One More Peterson Quote

This isn’t so much of a damning omission, or a truthful admission, but just an example of anti-rights philosophy.

As you well know, most states have Child Access prevention laws making the owner of the weapon liable if a child uses it in an accidental shooting or homicide. There are laws in place but with rights come responsibilities. It is too late to prosecute, if that is the route taken, once the bullet kills or injuries someone. Let’s prevent it ahead of time.

I’ve coined a phrase to show the absurdity of this philosophy: “If owning guns was as illegal as murder, nobody would be murdered with guns.”

Its kinda foolish when you think about it. Murder is one of the highest crimes in the land and no matter HOW nasty the gun laws are wherever you are, the punishment isn’t as severe as the statutes for murder. But we still have murder, and frankly that’s the core of the anti-freedom argument is that there is too much murder….well they often say “Gun Death”, but I’ve never heard one admit that non-gun deaths don’t count….they just aren’t worth any time, consideration, emotion, legislation….well anything, but they count…just the antis aren’t counting.

We could make selling a gun (FFL or otherwise, imagine a full ban on firearm transfers) punishable by 5 years in prison. Yep sell that pistol you didn’t like, or want to upgrade, or buy give your son or daughter their first .22 and you go to JAIL. That may stop SOME people…but not all, and frankly the people it won’t stop are the people we’re concerned about. If I were to sell Jay who’s a personal friend, family man, and of course somebody with a clean background to match his kind heart (and eyes!) one of my guns…but say skip the Massachusetts paperwork. Or let’s say while I’m in Maine I grab a few new-made Glock magazines at a local store. (Note I do not OWN a Glock)

Now both of those actions would be a crime, punishment by felony conviction, loss of permits and rights, and time in jail. But what HARM would come of it? Jay and I already have LOADS of guns…if we wanted to start some shit wouldn’t we have started it already? And I got lots of magazines and ammo, what exactly would bringing a new 15 round G19 mag into Mass exactly do?

Meanwhile this weekend in Boston a gang member is going to borrow the communal pistol (likely stolen ages ago) and shoot a rival drug dealer. He won’t have a permit, the gun isn’t legally his, he can’t posses ammo, he can’t carry a gun in public….but he’ll do it anyway. Why? Because he’s already decided to do murder, the other crimes are petty.

And there’s the crux of my argument, the anti-rights people (and remember I say Anti-Rights, not Anti-Gun) want to stop murder. Not reduce it. Not take dangerous murderers off the streets, but essentially un-invent the crime of murder. Make it so one of the highest crime in all of history suddenly is gone in a puff of logic.

Now I won’t fault them for that wish, its a nice one, but its impossible. There has never been a time when humans haven’t murdered (OK if you want to get technical Murder is a construct of the criminal code, its unknown if pre-historic man had such distinctions…tho frankly I imagine that the distinction between “Justified Killing” and “Murder” likely popped up pretty early in human social behavior) hell there are lots of animal species that will kill their own kind out of personal convenience.

I don’t fault them for wanting to rid the world of an ugly thing…but I do fault them for attacking human freedom to attempt to do the impossible. Its like banning apples in attempt to repeal the laws of gravity. Sorry you won’t accomplish anything and I like apples. Also I like oranges more, and if you ban apples and are unsuccessful at stopping gravity what’s to keep your hands off my oranges?

There’s another hollow philosophy. The anti-freedom types often assure us “We’re not coming for your guns” yet they are taking away rights in attempt to do the impossible (eliminate murder) or simply the irrelevant (disregard murder rates and attempt to stamp out “Gun Death”), so where will you go when you’re not successful? Away?

Of course not.

-There are many states that have bans on private sales (this is one of them), it doesn’t work, criminals still get guns, and still murder each-other with other weapons. Yet they want to push it nation-wide.

-There are many states that restrict magazine capacity (This is one of them) it was done nation wide as well, it didn’t work, it was repealed nationally and there have been no trends or falls into ruin. They want to push it nation wide.

-There are states that ban “Assault Weapons” by arbitrary features. (This is one of them), and it was done nation wide. Of course those features can be removed or modified with minimal effect on the performance of the gun…and of course the law was a solution to a problem that never existed. They still want it back.

And these all arose from other gun control ideas. Ideas that didn’t work. When they failed they simply demanded more restriction of rights, more declarations of once legal activities and property to be criminal. They say that THIS time they will manage to do the impossible, and lawful gun owners have nothing to fear, because this will be the last step. Only it won’t be. They won’t stop, nor will they look at the flaws in their reason. They are a religion more than a political movement. They are blind followers of a hollow faith carried on by political whores who have secured jobs that net them six-figure incomes if they just preach the lies.

I used to attempt to debate them, because I used to be one of them, and I guess I saw a little part of me in them. I don’t see that anymore. I didn’t need lengthy debates or 100+ comment blog posts, or twitter debates. All I needed was one or two good gun owners to demand I bring proof before pointing a finger at them. It was a logical request, and a request I would have made of others even when I was more leftist and less worldly. So I attempted to make a case.

I attempted and I failed. That was all it took. That was all it took because I was honest.

These people are not honest. I wanted to ban guns because I thought it would do some good in the world. I had an honest reason. When I found that my reasons were deeply flawed I didn’t give up my hopes for a better world, I just changed my methods.

I became pro-gun, and pro-rights. That is where we differ, and why we’ll never see eye-to-eye. Its also why there are so very few of them.

Keep pushing on, fighters for human rights. We will succeed. We will only fail if we chose to do nothing.

This entry was posted in Freedom, Guns, Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

0 Responses to One More Peterson Quote

  1. alcade says:

    My mom was the same way. Growing up she was an anti gun liberal to make Joan herself proud. Over the years, she has come around after examining the facts. I can proudly say that last year she bought her first gun!

