Someone was QUITE confused over at TH, still at the “Right wing populists want to kill us all” post. More on that part later on but I had to bring this up about guns. It’s a topic that comes up rarely (much to my surprise) but the opinions are what one would think at an eco-progressive site (no surprise at all):
Many people don’t take responsibility for their actions. If I owned a gun, I would have the freedom and ability to kill someone…
Yep “w3wickedwitch” went there. And then went into a very strange pro-abortion outpouring; how the heck did she link those two topics? And yes, I’ll do the abortion part later, but here was my response once I got over what she said (emphasis mine this second time around):
Absolutely wrong and I apologize for missing this style of argument first time around. NO, simply possessing a firearm DOESN’T give you the right to kill someone out of thin air. Here in the US, the Second Amendment codifies an existing Natural Right to self-defense as well as to protect against a tyrannical government (yes, Venezuelans ARE lamenting that they were totally disarmed years ago – except, of course, for those loyal to Chavez / Maduro. How’s that working out for them now?).
If someone came at me with the intent to cause me harm, or those around me, I have the right to stop them. Yes, death might be a natural consequence of that person’s decision. MY decision is to make them STOP. I’m 62 and like all males my age, am seeing my muscle mass and agility on the decrease. If someone in their mid-twenties started swinging at me, there’s probably little I can do. A firearm protects those that would otherwise be unable to stop that attack.
So to my point – WHY is it that someone, in this kind of setting, always says that quote? I have never understood that from a plain outlook OR from a debating strategy. With the freedom to carry is the high responsibility to not use it in the first place. That’s what law abiding people do (in fact, CCW folks are an order of magnitude MORE law abiding than police in the aggregate). We realize that possessing also has that high burden of using it only as a last resort – walk away, talk yourself out of a situation, don’t confront, avoid being in places or situations where such force may be a likely outcome. A LAST RESORT.
Thus, I reject that argument. I also don’t understand why people keep making that hysterical argument. There are more CCW licenses in the US than ever before and excluding suicides (giving up on life) and gang-banger/crime infestations (Chicago South, anyone? LA?)(no regard for life), crime stats are down with guns instead of the expected rise due to those increased bearers.
I have carried for years. Not ONCE have I ever had to unholster or pull my firearm from my pocket. That’s responsibility in action. Not “the freedom and ability to kill someone” – the responsibility to be wise is even with the freedom to carry.
Perhaps a lot of this came from my martial arts training, both with and without hand weapons. It was always drilled into me is that the fight you win is the one you never have to have in the first place. Don’t put yourself into the situation where that training had to be put into action. It was a natural carry-over to carrying a firearm.
Freedom to kill – that is an unfathomable mindset to me. Yet, Progressives seems to believe that our Second Amendment allows that unfettered freedom to callously shoot someone. Why is it that most Progressives, unlike those of us that do carry (and there are some Progressives that do carry as well), either fail to either understand or do not WANT to understand that Freedoms DEMAND self-responsibility? That the Rights embodied in the Second Amendment DEMAND the responsibility to know when and when not to exercise it?
The closest thing I can thing of in comparison is when Conservatives with the self-responsibility angle, say that young ladies should be careful how they dress, where they go late at night, and don’t drink or drug themselves into a stupor else something bad might happen. The Left is almost adamant screaming that would be victim-shaming – that she should have the freedom to be free from molestation.
We actually believe that a female victim should not be molested as well. Where we disagree is the total unhinged demand that self-responsibility be cast off in this scenario; the chasm between us and Progressives that Freedom means freedom from everything – especially self-responsibility. Freedom from self-responsibility –
I can’t, and probably never will, understand that mentality.
“If I owned a gun, I would have the freedom and ability to kill someone…” No, that’s as wrong as it gets.