Brady gun control tweet accidentally supports the 2nd Amendment Right to bear arms…

2aguy

Diamond Member
Jul 19, 2014
111,970
52,238
2,290
The Brady gun control group sent out a tweet condemning state sanctioned gun violence…..pointing out exactly why we have the 2nd Amendment…..

Today, we remember the students shot and killed at #KentState: Allison Beth Krause Jeffrey Glenn Miller Sandra Lee Scheuer William Knox Schroeder Half a century later, unnecessary state-sanctioned gun violence continues to kill Americans, especially Black + Native Americans
—————————
However, what is true is that Brady is talking about “state-sanctioned gun violence” while simultaneously doing everything they can to make it so the state is the only one with guns in the first place.
—————-

We also should remember that Kent State wasn’t the police. It was the National Guard. That’s military. There’s absolutely no push by Brady to disarm or restrict the military from having certain weapons, now is there?

Yet if state-sanctioned homicide is a problem that we should be prepared to address, how in the hell are we to do that if ordinary citizens are disarmed?

Without an armed populace, Kent State would cease being a historical anomaly and become simply the first of numerous other atrocities.

After all, I’m sure the people at Brady can think of a number of politicians they distrust with power. Everyone can.


If one of them gained power, though, and didn’t have to worry about an armed populace, just what would they do? Just how badly would they shift our nation on the spectrum between freedom and tyranny?
————
You can’t argue about state-sanctioned gun violence on one hand and then demand that only the state have guns. That just doesn’t make any sense.


 
You have no choice to depend on the policemen. You have a gun and may as well use it, why don't people carry guns? I'd call the police if my life was in danger.
 
It is interesting that we have police agencies in Canada who were pushing for the elimination of guns. I stated in the comments that I don't own one but if citizens can't own them neither should police, we could copy the British model where police have clubs instead of guns. There was silence after that.
 
"Fourteen-year-old boys are not part of a well-regulated militia. Members of wacky religious cults are not part of a well-regulated militia. Permitting unregulated citizens to have guns is destroying the security of this free state." Molly Ivins


"The shooter is almost always male. Of the past 129 mass shootings in the United States, all but three have been men. The shooter is socially alienated, and he can’t get laid. Every time you scratch the surface of the latest mass killing, in a movie theatre, a school, the streets of Paris or an abortion clinic, you find the weaponised loser. From Jihadi John of ISIS to Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris at Columbine, these men are invariably stuck in the emotional life of an adolescent. They always struggle with self-esteem – especially regarding women – and sometimes they give up entirely on the possibility of amorous fulfilment. There are different levels of tactical coordination, different ostensible grievances and different access to firearms, but the psyche beneath is invariably the same."



'A third of guns in the US are imported, and foreign firearms makers want a say on gun control'

 
You have no choice to depend on the policemen. You have a gun and may as well use it, why don't people carry guns? I'd call the police if my life was in danger.
And the police would be very unlikely to get there quick enough to save your life. There have been multiple court decisions saying that the police have no responsibility to protect any individual. Their job is to protect society by capturing criminals AFTER they have committed crimes. The median response time for priority one calls in Phoenix is six minutes and twenty-seven seconds. Unless you are very lucky, your killer would be done and gone minutes before the police could arrive.
 

Forum List

Back
Top