Monday, March 08, 2010

Headline

From The Washington Times:

Someone who is drunk shouldn't be handling a gun, but that doesn't justify a ban on concealed carrying in all places that serve alcohol.

I firmly disagree. Fortunately for the gun freaks, I'm in the minority. Which, adopting their tactics, means that I should be for seizing all the guns. Legal and not. Responsible and not. Self protection and not. All the guns.

Okay.

4 comments:

M Hastings said...

Not that I'm a gun-toting person (never have been), but I have to say, if humans aren't using guns to kill one another, they'll be doing it with some other weapon.

Cerulean Bill said...

I know that. But do we have to make it easy? I get more than a little tired of 'the other side' saying they can carry guns ANYWHERE. I don't agree with that, regardless of what the Supremes say.

I haven't seen you here before. Welcome!

STAG said...

I dislike guns, especially concealed guns. Surprisingly enough, I am ok with folks dropping into the hunting lodge and propping their shotguns into the specially made grooves in the tables and having a boiler maker or two.

But pistols? Useful for only one purpose, and not very useful even for that! Should be got rid of totally but only because they are more dangerous to bystanders than the person being shot at.
(and I speak as the runner up pistol-rifle-smg champion for all of Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, and New Brunswick and three years range safety officer for the entire province of PEI.)

So its not that I agree, or disagree, but rather, am in favor of good clear thinking.

On the other hand, yesterday, an Ontario Provincial Police officer was killed with a registered hunting rifle as he responded to a domestic dispute. Makes a change from them getting into car accidents I suppose.

Cerulean Bill said...

I just think that people who say guns should be uncontrolled in one circumstance won't be happy until they're uncontrolled everywhere. And if more people die, they take that to mean that perhaps the newly-dead should have been armed, themselves.

Is there justification for home protection? Yes, though I am sorry to say. For carrying a weapon into the local Starbucks? The playground? The library? Some, but not enough for me. If they think its that unsafe, let them stay home. Easier to fondle their weaponry there, anyway.