Inspired
A post at DoubleTapper spurred some thinking on my part about who shouldn't be allowed to own a gun. Here's what I commented:
Back on topic: certainly someone who is deranged or adamant about their opposition to gun ownership would be willing to sign away their rights. And I know if the government instituted this new law, there'd be screams from all the libtards about how they're being disenfranchised. Tough. Suck it up and buy one, if you can afford an iPod and a cell phone and cable TV, you can afford a gun, nothing in the law about actually using it, altho it would be irresponsible to not learn how to use and care for it, and certainly to not keep it safe from those irresponsible to not use a gun wisely (like children and thieves). I think this would negate every local gun law out there, like the DC handgun ban (soon to be followed by Philly, Chicago, and San Fran, by the news today) and the Cali waiting periods.
More wishful thinking on my part.
For the USA? Perhaps anyone who isn't willing to own a gun as a prerequisite to voting, barring the existing felons and insane. Certainly, as SailorCurt pointed out, anyone who is anti-gun usually doesn't own a gun and has nothing to lose by agitating against their ownership. So, if we tie gun ownership and voting together, they'd have an interest in working for real crime solutions, instead of blaming the guns. Even make it part of the public records, refer to them as "Civilian" and those of us with guns are "Citizens," similar to Heinlien's Starship Troopers.A bit succinct, but really, is it that bad an idea? I'm sure we can have an appeal process to restore full rights to felons and the mentally ill, ya know, after a grace period of demonstrating good behavior of 5 or 10 years. In Roswell, Texas, the law in Texas was that you had to have a firearm, and if you wanted to go without, you had to apply for a special permit to be unarmed, after being certified of sound mind and character. (Hot Damn! I just went to the Big Head Press site to copy the previous link, and they're gonna print up Roswell, Texas into a real paper graphic novel!! YESSSS!!)
Back on topic: certainly someone who is deranged or adamant about their opposition to gun ownership would be willing to sign away their rights. And I know if the government instituted this new law, there'd be screams from all the libtards about how they're being disenfranchised. Tough. Suck it up and buy one, if you can afford an iPod and a cell phone and cable TV, you can afford a gun, nothing in the law about actually using it, altho it would be irresponsible to not learn how to use and care for it, and certainly to not keep it safe from those irresponsible to not use a gun wisely (like children and thieves). I think this would negate every local gun law out there, like the DC handgun ban (soon to be followed by Philly, Chicago, and San Fran, by the news today) and the Cali waiting periods.
posted by Mattexian at 1:29 PM
2 Comments:
From what I hear, somewhere over the rainbow is where dreams come true, and perhaps your wishful thinking might have a better outcome.
Anti-gun people SUCK.
I have a simple test for most people as to whether they should own firearms or not.
I will start by leaving you alone in the room with a plethora of power tools. If I come back you are still alive and have no new holes in you, you pass the first half of the test.
The second part of the test is where I fire up a circular saw and toss the still-spinning machine at you. If you try to catch it, you fail. No guns for you.
Dodge it and supress the urge to catch the flying power saw, and I grant you the ability to own weaponry.
Post a Comment
<< Home