Wednesday, March 14, 2012

The Baltimore Sun on The Second Amendment

Tails of the Gun

The attack on Maryland's gun laws
Our view: A federal judge finds the state's limit on handgun permits unconstitutional in a win for the NRA crowd but a potential loss for public safety (Baltimore Sun)




Res Ipsa Loquitur
Enjoy. Things get ugly after this.

Maryland's restrictions on carrying a handgun outside the home have been among the strongest in the nation — and for good reason, given the death and destruction perpetrated by those possessing handguns in this state. So it is regrettable that the standard is now under threat because a federal judge, emboldened by a pair of recent Supreme Court decisions that have expanded the reach of the Second Amendment, has found a portion of the law unconstitutional. [Full Hilarity]

Imagine that.  The Judge was "emboldened by a pair of recent Supreme Court decisions ..."   I'll forgo indulging in the verbal fun fest that argument invites; hell, begs for.  We live with it daily.  These are nice people, but you don't argue with wind-up dolls. The Sun then grants a reader his  own online page.for this killer argument.

It is depressing that supporters of Second Amendment rights seldom if ever mention the frequent tragedies, such as the recent killing of the 13-year old girl in Baltimore. Because they do not mention them, one is left to assume they regard them simply as inevitable collateral damage not worthy of mention in discussions of gun control.

How do you argue with that? 







8 comments:

Helly said...

How do you argue with that?

I would say, finish the job you started with abortion. When Democrats shoot each other into extinction, there will be no further need for any gun laws, regulations, or concerns. We will have peace and prosperity, and a golden age will spread across the planet.

Chuck Martel said...

I agree with whoever wrote this editorial for The Baltimore Sun. Progressives/Liberals/Democrats/Socialists should not own firearms.

They are too irresponsible to have one in their hands.

Anonymous said...

Remove "Second Amendment" from that quote and read it again.

Anonymous said...

I've said before, if you want to make a democrap's head explode, swap their arguments for gun contol and abortion. They screem drooling into a black hole of absurdidty.
Tim

DougM said...

"given the death and destruction perpetrated by those possessing handguns in this state"
"those possessing" meaning "murderous criminals."
Perpetrated against those not possessing handguns meaning those certified defenseless by fantasy-poisoned politicians.

Progs refuse to discriminate between law-abiding and criminal. It's too judgmental for their fantasy world.

How do you argue the case?
Show the statistics over the past ten or twenty years of expanded concealed-carry.

Rodger the Real King of France said...

got it! .... she looks like Annette Funicello

Cheesy said...

It is depressing that opposers of Second Amendment rights seldom if ever mention the frequency with which a firearm is used to prevent tragedies, such as rape, robbery and murder, that would occur if the potential victim was unarmed. Because they do not mention them, one is left to assume that it never happens, but conservative estimates and anecdotal evidence indicates it may happen tens of thousands of times per year.
Hows that?

Kristophr said...

Cheesy: Victim-disarmament supporters never use facts.

They got to their current position through psychotic fear, so facts are evil to them.

Post a Comment

Just type your name and post as anonymous if you don't have a Blogger profile.