Saturday, February 4, 2012

"We both support the 2nd Ammendment..."

What a load of crap this is!

If Bloomberg supported the right of every human being to defend himself (I refuse to refer to it as, "The 2nd Amendment," as it's not the 2nd amendment that grants me this most basic of human rights), he wouldn't be imprisoning people like this decent woman:

These are tyrannical bastards with no love for their fellow man.

1 comment:

  1. Personally I don't see what's so difficult about the concept of "shall not be infringed". Now, that being said, I don't think most folks should have AT-4's and M2HB's, but antitank weapons and heavy machine guns are a TEENSY bit overboard when it comes to most good old-fashioned American gun collecting. Plus, we do have some hotheads and crazies amongst us that probably shouldn't be packing heat in public. So some regulations may be necessary. Oh, the compromises of a modern society...

    I believe it's probably a good idea to have some sort of standardized training program, including practice in discriminative shooting, before just letting anyone walk around legally packing on anyone's property but their own. It would be nice if there was a Federal standard for concealed carry, and you could get a Federal accredited concealed carry license in your state that would work in other states. But unless your state has reciprocity laws with the state you're traveling to, you may be in for a bunch of trouble.

    Ideally, there should be some kind of plea deal where the NY State PD folks have a talk with the TN State PD folks and possibly transfer her back to work off her BS with some community service back home, and perhaps a restriction on her license, depending on how TN feels about it.

    If we could address those debt based currency issues and start up an actual manufacturing and service based economy again, and make it the law that people have to be given a living wage for their hourly pay, we could pretty much eliminate all the crime issues associated with firearms. Which is pretty much what the whole point of firearms laws is about, according to the talking heads: crime.

    Well, I live in crime central, PG County. My part ain't quite as bad as some others not so far away. Their crap spills over into our neighborhoods, and we have a little of our own locally. Wouldn't you know that we're on the border of the poorest section of Washington DC, "far" Souf'eas. Remember that: there is no "t" in Souf'eas. Managing communities, I've learned a lot about crime. Crime happens because of three things, according to criminal theory. It's called the "crime triangle".

    For crime to exist, you need three things: motive, opportunity/ability, and a lack of exposure. In other words, you need to have a reason, you need a chance to do the deed, and you need to feel like you can get away with it. Most crime prevention strategies focus on increasing exposure via cameras and open spaces, and removing opportunity/ability by installing locks and other passive barriers.

    But if we were to address the economic roots of why crime occurs in the first place, it'd evaporate like a summer rain on the concrete when the clouds part. No expensive cameras and complicated locks necessary.

    Wouldn't it be nice to live in a just and honorable world, where shooting was for fun, and for hunting, and bonding with the next generation by passing on a tradition? Why must we persist on being such assholes to each other?