Defending the 2nd Amendment

[DynaBMan]

I haven't posted in quite some time on THR, but since I have a political blog, I have written some about 2nd Amendment news. I have written an article about this, in response to someone commenting on my blog, trying to convince me that more gun regulation is what is needed to control crime. The original article and comments is at the first link and the article written in response is at the second link. I would welcome any of you that want to visit and jump into the fray. The gentleman that has been commenting says he isn't interested in taking our guns away and has plainly stated that he believes I am seeing the boogeyman at every turn. He obviously has more trust in the gun control crowd than I do.

Kirsten Gillibrand's sin of supporting the 2nd Amendment

Defending the 2nd Amendment

 

[Duke of Doubt]

Amateur journalism is alive and well in America, as is self-promotion.

 

[DynaBMan]

Amateur journalism is alive and well in America, as is self-promotion.

I am not trying to promote my blog so much as I am trying to do what I can to help defend our rights. I don't claim to be much of a journalist, but I do enjoy writing about things such as the 2nd Amendment. If my post has offended anyone, I will be glad to delete it.

 

[Duke of Doubt]

It didn't offend me at all. We just see a lot of this.

 

[mgkdrgn]

Ok, I posted a comment for you.

The basic misconception is that laws prevent crimes.

Laws do not prevent crime. Never have, never will. Laws only define what action or actions constitute a crime.

The genie is out of the bottle. Guns exist. The technology to make guns exist. There is no magic dust that can be spread over the globe that will make all of the guns that exist evaporate.

Hence, criminals will -always- have guns, no matter how many laws/bans whatever are passed. Criminals won’t obey your laws/bans. They do not now, and they never will … it’s kind of like their job.

It is already illegal for criminals to have guns. It is already illegal to use a gun in the commission of a crime. If laws were the answer, the problem would already be resolved. All that =can= be accomplished by more laws/bans/restrictions is to insure that the criminals will have a steady supply of un-armed victims to prey on.

 

[DynaBMan]

Thanks, Brett. I seem to need all the help I can get.

 

[deacon8]

Duke of Doubt,

YOU may see a lot of this, but new members might have never seen this here. This is the kind of mentality that hurts THR...this has been around, yeah, yeah. However, some people that are somewhat new here, want to interact with this type of stuff. Maybe veterans here at THR should stop saying things like, "been there, done that." It's stupid.

 

[Duke of Doubt]

It's not the content I was reacting to. I have nothing against the poster or his article. And I give him points for acknowledging the article as his own.

Maybe it's just that too many times I've seen a post by someone with a low post count breathlessly endorsing an article self-published on a blog which obviously either is his own or his friend's creation, rehashing time-worn arguments, some good, some bad. I happen to approve of that type of work, which used to be known as "amateur journalism," and not in a pejorative sense. In the days before the internet, like-minded people of similar interests self-published small magazines or journals to which they contributed articles.

That work goes on today, in the form of blogs. Nothing wrong with it at all, but as a former syndicated journalist and sometime freelance journalist I get tired of many bloggers' exaggerated sense of importance. Nothing personal whatsoever, one of my best friends is a prolific blogger.

As to "hurting THR", I don't think I have that sort of power.

 

[Art Eatman]

Political philosophy is not on-topic for this forum...