search
top

War on Guns Has Some Good Stuff Today

Talking about a gun shop owner who needs to stop talking to the press before he does more damage.  Gun shop owners should be very wary of talking to the press, and if they do, they need to be careful of what comes out of their pie hole.  Don’t try to make yourself look good at the expense of other gun owners.  Educate, don’t feed the public’s irrational fears.

Asks whether deadly force against the Colorado man was warranted considering he motioned toward his revolver but did not draw it.   I think it probably is justified.  He had the means, the motive, and opportunity, and if he wasn’t complying with orders, then yes, it would have been a justifiable use of deadly force.  If he had his hands in the air and/or was in the process of surrendering, then no.   If someone approaches you on the street, stops you, and demands your wallet while flashing a revolver stuffed in his waistband, would you give him the time or opportunity to draw?  I wouldn’t.

I agree with David that this isn’t the right thing to do.   Point out the hypocracy, point out that it’s illegal, but don’t go for the poetic justice of pushing to jail them for a law most of us think shouldn’t exist.

2 Responses to “War on Guns Has Some Good Stuff Today”

  1. Yosemite Sam says:

    “I agree with David that this isn’t the right thing to do. Point out the hypocracy, point out that it’s illegal, but don’t go for the poetic justice of pushing to jail them for a law most of us think shouldn’t exist.”

    I disagree. I hear that pompous windbag Steve Bailey every morning on WRKO. That morning, he was crying about how we have too many guns in this country and that we need more laws. Then he brags about going to a gun show with Rosenthal and illegally buying a gun. He even glibly added that he expense accounted the purchase to the Globe.

    Why should he be above the law and not prosecuted? If gun stores like Red’s in Idaho are being persecuted by the ATF for minor paper work violations, they should go after Bailey as well for his openly admitted felony.

  2. Sebastian says:

    I put it in the “two wrongs don’t make a right” category. It’s worthwhile to point out how useless the laws about purchasing out of state are, as Bailey and Rosenthal so aptly demonstrated. There is no solution that will solve the problem of straw purchasing as long as guns are legal for law abiding people to own. That’s a worthwhile thing to point out, because they claim to not want to make guns illegal, but that’s where the policy logically will lead.

    I have a lot of sympathy for David’s argument that it’s a bad idea for the NRA to push the “Enforce the existing gun laws” meme, because I do think many of those laws that will be enforced are wrong and unconstitutional, especially in the case of Massachusetts where most of them are. The NRA does this because it’s good PR, and it resonates with the public, and that’s a reason to not discount it’s value as a rhetorical tool.

    But if a pro-gun person had done this, unaware that they were violating a federal law, we’d be complaining that the law was unconstitutional anyway, and calling for discretion on the part of the authorities. Neither Bailey nor Rosenthal had criminal intent, and I do think that should count for something, whether they are anti-gun boneheads, or pro-gun folks who are ignorant enough to believe that the second amendment actually mean something in this world, I think doesn’t matter. Wrong is wrong.

top