Libertyteeth
Member
Great editorial from the Missoulian, Missoula, Montana.
Link: http://www.missoulian.com/articles/2005/10/10/opinion/opinion2.txt
*It's a good idea to behave here, too* - Monday, October 10, 2005
SUMMARY: Anti-gun group parodies itself with hyperbolic warnings.
An anti-gun group, unhappy about a new Florida law bolstering people's right
to defend themselves against attack, issued a warning to tourists arriving
in the Sunshine State last week:
"Do not argue unnecessarily with local people," warned the Brady Campaign to
Prevent Gun Violence.
The implication is that Floridians might just fill their argumentative
visitors with lead.
"If someone appears to be angry with you, maintain to the best of your
ability a positive attitude and do not shout or make threatening gestures,"
the Brady Campaign literature adds.
What are they saying? That tourists shouldn't be obnoxious or shout and make
threatening gestures to the locals? This is supposed to be an argument
AGAINST guns?
Boy, howdy, if an irrational fear of guns is the only thing that keeps mean,
threatening people from harassing others, pass the ammunition!
What, exactly, is this new law that causes anti-gun folks to preach good
manners? It's legislation that took effect Oct. 1 clarifying people's right
to defend themselves at the moment of attack. The law frees victims of
attack from attempting to flee the situation before fighting for their
lives. Someone who faces a deadly attack may shoot the assailant so long as
the attack occurs in a place the victims is legally entitled to be. That is,
a woman would enjoy criminal and civil immunity if she shot a guy who pulled
a knife on her at a bus stop, but would be in trouble if the shooting took
place inside a house she had broken into. Critics say this will encourage
people to shoot first, ask questions later, but that comically trivializes
the fundamental human right of self-defense. The Florida law doesn't give
anyone the right to shoot anyone who doesn't need shooting.
Similar legislation was proposed in Montana earlier this year but died in
the House of Representatives. House Bill 693 included a provision saying, "a
person threatened with bodily injury or loss of life has no duty to summon
law enforcement assistance prior to acting in self-defense or to retreat
from the threat."
Although Montana's HB693 failed to pass (expect to see some version of it
back in 2007), we hasten to point out that this state is bristling with
firearms and there isn't a jury in the land that would convict anyone for
righteously using one to protect life and limb - even if he or she hadn't
first tried to outrun the attacker or taken several minutes to find a phone
and dial 9-1-1.
So, when the Brady Campaign finishes in Florida, perhaps we can get them to
remind visitors to Big Sky Country to behave themselves, too.
Copyright © 2005 Missoulian, a division of Lee Enterprises.
Link: http://www.missoulian.com/articles/2005/10/10/opinion/opinion2.txt
*It's a good idea to behave here, too* - Monday, October 10, 2005
SUMMARY: Anti-gun group parodies itself with hyperbolic warnings.
An anti-gun group, unhappy about a new Florida law bolstering people's right
to defend themselves against attack, issued a warning to tourists arriving
in the Sunshine State last week:
"Do not argue unnecessarily with local people," warned the Brady Campaign to
Prevent Gun Violence.
The implication is that Floridians might just fill their argumentative
visitors with lead.
"If someone appears to be angry with you, maintain to the best of your
ability a positive attitude and do not shout or make threatening gestures,"
the Brady Campaign literature adds.
What are they saying? That tourists shouldn't be obnoxious or shout and make
threatening gestures to the locals? This is supposed to be an argument
AGAINST guns?
Boy, howdy, if an irrational fear of guns is the only thing that keeps mean,
threatening people from harassing others, pass the ammunition!
What, exactly, is this new law that causes anti-gun folks to preach good
manners? It's legislation that took effect Oct. 1 clarifying people's right
to defend themselves at the moment of attack. The law frees victims of
attack from attempting to flee the situation before fighting for their
lives. Someone who faces a deadly attack may shoot the assailant so long as
the attack occurs in a place the victims is legally entitled to be. That is,
a woman would enjoy criminal and civil immunity if she shot a guy who pulled
a knife on her at a bus stop, but would be in trouble if the shooting took
place inside a house she had broken into. Critics say this will encourage
people to shoot first, ask questions later, but that comically trivializes
the fundamental human right of self-defense. The Florida law doesn't give
anyone the right to shoot anyone who doesn't need shooting.
Similar legislation was proposed in Montana earlier this year but died in
the House of Representatives. House Bill 693 included a provision saying, "a
person threatened with bodily injury or loss of life has no duty to summon
law enforcement assistance prior to acting in self-defense or to retreat
from the threat."
Although Montana's HB693 failed to pass (expect to see some version of it
back in 2007), we hasten to point out that this state is bristling with
firearms and there isn't a jury in the land that would convict anyone for
righteously using one to protect life and limb - even if he or she hadn't
first tried to outrun the attacker or taken several minutes to find a phone
and dial 9-1-1.
So, when the Brady Campaign finishes in Florida, perhaps we can get them to
remind visitors to Big Sky Country to behave themselves, too.
Copyright © 2005 Missoulian, a division of Lee Enterprises.
