I am sure I have written about this in the past, but I continue to be astonished at how anti-rights cultists‘ brains work… or, for the most part, do not work.
For instance, by now, most of my readers are probably aware of the unfortunate case wherein George Zimmerman fatally shot Trayvon Martin; however, are you aware that anti-rights organizations like the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence are actively encouraging vigilante violence against George Zimmerman? Bear in mind that Zimmerman has not even been charged with any unlawful actions yet, but the "gun control" extremists have already convicted him in the court of public opinion, and are now facilitating those who wish to take "justice" into their own hands.
Why? Well, Zimmerman had a license to carry concealed in Florida, and Florida recently passed "stand your ground" legislation, so Ladd Everitt and the rest of the anti-rights cultists see this as a perfect opportunity to do their best to attack both – after all, they ardently believe in the concept of "collective guilt/responsibility", so if Zimmerman turns out to be a murderer, then all Florida CCW holders could be murderers as well, and, likewise, if Zimmerman walks, they will never stop harping on this case as an example of how the "stand your ground" laws allowed him to "murder" Martin. Win-win, in their books.
The important take-away from this, though, is to notice how readily they are focusing on Zimmerman; the anti-rights cultists are accurately saying that his actions are his responsibility, and he should be held accountable for them. They are, admittedly, jumping to conclusions in regard to his guilt, but that is par for the course for them.
On the other hand, consider the average "gun control" extremist’s reaction to an obviously criminal shooting. They waste millions of electrons expounding on how the shooter was "just a good kid", and it was "all just just a misunderstanding", and how this is really the fault of the "evil gun lobby" for "flooding our streets with easily-procurable firearms", and generally trying to absolve the actual criminal of any and all responsibility whatsoever while simultaneously castigating the lawful firearm owners of America.
Noticing the pattern? If there is a firearm-related crime, regardless of who is actually at fault, it is invariably the firearm owners of America who are to blame if you ask the anti-rights cultists; is it any wonder why I have given them that moniker? Every single time, no matter if the person doing the shooting has a criminal record longer than the Constitution or if the person has no criminal record to speak of, if he did something wrong, it is somehow "our" fault.
I do not hold to that. Not only is that position inherently logically inconsistent – if it is the shooter’s responsibility in some cases, it should be the shooter’s responsibility in all cases – but the very notion of "collective guilt" is a myth and a logical fallacy to boot; unfortunately, as the date on that first article shows, it is a very deep-seated myth, but a myth all the same. We are, each of us, individual, adult human beings, and are thus individually responsible for our own individual actions; to punish others for the illegal actions of one would be a base abrogation of the rights and responsibilities of all parties involved, and would severely undermine the very fabric of our civilization.
Disturbing though this attempt at "collective guilt" may be, it does tell us one useful and heartening thing – the "gun control" extremists are getting desperate. After all, if they were honestly on the offensive and in control of the debate, they would not have to keep framing their argument in terms of logical fallacies and presuppositions of guilt without the benefit of trial. Of course, the irony in all of this is that if one of those violent, hateful persons does track down Zimmerman and harm/kill him, by their own tortuous "logic", the CSGV would share responsibility in that illegal and immoral action. Honestly, I do not think that would bother them.
Tragic situation, but it is another opportunity for the cultists to dance in the blood of the slain.
[...] case has already been covered by a lot of people (there’s 6 links there, read them all) elsewhere so I’m not going to bother with [...]
There is plenty about this case that doesn’t fit, but it seems the anti gun folks could careless about what the facts are or waiting for evidence. I am constantly baffled that a group of people that claim to care about victims actually love to see someone get killed and then see someone get punished…innocent or not. I keep saying the same thing over and over, but it is astounding.
@ MAJ Mike: Exactly that, and they are shamelessly (and shamefully) exploiting Martin’s death just like every one before his.
@ agirlandhergun: Take a look at my most-recent post – as I told someone on Twitter, most of the people literally demanding Zimmerman’s head on a platter also have tweets about “stop the hate” or something in their timelines.
I honestly think they cannot see the incongruence. In their world, their demanding someone be killed without conviction or due cause is “better” than what Zimmerman did, because they are “right”. Damned if I can comprehend that.
[...] commentsLinoge on quote of the day – @chriszumpLinoge on getting to that ageLinoge on the celebration of double standardsLinoge on leadership failBraden Lynch on quote of the day – @chriszumpagirlandhergun on the [...]
“Damned if I can comprehend that.”
They are zealots. They are fanatics. They know they are good and correct and pure and nothing will dissuade them from it.
They are everything they claim to despise.
Linoge: “likewise, if Zimmerman walks, they will never stop harping on this case as an example of how the “stand your ground” laws allowed him to “murder” Martin.”
Of course if he is convicted, it is not like they’ll admit they are wrong about Stand Your Ground laws. They want to piggyback on the “Justice for Martin” crowd without even realizing they have the opposite goals. If justice is served, there is no real problem with the law, is there? They want to say Florida law prevented Bill Lee (SPD chief) from making an arrest, but also demand he be fired. How does that work? They want to throw this man under the bus and ruin his career for following the law??? Of course they are dead wrong about what SYG means, and the initial non-charge was because SPD claimed a lack of probable cause, not SYG. But ant-gunners can’t be seen taking an opposite stance to the “Justice for Martin” crowd, so they stick with both despite its blatant contradiction.
@ Rob Crawford: Which, I guess, is why I cannot really wrap my head around it – that level of blind, religious faith in something… Yeah, I have never achieved it.
@ TS: Ah, but you see, if he is actually convicted, he will serve as an example that any Floridian with a CCW could possibly snap and start killing random little boys, and thus we need stronger restrictions on who can carry legally. Additionally, it is obvious that this law encouraged to shoot Martin (even though it does not protect him now), so we should do away with it too.
Or so they will say. Thankfully, the world does not seem to be generally buying into the “gun control” blood dancing at the moment, only the whole “why has he not been arrested yet” question, which is one I rather echo.
Linoge: “Additionally, it is obvious that this law encouraged to shoot Martin (even though it does not protect him now), so we should do away with it too.”
Come to think of it, I have heard people (wrongly) say this is a “license to murder”. Hmmm… now where have we heard that before?
That seems to be the going propaganda, does it not? Nevermind that it does no such thing – just saying that gets people riled up in a righteous fury.