Monday, November 07, 2005

More Dangerous Than Blind Ignorance?

The Boston Globe today brings us this Letter to the Editor in response to these earlier letters I blogged on here and here, concerning the recent murder of 18-year-old Kevin Garces in Roxbury.

The "other side" speaks - and it's not pretty. Too stupid to fisk, though? Well...almost.

NRA rationale is dangerous

November 7, 2005

I CONFESS to being one of the gun-phobic liberals Robin Shore points to ("Blaming guns," letter, Nov. 3).

Congratulations, Mary, admitting that you have a problem is the first step to recovery.

Shore said that "In the fantasy land of gun-phobic liberals there are no good people and no evil people" and that "In such a fantasy land, the argument that guns should be banned because they have no purpose except to kill" makes sense.

Perhaps I'm unclear on the concept, but other than killing, what is the purpose of a gun?

Mary, with that question there, you just illustrated exactly what Robin was referring to. In the same way liberals fail to recognize the difference between "good" and "evil", as those labels pertain to the gun control debate, they also fail to recognize the immeasurable difference between killing as "predatory violence" and killing as "legal self-defense".*

Further, in most cases of armed self-defense, the gun is never fired. It's amazing how quickly the common street thug will develop a change of plans when faced with the business end of a shotgun. Perhaps the best purpose of a gun is serving as the visual exclamation point in "Get the fuck out of my house, asshole!"

No shots fired. Lives saved. Everyone gets to sleep with a clean conscience. Well, except maybe for the dirtbag wearing soiled pants running for his life down your street.

Do guns heal?

No more than the unopened box of Band-Aids in my bathroom does.

Seems to me if a gun can prevent a violent act from occurring in the first place, there's nothing to heal. How can that possibly be a "bad thing"? Would you prefer having people shot and stabbed in their homes, so as to keep the local emergency room personnel on their toes?

Do they do good works?

Um, they don't do anything. They just sit there, until people pick them up and use them to act out their intentions. Reminds me of the old "Bert and I" routine (Downeast humor warning):

Tourist: Does this road go to Portland?
Mainer: It don't go nowhere, Mister. Just sits right here.

As far as the possibility goes that guns could be used to do good works by the people carrying them, maybe you should ask the good men and women of law enforcement who carry them on a regular basis if it bothers them to have such evil mind-control devices strapped to their hips.

Do they teach values?

Inanimate objects now have to the ability to impart wisdom and morality? Please elaborate.

The NRA model of the strong, independent American being complete only with a gun at his side is not only obsolete, it's dangerous.

Yeah, dangerous for the already-armed carjackers and rapists. What kind of person has a problem with that? I mean, other than carjackers and rapists?

And, I suppose the 1st Amendment rights that make it possible for people like you to speak your mind in a public forum such as this are dangerous, too, right? Tell us, what other parts of the Constitution should we do away with on the grounds that they makes your tummy a little queasy, Mary?

The headline "Shootings in Hub rise dramatically" (Page A1, Nov. 3), up 77 percent from three years ago, shows that guns in the hands of "evil" people are causing the crisis in our city streets, homes, and schools.

Close, but no cigar. It's the "evil" people with guns in their hands that are causing this crisis. You'll never understand this concept, will you?

Perhaps this argument would be moot if we could sort out buyers and sell guns only to Shore's "good" people of "solid moral agency."

You haven't tried to purchase a gun recently, have you, Mary?

Unfortunately, the National Rifle Association and its supporters step in to block off every attempt to separate the "good" from the criminal in access to guns.

That one sentence takes the ignorance and idiocy of the gun control-loving leftists to new heights. I hate to the one to burst Mary's bubble here, but that is EXACTLY what the liberal gun-grabbers have been doing for decades - blurring beyond recognition the distinction between the law-abiding citizenry and the criminal element, as they go about disarming the former by passing laws that go completely ignored by the latter.

In their perverted view of freedom, the sale of guns, from handguns to assault weapons, to anyone at any time is ideal.

That must be why the NRA supports the concept of background checks for purchasers of firearms.

And, yes, in Mary's world the concept of a free citizen actually having the ability to defend his or her family from harm without relying on an all-powerful government agency for protection is "perverted".


Sadly, that is the ignorant fantasy that is killing our children, including Kevin Garces.

Unlike the ignorant fantasy that propagates the myth that criminals willing to violate laws concerning assault, kidnapping, murder, torture, and rape will give half a rat's ass about a law that makes it illegal for them to walk around with a gun in their pocket.

Mary, honey, I don't know how else to put this, but you're ignorance and refusal to admit even the slightest rays of reality into your ideologically-blinded mind is disturbing, to say the least. But, I will defend, with arms if necessary, your right to express your opinions, however warped and ignorant they may be.



* UPDATE: More on this novel concept, courtesy of Kevin at Smallest Minority here.