Unbelievable Article from the Anti-Gun Crowd

The crux of this argument, which tries to discredit the basis of McDonald, particularly Thomas’ concurrence, is that gun control isn’t racist, because blacks would have been better off disarmed, since armed resistance against white oppressors just made them angrier and caused more blacks to be killed. I kid you not. Apparently this author would also have us believe the jews of Warsaw would have been better of not fighting back against the Nazis. The Kurds obviously would have been better off submitting to Saddam, since he nerved gassed a few of their towns in retaliation.

The other side has a real difficult time understanding there are things out there worse than death, and submitting to evil is one of them. This persons moral compass isn’t just off, it’s not functioning at all. The article then goes on to conclude that we’re the real racists in this argument, including Charlton Heston, which makes this photo and this photo all the more puzzling.

11 thoughts on “Unbelievable Article from the Anti-Gun Crowd”

  1. The first comment to that article was excellent …

    Something like “would the adults who run this site get a handle on your interns?”

    That article was written by a very narrow-minded and poorly informed person.

  2. Just finished reading the article. WOW!! That could well be the most Orwellian twisting of the truth that I’ve come across in quite awhile. I mean, really though, you have to admit that the piece, as propaganda for the choir, is pretty brilliant in it’s own perverse way. There are none so blind as those who will not see. And people wonder why we get our fur up when this is he kind of nonsense that we have to deal with on a perpetual basis. Sheesh!!

  3. Clever. I’d call the article clever. These guys are really quite good at doing the best with what they have.

    Sebastian and others have referred to this as “polishing turds.”

    Indeed … they are very good at doing such a thing.

    But nowadays, the gun control movement is pretty much on the ropes. Very few people are taking their statements seriously anymore. That pleases me to no end.

  4. Not only do I think their moral compass is off, but I think these ideas come from people who have lived in world of such prosperity and abundance, that they can’t fathom any evil requiring arms to protect the innocent ever taking place.

    Our prosperity is definitely going to be a cause of our downfall.

  5. I’ve heard the argument before. I think it was in reference to villagers in Africa not having arms so they wouldn’t escalate the violence when they were slaughtered. Absolutely nuts.

  6. Am in the middle of reading Stephen Halbrook’s Securing Civil Rights which does an excellent job of covering this very topic, especially the Civil Rights Act of 1871.
    That which the intentional-moron calling itself “Waging Nonviolence” calls the Civil Rights movement was long preceded by an earlier Act that was necessitated by some very real struggles against murderous Klansmen – not just modern job, gender, or racial equalization measures.

  7. “The other side has a real difficult time understanding there are things out there worse than death”

    More relevant: The other side has a real difficult time understanding there are things out there which want to kill them, and will not opt not to just because their would-be victims are unarmed.

Comments are closed.