A few contradictions
The subject of firearms and gun laws tends for some reason to infect certain persons with a form of dementia -- they discard all their values without seeming to notice it. The liberal wing of the Supreme Court suddenly agitates against judicial activism, wants to constrain rights as tightly as possible. People who would oppose government databases in any other context decide they're a good idea. People who would condemn law enforcement abuse instead strongly defend it (e.g., Waco). Figures who think incarceration is a bad and expensive way to deal with street criminals argue that gun owners rather than criminals should be prosecuted.
The latest, from a blog that calls itself "Think Progressive." This article argues that women who experience domestic violence shouldn't have guns, because they're so weak or inept that anyone can overpower them and take the gun away:
"“I was shot with my own gun. Just putting a weapon in the woman’s hand is not going to reduce the number of fatalities or gunshot victims that we have,” Christy pointed out. “Too many times, their male counterpart or spouse will be able to overpower them and take that gun away.”"
Well, if that's true, then presumably women shouldn't be allowed to be police officers -- why, even if they go for their gun, the criminal will just get it away. They probably shouldn't be allowed in the military, and if they are, certainly not in combat roles. This is "Think Progress"????
We support a woman's Right To Choose ™, unless we disagree with her choice.
Posted by: Donkeyrats at October 29, 2013 06:05 PM
I think we can agree, though, that if you're regularly sleeping with the bad guy, having a gun isn't going to protect you from him.
Posted by: Norman Yarvin at October 31, 2013 02:01 AM
On the other hand, I hope I never completely forget the woman who took a gun away from a burglar and shot him with it. (I've forgotten all other details of the story, alas.)
Posted by: Anton Sherwood at November 1, 2013 11:49 PM