Mission statement:

Armed and Safe is a gun rights advocacy blog, with the mission of debunking the "logic" of the enemies of the Constitutionally guaranteed, fundamental human right of the individual to keep and bear arms.

I can be reached at 45superman@gmail.com.You can follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/45superman.

Tuesday, April 01, 2008

Rights? Who needs 'em?

An editorial in the cynically misnamed "Patriot-News" laments that whenever new gun restrictions are discussed, some people insist on talking about their silly rights to possess the means to defend their lives, their homes, their families and their freedom.

And here is a sad commentary on how far removed the nation is from confronting this scourge that leads to the deaths of thousands of children a year and wounds thousands of others, not to mention many more adults: The discussion inevitably gets bogged down in conflict over gun rights and gun control.
That's the problem with people who perceive their fundamental human rights as being under siege--they tend to object, loudly and persistently. For some crazy reason, they fail to realize that the evil or grossly irresponsible acts of others impose a moral obligation on them to surrender those rights.

The Patriot-News is a Pennsylvania newspaper, and the editorial was apparently inspired by the debate (to which I alluded yesterday) about passing a "blame the victim" law in Pennsylvania, subjecting people whose guns were stolen to criminal sanctions for failure to promptly report the stolen gun.
That we even need to debate whether stolen guns should be reported to police demonstrates just how bereft of substance the "gun debate" is and how little it has to do with the real world, where it's all too easy for firearms to fall into the wrong hands.
Actually, as far as I know, no one is debating whether or not stolen guns should be reported--the bone of contention is the notion of making the report a legal obligation, whereby the theft victim must report the theft, or become a "criminal" oneself.
The discussion never quite seems to get past the argument over the Second Amendment to focus on the victims, and why so many young people are mindlessly inclined to destroy others and themselves through acts of violence.
I have no objection whatsoever to discussing the victims, or the motivation of their assailants, but I'll never forget what shall not be infringed means, and I don't intend to allow anyone else to forget, either.


Anonymous said...

unfortunately all one can hope for with people like the editorial writer is that their philosophy of denigrating rights of others as some kind of negotiable commodity is that they suffer extreme violations of the unalienable rights that they value. Then see how they feel about rights.

I have a feeling all that philosophical sophistry will be out the window, if the jackass has to comply with 20,000 regulations to publish his opinion.

Unknown said...

51% of all injuries and 46% of all deaths for kids are directcly attributable to auto/vehicle causes. Guns don't appear on the injuries list until number 9, and it's number 10 for deaths. Auto/vehicles are number 1 on both lists, drowning is number 2 on both lists.

I think kids are the fig leaf for the real agenda of these people(?).

Molon Labe, assholes.

Good reading: