March 9, 2021
December 10, 2020 By Rattler Rider Leave a Comment
12 Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you ignorant. 2 Ye know … [Read More...]
December 6, 2020 By Rattler Rider Leave a Comment
https://youtu.be/62Rku_kJEvQ … [Read More...]
December 5, 2020 By Rattler Rider Leave a Comment
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NmKCvlF924A … [Read More...]
May 19, 2020 By Tom Leave a Comment
This post is really intended for those who believe that when they go to the polls to vote, their … [Read More...]
July 10, 2020 By Tom Leave a Comment
For at least a decade I have been beating a drum that Global Warming is NOT the cause of Maine's - … [Read More...]
February 15, 2020 By Tom Leave a Comment
The Tavistock Institute of Human Relations (TIHR), formerly known as the Wellington House, is, to … [Read More...]
January 21, 2020 By Tom Leave a Comment
This morning I was rereading a Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) blog post … [Read More...]
January 6, 2020 By Rattler Rider Leave a Comment
The top Law Library most "researchers" have overlooked, or never heard of… The International … [Read More...]
June 4, 2020 By Tom
George Floyd had CORONAVIRUS! BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH … [Read More...]
May 28, 2020 By Tom
Because there are still a handful of people who can actually do a bit of thinking on their own, what … [Read More...]
May 19, 2020 By Tom
This post is really intended for those who believe that when they go to the polls to vote, their … [Read More...]
May 16, 2020 By Tom
As the world marches forward on a direct path toward complete submission unto the "Beast" System, … [Read More...]
May 13, 2020 By Tom
We have now progressed in this fascist and totalitarian society to a point where, not only are Media … [Read More...]
Copyright © 2021 ·News Child Theme on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in
Confusing And Contradictory Editorials On Gun Rights Issues
It amazes me how that editors when they feel the need to weigh in on a subject, in this case gun rights, they use fear to get their point across, confuse facts with fiction and then present the issue of the right of lawful citizens with those of criminals as one in the same. Why?
In my journey through cyberspace this morning I found another editorial condemning the actions of Indiana officials in granting back to legal citizens the right to keep and bear arms.
The overused classical tactic of instilling fear among the masses is the choice of words to describe an action. In this case, the issue the editor is dealing with stems from action taken last week by the head of the Indiana DNR relaxing restrictions on concealed weapons permit holders to allow them to carry in state parks.
The editor begins his piece with this.
Packing heat among picnickers…….a classic. If that doesn’t paint a picture in the minds of ignorant readers nothing will. Just think, you’re sitting there enjoying a little barbecue chicken, some potato salad and ice cold lemonade, when the guy having his family outing next to you reaches into the inside of his jacket and pulls out a 9mm Glock and begins randomly shooting everyone in sight. Isn’t this what concealed weapon carriers do?
Here’s the first indication that lets us know the editor must be really, really old. I say that because of his “in parentheses” exclamation that tells us he/she was there when the founding fathers penned the 2nd Amendment.
Why did the editor choose to describe his efforts in a collective “we” when using this statement? Must be he has a “mouse” in his back pocket. How many times have we heard “experts” on the Constitution tell us the founding fathers meant this or they meant that? Even they are making every attempt at misleading people to believe the founding fathers wrote a “tricky” document, one that was confusing and deliberately full of several interpretations.
This statement is my all-time favorite and I know it will be yours after you read it.
Laws logically prohibit? Only for those who go through life bent on prohibiting life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness from all the rest of Americans. In places where we “logically prohibit” carrying guns there is no “rational explanation” to have one. The only illlogical and irrational explanation anyone can have to want to take away the right that is granted us under the Constitution, is because they believe that the majority of people who have guns do so because they want to go kill other human beings. Have they ever thought that some people might really want and need protection? Here’s an original question. Have any of these people ever thought that I don’t need a “rational” explanation to own a gun or to carry concealed. As long as I am lawabiding and remain that way, I have the right.
The editor then goes on to contradict previous statements and suggests that Indiana is succumbing to pressures from the NRA.
“While the lifting of the parkland gun ban doesn’t concern us….”……..Wait, I’m back up off the floor. I got to go get some paper towel and clean the water off my computer screen that I spit out when I read this. The editor’s previous statements sure sounded to me like lifting the ban concerned him.
The same scare tactics are also used when antis editorialize about the “castle doctrine” as it is often called. The laws that are being passed in the majority of states, is merely a clarification of existing laws that allows a person to lethally defend themself when they reasonably preceive tp be threatened. Contrary to what some would have us believe, states that have enacted the new law have not seen an increase in senseless killings.
To offer the opportunity for someone to obtain a lifetime permit to carry is a great idea. Because the bureaucrats and the greedy politicians want to keep charging over and over again fees for permits and renewals, it is becoming an encumbrance on the people’s right to keep and bear arms. In many places, the anti gun crowd uses such tactics as backdoor gun control, even to the extent of bogging down applications through understaffing, budget contraints and paper work. Whether a person has a one-year, five-year or lifetime weapons permit, doesn’t really matter. That person still has to remain within the laws to retain his/her permit.
Finally, the editor begins talking about a completely different issue concerning public safety and firearms.
Duh!?! This is why they are called criminals. I know of no supporter of 2nd Amendment rights who wants criminals to be able to have a gun. Most proponents of our right to own guns, believe that if the effort was put into going after the criminals and leaving the lawful gun owners alone, a lot more would be done to curb gun violence.
I am not exactly sure what the intent and focus of this editorial was. What began as an attempt to scare everyone out of the parks of Indiana, morphed into a chastising of the state of Indiana for not cracking down on criminals, with many stops in between.
When you sift through the wording meant to scare people and delete out the untruths and contradictions, the bottom line always comes down to the need to go after the bad guy not the good guy.
Tom Remington
You may also like -