Something that’s occurred to me about the gun debate is that gun lobby
arguments aren’t exactly coherent. They glom onto the Second Amendment
phrase “shall not be abridged,” in order to shoot down any regulations
at all on firearms.
As I’ve already pointed out, they’re absolutely fine with some weapons beingillegal in a civilized society. And the Second doesn’t say “firearms,” it says “arms.” “Arms” means any weapons, not just guns. Yet Dzhokhar Tsarnaev gets charged with using WMD and there isn’t a peep from the NRA. Likewise, we’re not seeing a big push to overturn state laws against switchblades. Clearly, in the way the gun lobby uses the words “rights” and “infringed,” your right to use the arms of your choosing are definitely being infringed — constantly.
But I’d also point out that the Second Amendment doesn’t spell out exceptions to who can own a gun. Yet the blood lobby is constantly saying we” need to enforce the laws we have” against possession of firearms by felons and those who’ve been deemed mentally unfit, “We don’t have a gun problem, we have a mental illness problem,” they say.
But where in the Second Amendment does it say you can take weapons away from or deny them to certain mentally ill people? I’ll tell you where — nowhere. If the NRA were really as concerned about an unarmed populace being crushed by government (an insane fear in and of itself, ironically), they wouldn’t back this exception. After all, you could just declare an epidemic of mental illness and disarm anyone who gives you any trouble by saying they have “Rightwing Nutjobitus.” It’s no more stupid, ridiculous, and paranoid than any conspiracy theory fantasy about gun registries.
I’m not sure what else to say here, other than it points out the hypocrisy of the gun lobby and the gullibility of the fools who believe them. After all, the NRA demands exceptions to the Second Amendment and all the gun nuts repeat everything they say — never realizing that they too are demanding the government carve out exceptions to the Second Amendment.
I guess it just shows that gun fetishists just repeat thing like parrots, without giving what they say any thought at all.
[photo by bixentro]
As I’ve already pointed out, they’re absolutely fine with some weapons beingillegal in a civilized society. And the Second doesn’t say “firearms,” it says “arms.” “Arms” means any weapons, not just guns. Yet Dzhokhar Tsarnaev gets charged with using WMD and there isn’t a peep from the NRA. Likewise, we’re not seeing a big push to overturn state laws against switchblades. Clearly, in the way the gun lobby uses the words “rights” and “infringed,” your right to use the arms of your choosing are definitely being infringed — constantly.
But I’d also point out that the Second Amendment doesn’t spell out exceptions to who can own a gun. Yet the blood lobby is constantly saying we” need to enforce the laws we have” against possession of firearms by felons and those who’ve been deemed mentally unfit, “We don’t have a gun problem, we have a mental illness problem,” they say.
But where in the Second Amendment does it say you can take weapons away from or deny them to certain mentally ill people? I’ll tell you where — nowhere. If the NRA were really as concerned about an unarmed populace being crushed by government (an insane fear in and of itself, ironically), they wouldn’t back this exception. After all, you could just declare an epidemic of mental illness and disarm anyone who gives you any trouble by saying they have “Rightwing Nutjobitus.” It’s no more stupid, ridiculous, and paranoid than any conspiracy theory fantasy about gun registries.
I’m not sure what else to say here, other than it points out the hypocrisy of the gun lobby and the gullibility of the fools who believe them. After all, the NRA demands exceptions to the Second Amendment and all the gun nuts repeat everything they say — never realizing that they too are demanding the government carve out exceptions to the Second Amendment.
I guess it just shows that gun fetishists just repeat thing like parrots, without giving what they say any thought at all.
[photo by bixentro]
