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.

Thursday, January 01, 2009

Pretty please, with sugar on top, keep your filthy hooks off our @!#% guns, so we don't have to kill you

A couple days ago, I wrote about Robert Smith, Jr, who, in a blog he writes for The Detroit News, contends that the Founding Fathers were wrong to extend Constitutional protection to the fundamental, absolute human right of the individual to keep and bear arms, and who indeed argues that we should "Ban All Guns." I wasn't the only gun rights advocate to take exception to this advocacy of such an attack on liberty--Pistolero, David Codrea, and Mike Vanderboegh (must read) have all weighed in on the subject.

Some of the criticism came not in blogs, but in comments left at the site of Mr. Smith's opinion piece. Now, it seems that another Detroit News blogger, Libby Spencer, thinks the criticism is out of line (excerpt follows):

Nonetheless, the point is, most people who are for gun bans don't have experience with hunters or recreational gun owners. Their only knowledge comes from the real dangers of inner city use in the commission of crimes. When you respond to the slightest whiff of disagreement with hateful pile-ons such as we're seeing in the comment section now, you not only make supporters of your rights like me want to rethink my position but also solidify the fears of those who would ban guns altogether.

If you don't want to be treated like a raging pack of trigger happy hotheads, don't act like one. A little civility in making your case would go a long way.
In other words, it seems that Libby, although supposedly one of the "supporters of [our] rights" (she can keep her "support," as far as I'm concerned), thinks that we should be polite in defense of our fundamental rights.

The problem with that is that it's just so damned difficult to come up with a polite way of saying "If you try to take our firearms we will kill you." The title of this blog post is about the best I could do.

Thanks, Pistolero, for bringing Libby's chastisement of gun rights advocates to my attention.


the pistolero said...

You're quite welcome. I can't wait to read Vanderboegh's take on Smith's idiocy — I've a feeling that I was much more polite to Ms. Spencer than Vanderboegh was to her fellow idiot blogger. Oh, and the title of this post was a riot!

Kurt '45superman' Hofmann said...

Oh, and the title of this post was a riot!

Thanks--Harvey Keitel's Winston Wolf character, in "Pulp Fiction," provided the inspiration for that.

Anonymous said...

How does this clueless wonder think that we haven't been civil and reasonable, as least until now? She's not dead by gunfire yet, is she?

The point is, we HAVE been reasonable, and all it got us was condescension,and ever more infringements on the 2A. All we have left is defiant "Hell, Noes", and terse warnings of bloodshed tom come.

Anonymous said...

Welcome back, K-man.

Smith is engaging in the promotion of solution 'X', where 'X' has already been tried, as well as 'Y' and 'Z'. All of them failed.

I try to think of something new to say every time someone proposes something to "solve" the complexities of human nature--where, of course, there is no solution. I'm going to run out both new material and patience pretty soon. I may resort to simply posting, been there, done that, didn't work.

NotClauswitz said...

Good foundation article by David Hardy on the public awareness of the 14th Amendment in regards to recent lies attempting to cover that up. Very clearly states the racist motivation to quash the 14th since it allowed blacks to own guns like any normal citizen - and the awareness of that was very widespread at the time they voted FOR it...