How can we fight this?
Andrew Rothman
April 3, 2004, 10:34 PM
I find myself powerless against (il)logic and emotion like this:
It is the duty and responsibility of our government, at every level- federal, state, and local, to protect our citizens from harming themselves. We protect depressed people from committing suicide, we protect people from purchasing and using unsafe foods, drugs, and products, but we don’t protect people who are too ignorant, drugged up, or just too young from getting a hold of guns and hurting themselves or others. How many examples do we need before we are willing to end our love affair with the gun? True there are many factors involved in violence. However, guns are a common catalyst that allows violence to surface with no more effort than changing the channel on the TV. We must act together, starting at home, to eliminate access to guns to those who misuse them. To do this, you may have to give up your gun too.
- James L Horwitz, MD
http://www.rainbowpediatrics.net/nokilling/gunindex.html
If you enjoyed reading about "How can we fight this?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join
TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
P95Carry
April 3, 2004, 10:39 PM
I think I share your despair Matt ...... but of course he fails to mention deaths due to medical malpractice and ''accidents'' .... which would help greatly with his warped perspective.
Just how we ''educate'' and instill some real logic, I really don't know .... these people have such closed minds and blinkered outlooks.:(
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Edit to add .. I wish he and his ilk would come to THR and debate this nonsense!
cheygriz
April 3, 2004, 10:41 PM
Matt,
You can cure ignorance with education, but at the current level of scientific knowledge, there is no known cure for stupidity.
edited to add: Physicians kill more people through medical mistakes every ear than guns do.
AND: Ted Kennedy's car had killed more people than all of the guns I have ever owned!
R.H. Lee
April 3, 2004, 10:42 PM
The guy is a blissninny. Sucker him in. Have him commit, then re-commit again that his sole purpose is prevention from harm. Gather data documenting where a firearm in the possession of a civilian prevented a crime. These instances overwhelm the criminal/accidental use of firearms.;)
Standing Wolf
April 3, 2004, 11:16 PM
...guns are a common catalyst that allows violence to surface with no more effort than changing the channel on the TV.
There is no cure for complete anti-reality.
goalie
April 4, 2004, 12:11 AM
A doc at work once spouted some crap like that to me while we were BSing in the ICU one night. My reply was along the lines of: "Gee, well seeing as, in the last 100 years alone, disarming people led to over a hunded million deaths of civilians in various countries at the hands of their own government, maybe the benefits of an independent, self reliant, and free populace far outweigh the negatives. Then I made some smarmy comment about kids drowning in buckets more often then being truely accidentally shot. A little trip to the CDC website became quite interesting, and I have gone shooting with that same doc twice now in the last few years. :)
hapafish
April 4, 2004, 12:14 AM
It is the duty and responsibility of our government, at every level- federal, state, and local, to protect our citizens from harming themselves.
No, it is the duty and the responsibility of our government to uphold the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. As it is written, not fantasized by someone who probably doesn't have to deal with the realities of living in bad neighborhoods, having your loved ones predated on, or victimized in countless other ways.
but we don’t protect people who are too ignorant, drugged up, or just too young
I suspect the good doctor Horowitz is guilty of at least two out of three of these listed failings, but something called "respecting free will" keeps me from wanting to violate the good doctor's civil rights and beat him to death with a nerf bat.
To each their own poison. Peace out.
Gary H
April 4, 2004, 12:18 AM
A would be jumper held up traffic on the SF-Oakland Bay Bridge yesterday and folks were parked for a good part of the day. I don't understand why someone can't kill themselves. I only require that they don't hurt anyone else and pay ahead of time for service required (security, cleanup and burial.) Of course, it isn't my call.
7.62FullMetalJacket
April 4, 2004, 12:51 AM
hapafish beat me to it.
It is the duty and responsibility of our government, at every level- federal, state, and local, to protect our citizens from harming themselves.
The good Dr. needs to go back to skool and do sum book learnin'
hapafish
April 4, 2004, 01:00 AM
7.62FullMetalJacket, I didn't beat you to a thing. Since Matt Payne is kinda in the dumps over this, I think there's enough of the good doctor to go around for ridicule.
Gary H, I would bet breakfast at Waffle House (fine cuisine where I'm at) that the wannabe jumper was the good doctor himself, having taken too much Demerol and Vicodin and in severe depression at being laughed at in his workplace, and unable to respond to an RKBA proponent demolishing his carefully crafted fantasy world. Drugged and stupid. That does make two out of three.
