Want to know the difference between “gun control” extremists and pro-rights activist in one easy-to-swallow lesson? Behold.
I know you won’t publish this. That’s fine. It’s your space. But I give you my word that I won’t censor you on my blog. And I do plan to publish my comment on my blog. Probably repeatedly.
I dare say that difference in mentalities is about as perfect an illustration of the chasm separating us from them as you could ever ask for.
We defenders of individual rights do not need to hold publicity-stunt “vigils” to feel like we are Doing Something, because we are accomplishing our goals on a daily basis.
We believers in the sanctity of human life do not need to self-absorbedly narrow the playing field to only certain types of violence, because we are interested in stopping all predatory violence.
We who stand up for the individual do not need to use the threat of government force to coerce people to abide by our beliefs, because we accept anyone with open arms.
And that is why we are winning.
On the one hand, I wish I could unequivocally share Lila’s position on this distinction (read the whole thing):
Do you know what gets me? The sheer sadness of it all. Truly. When it comes to wanting to see less victims we are on the same side. The difference is that some have let their hatred of an object obscure any other thing.
But on the other hand, I am struck by two disjoint thoughts. First, as expressed by Cargosquid*:
Joan Peterson…without proof, without evidence, you slander good people. And yet you call us shameless? You have the outright, shameless, unmitigated, GALL to insult people that actually JOINED you in honoring victims of violence BECAUSE THEY DIDN’T DO IT IN YOUR APPROVED MANNER?
Apparently, the vigils were all about….. you.
I simply cannot get past the self-absorbed egotism of the average anti-rights cultist, especially not when coupled with their overriding sense of authoritarianism – while we want to live in a world where everyone can choose to defend themselves, or not, as they see fit, they want to live in a world where everyone is relegated to the position of “unwilling, defenseless future victim”, and I simply cannot tolerate that.
And, second, I cannot help but to see Joan and every other “gun control” supporter like her as being roughly analogous to book burners, especially when viewed in the light of their infatuation with censorship and controlling the message. Not only do they want us defenseless and easy prey for criminals, they want us quiet, docile, controlled. No. Just no. You cannot stop the signal, and we simply will not be forced to go quietly into that good night, no matter how many petty insults and specious accusations you throw our direction.
Yes, my life is worth enough to me to speak up against those who would deprive me of the ability to defend it. How about yours?
[Update] And in comes Barron to whack the crap out of that nail:
Also those you attack are also standing out in the open willing to freely debate, yet you hide unwilling to defend your position in public. That is a sign of someone who lacks integrity.
… among other things. To employ one of my mother’s favorite sayings, I am very sorry Joan’s opinions are so weak that they cannot withstand ours being expressed. [/Update]
(* – In fairness, I will more than admit to “attacking” “gun control” extremists for their honoring of those criminals amongst the ranks of “gun violence” victims. However, I stand by those words, and will not apologize for them.)