  2. Bob S. says:

    In that same comment thread, she admits that probably no law, rule or regulation would make a parent exercise common sense — keeping a child from having access to a firearm.

    She admits that a new law would have no likely impact — yet she will continue to push for ever more restrictive laws.

    And she claims to be exercising common sense?????

  3. Jake says:

    I’ve never heard one admit that non-gun deaths don’t count

    Joan herself did, and even went so far as to call us crazy for insisting that they do.

    I give you the argument of the guys with the “man pants” on ladies and gentlemen-” We’re saying that we’d rather have more gun deaths and lower overall violent crime, than zero gun deaths and higher rates of violent crime if given the choice” And there you have it. Nothing more to say here except “Wow” and “unbelievable”

    She doesn’t care if violent crime (including murder) goes up, as long as there are no guns used. As far as she’s concerned, non-gun deaths don’t count, and she admitted it.

    He won’t have a permit, the gun isn’t legally his, he can’t posses ammo, he can’t carry a gun in public….but he’ll do it anyway. Why? Because he’s already decided to do murder, the other crimes are petty.

    I pointed this out to an anti one time, and she actually responded with “just because it won’t work doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try anyway” (or words to that effect). When you hear that, it’s a sure sign that logic and rationality have gone completely out the window.

    It’s also telling that when I tell them “You want to restrict my behaviour, the burden of proof is on you. What’s actual evidence do you have supporting your position?” I get nothing but silence, or an attempt to redirect the discussion.

    They are a religion more than a political movement.

    I’d go further than that – they’re more like a cult than a religion.

  4. Teke says:

    We have one of these nice safe storage laws in TX. We had a case last week where a 6yr old kindergarden student brought a gun to school dropped it and an N.D. occurred. Several students were injured. This law did nothing. Chances are the owner will not even be prosecuted under this law. To everyones suprise this was in a poor part of town. These areas are where the we need to eradicate the istruments of the devil are preached loudest instead of safety. Chances are mom, dad, bro, sis, cuz or someone in the house is related to a gang. I belive it may have been on an out of reach shelf under some sheets if I recall some of the rhetoric about the incident.

    It’s for the children doesn’t work when it doesn’t teach them to be safe and doesn’t teach them responsibility.

    • Weerd Beard says:

      I’m not very familiar with the Texas laws, but here in Mass our “Safe Storage” laws have been declared unconstitutional by the US Supreme Court…twice. They’re still on the books as I type. since I just woke up and haven’t put on today’s carry piece ALL of my guns are currently locked up. That goes for my old collector’s gun, as well as my carry guns, as well as my Home Defense guns. Technically if somebody kicks down your door while you are asleep if you do not have to fumble with a locking device before defending your home you will be facing charges for being attacked and defending yourself. (Blame the victim anyone?) I will note that my house is only occupied by my wife and myself, both of whom are licensed to carry firearms in Massachusetts.

      Still we too have similar stories.

      Two young boys found big-brother’s “Duty Gun” (his vocation? He’s a drug dealer, and happened to be serving a prison term at the time) it of course was both unlocked, but fully loaded. One of the boys is shot and killed.

      Momma, who’s the local Gang-banger pump who has a whole collection of Baby-Daddies in prison for various violent crimes, claims Sumdood ran into her house and shot her baby.

      Later it came out there was no Sumdood, and it was just an unlicensed, unregistered, illegally acquired firearm.

      She was not prosecuted on any weapons charges. This is how gun control works. Violent gun banners walk free, lawful citizens who refuse to walk thought illegal paperwork and harassment get charged with crimes.

      This is what people like Joan Peterson want.

    • Pat says:

      The Texas law is below:

      (a) In this section:
      (1) “Child” means a person younger than 17 years of age.
      (2) “Readily dischargeable firearm” means a firearm that is
      loaded with ammunition, whether or not a round is in the chamber.
      (3) “Secure” means to take steps that a reasonable person would
      take to prevent the access to a readily dischargeable firearm by a
      child, including but not limited to placing a firearm in a locked container
      or temporarily rendering the firearm inoperable by a trigger lock or
      other means
      (b) A person commits an offense if a child gains access to a readily
      dischargeable firearm and the person with criminal negligence:
      (1) failed to secure the firearm; or
      (2) left the firearm in a place to which the person knew or should
      have known the child would gain access.
      (c) It is an affirmative defense to prosecution under this section that
      the child’s access to the firearm:
      (1) was supervised by a person older than 18 years of age and
      was for hunting, sporting, or other lawful purposes;
      (2) consisted of lawful defense by the child of people or property;
      (3) was gained by entering property in violation of this code; or
      (4) occurred during a time when the actor was engaged in an agricultural
      (d) Except as provided by Subsection (e), an offense under this
      section is a Class C misdemeanor.
      (e) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor if the
      child discharges the firearm and causes death or serious bodily injury
      to himself or another person.
      (f) A peace officer or other person may not arrest the actor before
      the seventh day after the date on which the offense is committed if:
      (1) the actor is a member of the family, as defined by Section
      71.003, Family Code, of the child who discharged the firearm; and
      (2) the child in discharging the firearm caused the death of or serious
      injury to the child.
      (g) A dealer of firearms shall post in a conspicuous position on the
      premises where the dealer conducts business a sign that contains the
      following warning in block letters not less than one inch in height:

      • Weerd Beard says:

        That seems pretty reasonable to me. Of course it does fit in with the anti-gun stupidity mantra of “The Gun is ALWAYS Different” this should be covered under the same laws that punishes negligent parents that leave buckets of water laying about with toddlers, or fail to secure their cleaning chemicals, ect.

        Still it least admits that if you live in a house filled with responsible adults you can choose how you can best secure your firearm(s)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *