From here.
It makes some sense. If one is going to go hunt humans, it would be logical to go hunting in places where one's prey is less likely to mount an aggressive defense.
Tuesday, June 4, 2019
Food for Thought
It makes some sense. If one is going to go hunt humans, it would be logical to go hunting in places where one's prey is less likely to mount an aggressive defense.
7 comments:
House Rules #1, #2 and #6 apply to all comments. Rule #3 also applies to political comments.
In short, don't be a jackass. THIS MEANS YOU!
If you never see your comments posted, see Rule #7.
All comments must be on point and address either the points raised in the blog post or points raised by commenters in response.
Any comments that drift off onto other topics are subject to deletion.
(Please don't feed the trolls.)
中國詞不評論，冒抹除的風險。僅英語。
COMMENT MODERATION IS IN EFFECT UFN. This means that if you are an insulting dick, nobody will ever see it.
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/05/01/607054795/nra-bans-guns-during-convention-speech-by-president-vice-president
ReplyDeleteThe graphic is skewed somewhat by choices made by the producers, including choices made that are similar to the choices Anytown made in their graphics, and that this group complained about.
ReplyDeleteThe biggest complaint I have here is that this suggests we cannot choose to avoid gun violence, but simply must all arm ourselves. A legal product that is so often abused often ends up regulated out of existence, something those to the extreme end of the gun rights crowd would do well to remember. In the long run, some form of smart gun technology, and I am well aware of the issues and limits, is liable to be the legal solution...so the pro-gun rights crowd should pick its fights carefully and make sure to be leading or guiding the move, and not trying to strictly play defense and maintain the status quo.
DA, you do know, I hope, that the Secret Service requires that?
ReplyDeleteBut you said gun-free zones only encourage shooters!
ReplyDeleteCP88, the graphic does not suggest that we must all arm ourselves.
ReplyDeleteAnd your segue suggesting the pro Constitutional Rights crowd initiate more rules that restrict people's rights before the gun grabbers to is complete and utter bullshit.
dammit, "...before the gun grabbers do..."
ReplyDelete0_0, I’m simply pointing out that the more the extreme Gun Rights crowd fights, the worse the eventual demographic catastrophe will be for Gun Rights. The shooting sprees across the country are steadily eroding the no restrictions position, as more and more people feel a connection to these shootings. Demographically, the Gun Control crowd is slowly gaining on the Gun Rights crowd, mainly as a function of a steadily more Urban/Suburban population, where gun ownership is more about “protection” than hunting or pest control.
ReplyDeletePeople with less “buy in” are more willing to consider restrictions, and the natural consequence of that attitude with the graphic above is that the larger and larger percentage of the population that believes something must be done will then support actions to “control guns. I stand by my position that the NRA’s hard right turn has consequences now and then...for now, gun rights expand, in the future they contract. The Senate will be the last bulwark for the 2nd Amendment, simply because of the power of smaller and more rural states, but that can change If the population as a whole views the Senate as an impediment.
I’ve preached for years that the NRA and such should work to properly prevent these events in a manner that is acceptable to Gun Rights advocates, and without suggesting how to do just that. Unfortunately, the NRA has turned from that course under Wayne and his cabal, and instead made it my way or the highway...a position that is likely to result in them dead in the road, run over by a truck labeled Gun Control.