One would think that MikeB302000 would eventually learn from his past mistakes and stop looking for trouble he cannot handle, but thankfully for those of us who continue to be amused by his childish antics, he just cannot seem to catch the drift.
But I do think there’s a big percentage of you guys who feel psychologically inadequate and have found the answer in guns. The problem with that is those of you who do that are starting off with mental problems which if they’re serious enough cannot be corrected with weapons. That makes you, not all of you, only the ones who fit this profile, unfit to have guns and a danger to yourselves and others.
To those of you who don’t fit into this profile, why do you get so defensive and upset at it?
The core of the rest of the post started out as a comment in response to the above, but I figured it needed a little more fleshing out…
The answer to MikeB302000‘s last question is easy – it is in his second sentence:
But I do think there’s…
MikeB302000 has no facts (again).
MikeB302000 has no studies (again).
MikeB302000 has no statistics (again).
MikeB302000 has nothing more than his own opinion that people’s rights should be subject to his whims and inclinations.
What Sparky does not comprehend, has never comprehended, and, I fear, will never comprehend, is that my rights, and the rights of fellow Americans like me, are not subject to his opinion, or much of anyone else’s. My rights exist whether or not governments, presidents, congressmen, governors, legislators, mayors, council members, and my fellow citizens choose to recognize and respect them or not – to be certain, some of those individuals can oppress my rights, but those rights exist regardless.
Also, bear in mind what, exactly, these rights are – the right ot protect yourself, your family, and your property. Without the ability to defend your life, what is it worth to you… or anyone else? If you are not legally permitted to keep yourself or your family alive, does the government actually respect you or the value of your life? Bear in mind the simple truth that people like MikeB302000 would very much prefer that this innocent, old, and otherwise-defenseless woman was left defenseless in the face of aggressors who intended to cause her harm – is that right?
However, now that we are talking about opinions governing other people’s lives, I think lots of people use computers to spread child pornography, and that makes you, not all of you, only the ones who fit this profile, unfit to have computers and a danger to yourselves, others, and children throughout the country and world.
Is that a good enough reason to abridge individual’s First-Amendment-protected rights? Is my opinion, even though it is supported by facts (in this case, not Sparky’s), sufficient to infringe on all American’s rights?
If no (as I have every reason to suspect MikeB302000 will answer), then why is his baseless, specious opinion sufficient to abridge Americans’ Second-Amendment-protected rights?
The facts of this situation are simple: psychological shortcomings or not, these people have committed no crimes and have not been legally judged as threats to themselves or anyone else, and thus anti-rights advocates have absolutely no basis to attempt to abridge or infringe upon their naturally-granted, Constitutionally-protected rights to self-defense. Likewise, unlike MikeB302000 and the rest of his anti-rights ilk, I oppose the oppression of rights for all law-abiding, responsible, adult human beings, and thus I have every reason to “get so defensive” when he and his fellow authoritarians attempt to overstep their bounds.
If a person cannot be trusted with a firearm, then they sure as hell cannot be trusted with gasoline, fertilizers, propane, natural gas, welding equipment, bottled oxygen, or even flour. Where are his cries, or those of his compatriots, to limit access to those dangerous materials?
Bigotry is an ugly thing, and it just gets uglier every time I come across it.