Politics, Weather, Photography, and the Dog
Wednesday 26 February 2014

I shouldn't have done it, but I just smacked someone down on Facebook. The exchange started when a college friend posted this photo (click for full size):

You will recall that Connecticut passed a firearms law about a year ago in response to the horrific mass-murder of children at Newtown in December 2012. Connecticut's law prohibits certain assault weapons and larger magazines in an effort to make it harder to kill 26 children with one weapon at one sitting.

I happen to think this law doesn't go far enough, preferring Australia's response to a similar event. Unfortunately, too many Americans prefer more guns and more murders to fewer guns and "less liberty."

So, after I posted a gently sarcastic response to someone's line about Connecticut's "tyranny," the guy fired back, and then I unloaded in a six-point, well-reasoned response. I know, it was a futile waste of time. It's just that I have a right to stand my ground and defend myself with everything in my intellectual arsenal, because FIRST AMENDMENT FUCK YEAH!

Here's the full exchange:

Jennifer (O.P., sharing the photo): Don't let anyone tell you "no one's coming to take your guns" because it's happening. - http://gunown.rs/1egzGtS

Sherman Kearns: Agreed Motherfuckers!

Wilson E Cuevas: Let's just pray that they take a stand against this tyranny.

David Braverman: Yeah, it's awful. Now in Connecticut, you can only kill 10 people at a time instead of 50. Tyranny, indeed. A democratically-elected state legislature passed a popular bill limiting the destructive power of individual weapons, to the great relief of an overwhelming majority of the state's residents.

Looked at another way: the line between permissible and impermissible firepower in Connecticut shifted in the direction of less firepower. If you argue that's tyranny, you'll have to discuss whether you think nuclear weapons should be permissible in Connecticut. Or tanks. Or armed fighter jets.

Wilson E Cuevas: David Braverman,you seen to be confused or your a democrat. Our constitution gives the same equal fire power as the government when it comes to tyranny. So better explained so you can understand it,in 1776 our founding father fought the king of England who in todays world would be considered the government. When they won the battle they knew that the only way to defeat the gov was weapon for weapon. In time the gov,weapon has gotten advanced. And as theirs did so did ours. As for your dumm remark about tanks and nuclear,those are weapon of war against foreign enemies not for our soul. Which is why we have a law in our constitution against our own military on our streets. But don't get me and the real American citizens,in time of a civil war,it will be weapon for weapon. As for the American people possessing 100 rnds or 500 guns it's our business not the government. We all have the rights to defend our selves and our loved ones. And with the very same guns that will be used in war. If a criminal brakes into a house then that's the criminals problem which weapon the home owner decides to defend himself with. But if you have a problem with our rights to near arms,then you need to get in contact with pierce Morgan and leave America. And why your even on this page beats the heck out of me. How can you confuse Michael Bloomberg jenniferwarewolves?

David Braverman: Some quibbles:

1. The Constitution says, "A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." In other words, the *states* have the right to have *state* militias. "The people" in this case is ambiguous, and there are valid arguments today (and there were in 1791, when the amendment passed) on both sides whether it meant "the people" as a group (i.e., states), or "the people" as individuals. We've been having this argument for 223 years. You're not dumb, and neither am I; it's just you want an absolute rule that says "all guns are fine" and I want a compromise that most people can accept.

2. George Washington, John Adams, and everyone else leading our revolution were very, very clear that they were engaged in treason, and had they lost, they knew they'd be hauled back to London and beheaded on the Mall. The only reason New York is part of the US instead of Canada is that the Patriots won. And the UK didn't accept our independence until 1815, which is why we fought a second war against them in 1812.

3. Jennifer is far better looking than Michael Bloomberg.

4. There is nothing in the Constitution prohibiting the U.S. military from acting domestically. The Posse Comitatus Act is a simple law, and can be repealed, and has been broken more than once. For example, did you know that the governor of Illinois called out the U.S. Army, complete with tanks, against the Chicago mob in the 1920s? Or that the U.S. Navy shelled New York City in 1863?

5. Even though the likelihood of another civil war in the U.S. is lower than the likelihood of Sarah Palin seeing Russia from her front window, do you honestly believe a few people with assault weapons would slow down the U.S. army? A quarter-million Iraqis with assault weapons didn't make a dent in our forces.

