Korwin Love Bombs The Antis

[JCMAG]

Thanks Rick. I read the whole OP but the link, apparently. I've been known to have selective reading.

Thanks again for reporting on this, it is excellent reading.

 

[armedandsafe]

"well, the odds of that happening are really small. How often does that happen?"

The response to that is, "I thought you said the idea was to save even one life."

Pops

 

[Poper]

"

Quote:
"well, the odds of that happening are really small. How often does that happen?"

It only takes one time. It should never happen, but it does... All too often.

Poper

 

[misterwhipple]

There are many who - for whatever reasons - are not able or competent to defend themselves. This doesn't make them currupt.

That's part of what I meant. If you can't defend yourself, arranging for someone else do it for you is entirely legitimate. It's expecting someone else to endanger his life to defend me when I won't defend myself that's corrupt; building on the foundation of that cowardice and equating my offer of money with the value of his life is worse.

(Note that a corrupt buyer doesn't always imply a corrupt seller.)

And let's face it...for ever buyer is a seller. Is that currupt?

That is a much more far-reaching question, perhaps beyond the scope of this thread.

 

[rainbowbob]

Points well made - and well taken, misterwhipple.

...equating my offer of money with the value of his life...

But isn't that what we do when we hire an LEO?

 

[Macpherson]

It's expecting someone else to endanger his life to defend me when I won't defend myself that's corrupt; building on the foundation of that cowardice and equating my offer of money with the value of his life is worse.

Even that's not the main issue here. It's the fact that people who don't like guns are deciding that no one should have guns, which is blatantly unconstiutional and contrary to the concept of individual freedom. If someone doesn't want to own a gun, fine, that's their right. However they have NO right to prevent me from owning one. Moral issues about a desire (or lack thereof) to defend one's family aren't even really the heart of the argument here, but unfortunately that's the way it has to work these days.

 

[The Unknown User]

Awesome post. I'm taken aback by his level of maturity.

Oh, and that "One Utah" blog is hysterical. The anti-rights group is so out there.

 

[Rumble]

Those of you who just want guns to go away, you don’t want to take guns away from the police do you? Heads shake no. Of course you want the police armed... and that’s a very pro gun position. You instinctively understand the value of guns. You just want someone else to hold it for you.

Oh, man, this resonated with me. What a powerful statement.

 

[AZRickD]

His words are one thing. You should hear how this six-foot-four-inch red-head delivers the message.

 

[misterwhipple]

But isn't that what we do when we hire an LEO?

Also a complicated question. Short form: sadly often, but not necessarily.

I'm thinking I'll put my thoughts together and either start a new thread or send them to you privately.

 

[misterwhipple]

Even that's not the main issue here. It's the fact that people who don't like guns are deciding that no one should have guns, which is blatantly unconstiutional and contrary to the concept of individual freedom. [...] Moral issues about a desire (or lack thereof) to defend one's family aren't even really the heart of the argument here, but unfortunately that's the way it has to work these days.

Personally, I believe that in the end, all arguments for what the law should be eventually boil down to an appeal to moral principles.

 

[ScottsGT]

Maybe if somebody showed up at Mr. Mausers speach with an empty holster and said if it were filled by a teacher at Columbine High School, his shoes might still be filled today.

 

[rainbowbob]

I'm thinking I'll put my thoughts together and either start a new thread or send them to you privately.

Sounds good. I would be interested to hear your views.

 

[AZRickD]

I found out today that Korwin has an interesting (mostly) non-gun-related blog called "Page Nine" or the "The Uninvited Ombudsman."

http://www.pagenine.org/

Two short ones:

Solarpanel Trumps Trees

The mainstream media told you:

Richard Treanor and Carolynn Bissett of Sunnyvale, Calif., were criminally prosecuted because their redwood trees cast a shadow over their neighbor's solar panels. They lost the case and had to have the trees chopped down, after the judge in the case ordered them removed. The trees had been planted before the solar panels were installed, but grew.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Just when it seems Californians cannot get any more bizarre, they prove me wrong. I apologize for being so naive.

Posted by The Uninvited Ombudsman on Thursday, April 17, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (1)

Candidates' Positions Unknown

The mainstream media told you:

"Voters Unaware of Candidates Immigration Positions: New Poll" according to a report circulated by the Associated Press.

Guest Columnist Craig Cantoni notes however that:

The headline could have read: "Voters Unaware of Candidates' Positions on Everything."

Or: "Voters Unaware of History, Economics, Law, Foreign Policy, Math, Spelling and the Foundations of Our Classical Liberal Republic."

Repeated calls for voter testing have been turned down by many of the same people who are calling for testing for gun possession.

Posted by The Uninvited Ombudsman on Wednesday, April 16, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (0)

 

[misterwhipple]

Wow. Never mind.

But isn't that what we do when we hire an LEO?

Also a complicated question. Short form: sadly often, but not necessarily.

I'm thinking I'll put my thoughts together and either start a new thread or send them to you privately.

I imagine much or most of what I was thinking came from hearing small quotes from Nation of Cowards. No way I come close to saying it as well or as effectively.

So, um, never mind. Go read that instead.