In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Options
Another Anti-Gun Jack*ss Columnist Spouts Off
trstone
Member Posts: 833 ✭✭✭✭
Yet more verbal diarrhoea from the left....
"NRA Emulates Nixon With Its Enemies List", by Leonard Pitts Jr. is yet another delightful illustration of how anti-Second-Amendment columnists think that the First Amendment is really the only important one. In this wonderfully revealing piece of journalistic claptrap, Pitts Jr. bemoans the fact that he's not important enough to be on an alleged NRA "enemies list"---in point of fact, Pitts Jr. isn't important enough to rate the small waste of ink and paper expended in printing his column in many dailies like the Omaha World-Herald, where I stumbled onto this revolting little gem.
What makes it "verbal diarrhoea"? you may ask.
What is it about this particular op/ed article that upsets me so? you may wonder.
Well, I just find it a tad irritating that this * seems to feel the First Amendment is sacrosanct, yet says in the same breath that---and I quote---"I believe the right to keep and bear arms is a fiction. Legal experts I respect---including Departments of Justice previous to the current one---have held that the Second Amendment confers no right of individual gun ownership. But---and here's the tricky part---I also believe the perception of such a right is sodeeply ingrained in the American psyche that the legal nicities are largely immaterial. As a practical matter, the right exists."
What a surprise that a liberal scribe respects ONLY the opinions of the previous administration's DOJ....And what a surprise to find a liberal scribe who thinks that it's perfectly fine to deny a Constitutional right to others---regardless of how they feel on the matter---because he doesn't wish to exercise it for himself. Sandwiched between his seemingly non-sequitur blabberings about being an "expert in Temptology"---a reference to his mastery of trivia regarding The Temptations, though God only knows what that has to do with the legitimacy of the Second Amendment---and some fuzzy ramblings about who's on the supposed NRA "hate list" (including, it seems, his precious Temptations, for whatever that's worth), Pitts Jr. clearly and admirably delineates his train of thought concerning the rights of others, Constitutionally protected or not: If Pitts Jr. doesn't like it, then NOBODY should be able to exercise it. And shouldn't the unwashed masses follow his lead on this issue, coming as it does from an elite member of the press? After all, Pitts Jr. says in print that the Second Amendment is a fiction, and he's a JOURNALIST, and the papers can't print anything that's not true, right? Right!
Gee, I'm glad we cleared all that up, aren't you?
An open invitation to Pitts Jr. and any other anti-gun fools out there: If YOU don't want to own a firearm, then DON'T. But don't open your disingenuous mouths and start telling those of us who DO that WE shouldn't be allowed to because YOU think you know what's best for society. Until then, we "gun-owning troglodytes" will respect YOUR First-Amendment rights only in the same measure that YOU respect OUR Second-Amendment rights...
"NRA Emulates Nixon With Its Enemies List", by Leonard Pitts Jr. is yet another delightful illustration of how anti-Second-Amendment columnists think that the First Amendment is really the only important one. In this wonderfully revealing piece of journalistic claptrap, Pitts Jr. bemoans the fact that he's not important enough to be on an alleged NRA "enemies list"---in point of fact, Pitts Jr. isn't important enough to rate the small waste of ink and paper expended in printing his column in many dailies like the Omaha World-Herald, where I stumbled onto this revolting little gem.
What makes it "verbal diarrhoea"? you may ask.
What is it about this particular op/ed article that upsets me so? you may wonder.
Well, I just find it a tad irritating that this * seems to feel the First Amendment is sacrosanct, yet says in the same breath that---and I quote---"I believe the right to keep and bear arms is a fiction. Legal experts I respect---including Departments of Justice previous to the current one---have held that the Second Amendment confers no right of individual gun ownership. But---and here's the tricky part---I also believe the perception of such a right is sodeeply ingrained in the American psyche that the legal nicities are largely immaterial. As a practical matter, the right exists."
What a surprise that a liberal scribe respects ONLY the opinions of the previous administration's DOJ....And what a surprise to find a liberal scribe who thinks that it's perfectly fine to deny a Constitutional right to others---regardless of how they feel on the matter---because he doesn't wish to exercise it for himself. Sandwiched between his seemingly non-sequitur blabberings about being an "expert in Temptology"---a reference to his mastery of trivia regarding The Temptations, though God only knows what that has to do with the legitimacy of the Second Amendment---and some fuzzy ramblings about who's on the supposed NRA "hate list" (including, it seems, his precious Temptations, for whatever that's worth), Pitts Jr. clearly and admirably delineates his train of thought concerning the rights of others, Constitutionally protected or not: If Pitts Jr. doesn't like it, then NOBODY should be able to exercise it. And shouldn't the unwashed masses follow his lead on this issue, coming as it does from an elite member of the press? After all, Pitts Jr. says in print that the Second Amendment is a fiction, and he's a JOURNALIST, and the papers can't print anything that's not true, right? Right!
Gee, I'm glad we cleared all that up, aren't you?
An open invitation to Pitts Jr. and any other anti-gun fools out there: If YOU don't want to own a firearm, then DON'T. But don't open your disingenuous mouths and start telling those of us who DO that WE shouldn't be allowed to because YOU think you know what's best for society. Until then, we "gun-owning troglodytes" will respect YOUR First-Amendment rights only in the same measure that YOU respect OUR Second-Amendment rights...
Comments
Death to Tyrants!!! Lev 26:14-39
Those who would offer any interpretation that would relegate Amendment II to "relic" status of a bygone era are blatantly stating that the remainder of the Bill of Rights isn't worth a damn, either.
Luke 22:36.
When guns were invented everything changed. For the first time in the history of the world a frail woman had a chance to sucessfully defend herself and home. My dream is that one of the anti-gun nuts will need a gun for defense and be unable to have one because of their own actions.