Actually, now that I think about it, maybe the good doctor was using "gun" as a substitute for something else. Like "penis." A topic close to the good doctor's heart ... ah yes, that makes so much more sense ...
We must act together, starting at home, to eliminate access to penises to those who misuse them. To do this, you may have to give up your penis too.
Peace out.
PATH
April 4, 2004, 01:01 AM
:( Sigh! When will they ever learn? :banghead:
Jeff
April 4, 2004, 01:07 AM
It is the duty and responsibility of our government, at every level- federal, state, and local, to protect our citizens from harming themselves.
What an incredibly frightening statement, especially coming from someone with a doctorate.
With that line of reasoning, where could one possibly conclude "duties of protection?"
Should we all abolish motorized vehicles and stay inside our homes and walk around in body armor and motorcycle helmets, as mandated by the government?
Unbelievable. :rolleyes:
Jeff
April 4, 2004, 01:09 AM
Someone please cut out my tongue, lest I should one day yell, "Fire!" in a crowded movie theater.
7.62FullMetalJacket
April 4, 2004, 01:09 AM
If he had been Cambodian in the 70's, he would have found out why the RKBA is so important, since he would have been a "targeted" professional. Just one of three million skulls.
JPM70535
April 4, 2004, 01:16 AM
Path
Scary thing is, they truly believe they are right, and that makes them doubly dangerous.
hapafish
April 4, 2004, 01:21 AM
Dangerous most to themselves, as they believe in living their own principles and walk around de-clawed.
I bet the good doctor's worldview wouldn't survive a mugging. Let him take lessons from Bernard Goetz.
Peace out.
geekWithA.45
April 4, 2004, 01:34 AM
To do this, you may have to give up your gun too.
Sure Doc. Come n get it.
-------------------------------
The American Society of Pediatrics pretty much rates right up there with the VPC/Brady/MMMs, this guy's basically parroting the party line.
PATH
April 4, 2004, 01:45 AM
JPM70535,
They truly are scary!
The_Antibubba
April 4, 2004, 03:33 AM
How do you refute that kind of argument? Follow the money trail. Wanna bet he's supplementing his pediatric's income as a paid shill?
You cannot let the Banner's get you down.
What you need is a trip to the range! :D :D :D
cheygriz
April 4, 2004, 04:10 PM
PRO-BUBBA!!! (lol)
Mr. Clark
April 4, 2004, 04:37 PM
Someone please cut out my tongue, lest I should one day yell, "Fire!" in a crowded movie theater.
There are people who might do it.
And even if you pointed out that if they did that then one day you might happen upon a crowded theater that is actually on fire, and be unable to warn the patrons, resulting in their death, achieving the exact opposite of what was intended, it wouldn't change their minds.
Sad.
N3rday
April 4, 2004, 05:39 PM
Traditionally, Saturday Night Penises have been defined as non-sporting, low-quality penises with a barrel length of under three inches. "Junk gun" is a more recent term used to describe penises which lack essential safety features
wow. works every time.
Bruce H
April 4, 2004, 07:53 PM
I was going to say the good doctor needed a proctologist but it is obvious that he is already brain dead.
7.62FullMetalJacket
April 4, 2004, 08:07 PM
Well, if a doctor has his head up his a$$, does he really need a proctologist? Second opinion maybe?
Foreign Devil
April 5, 2004, 10:38 AM
HE cannot compare the government regulation of unsafe food, medicine and products to guns. Most guns are inherently safe these days and it is misuse that is the problem not the product itself. There is legitimate use for food, medicine and house appliances of course, just as there is for guns.
Andrew Rothman
April 5, 2004, 10:51 AM
Antibubba -
I doubt that a trip to the range will improve my mood.
Still, to be sure, I'll give it a try! :)
There is progress in the world: Ten months ago, my wife, upon learning that I had procured a carry permit, insisted that I not carry while out with her or the kids.
On Saturday, she enthusaistically agreed that I ought to take our two-year-old with me when I went to the Million Moms Meetup (to see my RKBA friends, who are the only people who ever attend these things.)
It didn't even occur to her to worry that our little princess would be surrounded by men with guns. :)
If you enjoyed reading about "How can we fight this?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join
TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
vBulletin® v3.8.6, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.