General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Jason Alexander long twit on Assault Weapons [View all]calimary
(81,181 posts)Hanging with all hysteria turned up on high, on a technicality, in order to deflect any talk about the well-regulated part of the Second Amendment. You'd think ONE of them on the "don't touch my flame-thrower or my right to arm up to the tactical nukes level if I damn well feel like it" side would take a leadership position that was truly meaningful, and figure out a way to get these damn weapons of gone-in-60-seconds mass death out of civilian hands.
I hear the arguments again and again and again. They mean nothing to me and they only convince me of the closed-mindedness and pig-headedness on the one side. They blather on because they do so love their killing thingies. I yearn for the day when ONE of these folks comes to his or her senses and has the courage to take a leadership position for truly responsible gun ownership and the restriction of obscenely, ridiculously murderous instruments like these. DO NOT carry on with me about how "oh those are illegal, you can't buy guns like that." Well, THIS guy did. Don't tell me they're not obtainable. THIS guy got one. And don't tell me "oh THAT gun wasn't the right kind," or "oh this one doesn't count" or "this one had a doodad here or a thingamajigger there that was adapted and blah-blah-blah so it doesn't really apply to this case" or some other damn technicality or fine print that lets you escape all civic responsibility to your fellow man, or that the Second Amendment entitles you to own anything that mows any masses of people down in less than a minute JUST BECAUSE it's your divine right, somehow. It's always some fine-pointed technicality about why the founders' discussions about muskets and blunderbusses means that, lo these many years later, you have the sanctity of owning mass-murder machines. TWELVE people, including an innocent six-year-old girl, paid with their lives for this guy's wonderful, marvelous "freedom" to own mass-murder machines FAR beyond a simple handgun or even a basic rifle that's more than enough to hold off a home-invasion robber.
To the gun defenders - WHEN IS ENOUGH ENOUGH? When will these continuing massacres, to the point of an epidemic, finally reach the TOO-MUCH point for YOU, too? Or will life still always remain less valuable than gun ownership? Is that the dilemma we're cursed and doomed with, here in America, in perpetuity? Are we all condemned to be hostages to the NRA for all eternity? Is that our fate in this country? Is THAT what America is?
I know I'll get flamed for this. I certainly have been piled on for speaking out like this in other threads. Well, too bad. So be it. I could respectfully suggest that you save your breath. Please don't bother wasting it on the likes of me. NOTHING will change my mind or convince me to see your point. NOTHING. Not after this. Something just snapped in me, over this one, guys. You can argue about your gun rights til you pass out. I can't hear you anymore. Not after this. I think this was one too many gun schmucks who just kicked every last one of your arguments out from under you. Your argument is with guys like James Holmes who just peed all over your gun parade, not with me. Sorry, but that's how I feel. Go ahead and dump on me all you like for wanting to deny you your "freedoms." Somehow I just don't believe the founders of this country imagined protecting the freedom to own mass-murder weapons. Simple firearms, okay. Muskets and blunderbusses okay. That's what they wrote the Second Amendment about. Weapons that targeted one victim at a time, not dozens in less than a minute. I think the founding fathers and mothers would be HORRIFIED to see their words taken to such extremes in this modern day. In my opinion NO ONE in the civilian world is entitled to own weapons and ammo like this - that are designed for one thing and one thing only, mass murder in a mere few seconds. There's NO legitimate reason that I can see.
Have at it. Pick me apart if it makes you feel better or somehow morally justified. Condemn me for wanting to deny you a "freedom " that, in all seriousness, I firmly believe NO ONE is entitled to have, ESPECIALLY after this. You won't change my mind.