Don’t think gun grabbers will ever give up. Ever. E.J. Dionne comes up with an interesting way to circumvent the 2nd Amendment and get the guns from law abiding citizens. While giving criminals a good chuckle
How America can free itself from guns
Advocates of a saner approach to guns need a new strategy. We cannot go on like this, wringing our hands in frustration after every tragedy involving firearms. We said “enough†after Sandy Hook. We thought the moment for action had come. Yet nothing happened. We are saying “enough†after Charleston. But this time, we don’t even expect anything to happen.
What’s needed is a long-term national effort to change popular attitudes toward handgun ownership. And we need to insist on protecting the rights of Americans who do not want to be anywhere near guns.
OK. So, tell you what. Let’s disarm all police officers in the areas of those Americans who do not want to be near guns. Criminals would love this.
That’s why the nation needs a public service offensive on behalf of the health and safety of us all. It could build on Sandy Hook Promise and other civic endeavors. If you doubt it could succeed, consider how quickly opinion changed on the Confederate battle flag.
Interesting. Using the Power Of Government to force compliance and mental attitudes. To shame citizens who believe in their 2nd Amendment rights. Who believe in protecting themselves and their families. Nothing fascistic about it in the least!
“The best way to disarm the NRA rhetorically is to make the Second Amendment issue moot,†Molyneux said. “This is not about the government saying you cannot own a handgun. This is about society saying you should not have a gun, especially in a home with children.â€
I thought shaming people and bullying them was Bad? Gun grabbers know that they can never do away with the 2nd, and won’t even try to amend it, so, hey, Government indoctrination.
“Those of us who want to live, shop, go to school and worship in gun-free spaces also have rights,†Molyneux said. “In what way is ‘freedom’ advanced by telling the owner of a bar or restaurant they cannot ban handguns in their own place of business, as many states now do? Today, it is the NRA that is the enemy of freedom, by seeking to impose its values on everyone else.â€
Funny how most of those gun free spaces, as well as those with massive restrictions, are the ones attacked the most and have some of the highest crime rates.
The nation could ring out with the new slogans of liberty: “Not in my house.†“Not in our school.†“Not in my bar.†“Not in our church.†We’d be defending one of our most sacred rights: The right not to bear arms.
Criminals will know exactly where to go. Of course, this is about denying a right embedded in the Constitution.
So Teach when are you scheduling an open carry meeting at your phone store? Do you open carry on a daily basis, you know for self protection?
If the esteemed Mr Dionne — a left-wing writer who purports to be Catholic, and writes for the “lay Catholic” journal Commonweal, — believes, as he quoted,
then someone ought to ask him, what about those people who want handguns specifically to commit crimes? All that Messrs Molyneux and Dionne are asking societal pressure to do is to disarm potential victims.
You know john, this is one of your memes that truly demonstrates how poorly you understand the difference between the exercise of a right and liberals who want to restrict rights.
Whether Teach carries or not is his choice and an exercise of his rights. Dionne and people like him want to strip him of the ability to exercise that right.
If you can’t see or understand the difference, I suggest that you go back to 2nd grade were they teach basic government and rights. (Maybe they can even teach you math, map reading and the ability to read a application too!)
Our host quoted:
Exactly wrong: the right not to bear arms people exercise every day. What Mr Dionne is advocating is not allowing others to exercise their rights.
What the left can never seem to understand is that the criminals don’t care about other people’s rights. When a criminal murders or robs or assaults someone, he isn’t stopping to ask about his victim’s rights.
This is just so simple that I am continually dumbfounded that the left cannot see it.
But, let’s face facts: the left are the enemy of virtually all liberty. They support freedom of speech . . . until it’s speech that they don’t like, in which case they want to ban hate speech, campaign contributions, really anything which doesn’t fall within the liberal meme. They support freedom of religion . . . but are perfectly happy if the government says that religion can’t choose not to accept two queers getting married.
Really, for the left, the right of people to choose is restricted to exactly one thing.
The esteemed Mr Dionne wrote:
This, you see, is how the left now view things. Put in terms of the First Amendment, it is as though the right not to listen to what someone else is saying, or the right not to read what someone else has published, has been replaced by a right not to have people say within earshot that to which we don’t want to listen, or publish that which we don’t want to read.
And that’s exactly what they believe: if you are saying something they don’t like, why, that’s now hate speech. They even want to remove two stained glass windows from the National Cathedral, because they depict Robert E Lee, Stonewall Jackson, and the Confederate battle flag. The American left have become indistinguishable from the Taliban who blew up the Bamiyan Buddhas.
” “In what way is ‘freedom’ advanced by telling the owner of a bar or restaurant they cannot ban handguns in their own place of business, as many states now do?…”
Maybe I am missing something here.
What states require a shop owner to allow guns?
There are 22 states that have some form of a law that does not allow a business owner to ban an employee’s weapon if the weapon is in the parking lot.
I can see both sides of this issue. While the property owner has certain rights, so does the employee.
This is another case where rights clash.