a single rational argument, nor one bit of supportable evidence in this entire piece; it’s all assertion driven by personal opinion. His logic is so full of holes and classic fallacies, and he gets so much wrong, it’s hardly even worth responding to, but then, isn’t that what we’ve come to expect? I expect he thinks he’s quite brilliant though, so, um, right – must be nice being him.

    Switzerland. What kind of anti argument is Switzerland, where almost every home has an ACTUAL assault weapon in it? Sheesh…

    • Murdoc says:

      >>Is this guy somebody?

      Not a “name” that I’m aware of, if that’s what you mean. I just happened across him somehow.

      >>Why do I care what he thinks?

      You probably don’t. I don’t.

      >>>There isn’t a single rational argument, nor one bit of supportable evidence in this entire piece; it’s all assertion driven by personal opinion. His logic is so full of holes and classic fallacies, and he gets so much wrong, it’s hardly even worth responding to, but then, isn’t that what we’ve come to expect?

      Yes. Sadly. Or, rather, thankfully that’s what we expect from nearly anyone arguing for gun control.

      • Squidpuppy says:

        It’s always useful to regularly understand the tenor of one’s opponents, so while dreary, tedious, annoying, and taxing of one’s sense of reason and logic, hearing / reading this kind of thing does serve to strengthen resolve; it never pays to get complacent. I appreciate the examples you post; they’re always educational.

        It would be interesting to see a study on what turn-around percentages are like; that is, folks who were anti-gun who become pro-gun for whatever reason, and the reverse. I know of a few personal cases where anti-gun people changed their position, and a couple of those are really very satisfying. I don’t know of any personal cases where pro-gun people went the other way.

        I also know quite a few cases of immigrants from anti-gun / non-gun societies who are very pro-gun here, especially after getting US citizenship; so that would be an interesting study too. The question would be something like how many new citizens are pro-gun?

  • Dogman says:

    Earlier this morning I started writing a point-by-point rebuttal of this fellow’s blog. I was almost finished when I realized something–it is simply useless. Obviously, he fails to understand the ramifications of his desires. Obviously, he is naive enough to believe that taking away one person’s freedoms does not put his own in jeopardy. Obviously he is not in touch with the facts. No common sense argument will ever sway him. It is useless to waste time arguing.

    • Murdoc says:

      That’s funny. I started doing a point-by-point for this blog post but decided that most of what I was going to mention was self-evident and I would just be preaching to the choir. So I settled for pointing it out.

  • Ryan says:

    Well this at least this quote does shed some light on how they think and how they get their logic all messed up. To put it bluntly to them, guns are inherently dangerous. Not the fact that armed people can be crazy or lawless but The GUN itself that is dangerous. Maybe it is the power that it grants the person that scares them but whatever it is, it is the technology of the gun itself that they wish to remove from the world. In their view the world would be a much safer place if nobody had guns… Just like when Genghis Khan sacked Beijing…

  • Molon Labe says:

    The best part was when I had too much time on my hands so I did respond to him… and then he tried to cite Wikipedia. If you were listening carefully, you would have heard a facepalm of epic proportions.

Comments Closed