Our best defense against a civil war is a set of strong political institutions backed up by an educated, reasonable populace. Once the shooting starts, we've all lost. To think otherwise is dangerous fantasy.

6. Getting back to #3, I'm here because I've known Jennifer for many years, since we were kids in college, and I respect her opinions even while I disagree with them. We met when I was president of the Young Democrats and she was in the College Republicans. Which goes back to #5, I'd bet money that she and I both agree on having a political argument without firing blindly into the rhetorical crowd. Which brings me back to my main point: unregulated firearms with unlimited firepower, like ill-informed opinions, sometimes wind up in the hands of people without the skills or sanity to deploy them without hurting themselves and others.

No response yet from either Jennifer or Wilson, except he liked point #3.

Update, 14:00 CST: Cuevas responds:

I must admit,you had me laughing with #3. I so much agree. And I respect your feelings about who and what a person can and should have. But I am sure that when our founding fathers write the second amendment,they did not mean only a state militia. You have to keep in mind that not only was the king on a power trip,so is a state. And they we're aware of this and knew that the people will one day have to raise up again. As for #4,it's very true,it's also true that at this moment the government has candles it again. Which is why we have foreign troops trying to disarm us. The constitution was written to protect the people. It wasn't written to be suspended when ever they chose too. And yes our founding fathers knew they we're breaking the law,and they also knew that it was an unconstitutional law. So in reality the laws they broke we're laws that was wrong and illegal. We can go on and on till the lights go out,but in the end it all books down to one thing,and that's that their coming and their not coming for coffee. And no matter how you feel about the 2nd amendment,I know your not an idiot and you yourself are or need to be prepared.

And to give you a little bit of info about me,I was a gang banger. I robbed,stole,pumped,sold and took. Today I am 44 yrs old who opened his eyes to the other side of the world. Today I am a public servant,I pay my unconstitutional taxes,and I help those that people like you refuse to help because of fear of the consequences. I am a very strong supporter of my constitution. I believe in freedom liberty and God. If I was to see you getting hurt I would be that stranger who would stop and defend your life. If I saw you being abused by a crooked law enforcement,I would help you. If you ran out of bullets I would give you mine. But what I wouldn't do is let someone trample on my constitution,bill of rights and our freedom to privacy and especially my guns and God. So no matter what you believe in,you need to prepare yourself for what's coming. Because no matter what you believe in it's not going to feed you,protect you. So go hear up,and if you think we're all crazy,I would to be there to see you fight with a kitchen knife or screaming while they beat you down.

No response from me, I think.

Wednesday 26 February 2014 13:37:28 CST (UTC-06:00)  |  | US#
Search
On this page....
Unnecessary roughness? Asymmetric warfare? Just stupid?
Countdowns
The Daily Parker +3322d 05h 12m
2015 13d 09h 02m
Parker's 9th birthday 179d 08h 02m
My next birthday 260d 12h 07m
Categories
Aviation (346) Baseball (110) Best Bars (7) Biking (44) Chicago (912) Cubs (197) Duke (132) Geography (336) Higher Ground (5) Jokes (284) Kitchen Sink (659) London (58) Parker (195) Daily (204) Photography (144) Politics (303) US (1096) World (257) Raleigh (21) Readings (8) Religion (66) San Francisco (88) Software (207) Blogs (77) Business (231) Cloud (90) Cool links (134) Security (98) Travel (227) Weather (700) Astronomy (88) Windows Azure (60) Work (82) Writing (9)
Links
Archive
<December 2014>
SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
30123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031123
45678910
Full archive
Blogroll
About
David Braverman and Parker
David Braverman is a software developer in Chicago, and the creator of Weather Now. Parker is the most adorable dog on the planet, 80% of the time.
Legal
All content Copyright ©2014 David Braverman.
Creative Commons License
The Daily Parker by David Braverman is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License, excluding photographs, which may not be republished unless otherwise noted.
Admin Login
Sign In
Blog Stats
Total Posts: 4593
This Year: 491
This Month: 23
This Week: 6
Comments: 0