Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.8.7
Site Design by Sekimori

« The world turned upside down... | Main | Senators put "hold" on new ATF director confirmation »

Interesting views from the left

Posted by David Hardy · 12 December 2007 02:13 PM

A columnist at the Huffington Post proclaims he is sufficiently in tune with Buddhism to where he would not even shoot to save his own life ... but apparently finds no contradiction with pushing for strict gun laws, i.e., feeling perfectly all right about imprisoning his fellow citizens.

But I find the comments interesting:

"In view of the last seven years, I don't just want a gun, I want a effing arsenal!"

"So now I must get a gun. A big gun that hold lots of bullets. Strangely enough not to protect me and my family from criminals,no, to protect me an my family from roving gangs of 'security contractors' that will be patrolling the streets of the USA after Bush declares martial law just ahead of the 08 elections. I have come the the conclusion that Bush intends not to remake Iraq in the image of America, but to remake America in the image of Iraq. For that, I will need a gun. AAMF, I will need lots of guns. Good thing I live in Texas."

"Well Pete, the government is armed to the teeth, and many of us are not sure the government has the best intentions towards it's citizens and their right to dissent. We are headed towards a police state funded by homeland security money."

To paraphrase what Instapundit says about those who speak of global warming: I will take seriously the claim that Bush is a Hitler, when those who say he is one, act like he is one.

18 Comments | Leave a comment

anon | December 12, 2007 3:50 PM | Reply

From the article: "I myself am enough in tune with Buddhist teachings to believe that the taking of life is wrong in any circumstance--and, yes, that includes the saving of my own."

Well, he probably knows better than anyone whether his life is worth defending or not.

DavidL | December 12, 2007 4:33 PM | Reply

I don't accept the arguement as I don't want to protect my person or my family that therefore you don't have the right to protect yourself or your family.

The right to keep and bear arms has nothing to do with hunting. Rather is is based on the fact that free men can not exist where only that state is allowed to keep arms.

William Teach | December 12, 2007 4:40 PM | Reply

I have to wonder if Peter Clothier is, like most liberals, in favor of abortion on demand, which, by my reckoning, is killing.

It's a good thing that there are people out there with guns who work hard to protect Pete from hopefully never needing a gun.

- | December 12, 2007 4:44 PM | Reply

Bush is not a Hitler, no. Hitler was a good deal smarter than W, and Hitler could actually speak in public without making a laughing stock out of himself.

It's not the one, single individual of George Walker Bush I fear, it's that entire... Clique? Faction? Sub-group of a political party, which surrounds him and/or he has surrounded himself with, and from which he seems to derive all his policies, concepts, and political initiatives. Call them neocons or whatever. Claim they are, or harbor, the real power behind W's administration --- or not, it matters little. (The man himself may not be a powerless puppet, exactly, but neither is he nearly as influential and independent as a president should be.)

Either way, that faction is dangerous, and will remain dangerous no matter who wins the next few elections, because they can handily retain political influence and even power regardless. They are the real reason i'm sweating blood over the fact I can't at present afford to arm and train myself properly. They are a real reason for leftist-leaning people such as myself to be seriously worried for their safety in this country.

Bush is not a sturdy enough tool for them to load me and mine into cattle cars... But they'll be here after Bush is gone, and the next president --- who will almost certainly be a republican; Edwards can't pull off the presidency, nor will this country elect either a woman or a black man in my lifetime --- might just be.

The Mechanic | December 12, 2007 7:11 PM | Reply

Imagine there's no Liberals. "We" don't need to realize anything except that our rights are not granted by any government they come from God Almighty Himself.
The rights of the people are not conditional on the Government's approval.
I plan to waste my vote on Ron Paul
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/gunowners/

Kurt | December 12, 2007 9:39 PM | Reply

Wow, was that Dan Rather posting at 4:44?

Peter | December 12, 2007 9:44 PM | Reply

That's not including my first comment, which has been lost 'somewhere', and my second, which has been in the moderation zone for about five hours now.

dave | December 12, 2007 10:20 PM | Reply

"They are a real reason for leftist-leaning people such as myself to be seriously worried for their safety in this country."

No, YOU are the reason left-leaning people such as yourself should be seriously worried for your safety in this country. Your "faction" and "clique" has pushed gun control on millions of people in this country. If any political party scares me and gives me reason to think they have sinister motives, it's the one that seeks to prevent me from defending myself. If there's ever a political party that "loads you and yours into cattle cars," you can thank the left for making it possible through gun control.

- | December 13, 2007 7:50 AM | Reply

Whenever gunnies discuss the second amendment and the importance of a militia, it's seldom long before somebody pipes up with "it can happen here, we shouldn't think we're immune to tyranny and we ought to be prepared for it". And the majority will nod sagely and quietly agree.

But opine even once that it might happen not just here, but in and through the republican party, and you'll see fur fly more often than not. Usually yours, for proposing such a plainly off-the-wall lunatic notion.

Meanwhile, I'm saving up my money for a nice SKS and a range membership; I wish to be prepared. If other gunnies think my estimates of where the strategic threat is currently most likely to come from is so crazy as all that, maybe they should be less dismissive the next time the unprepared scoff at the very idea that a threat could ever appear from any quarter.

Flash Gordon | December 13, 2007 8:03 AM | Reply

The commenters at Huffington Post probably should not have guns. While I am a strong supporter of gun rights I do believe that anyone so filled with anger and ignorance to think Bush is Hitler is simply a nut who cannot be trusted with power tools, much less with guns.

Phillep | December 13, 2007 9:07 AM | Reply

People don't ridicule those who are likely to kill them. People ridicule Bush, and did not ridicule Hitler (and not because he did not screw up his speeches or cut them short because he had the trots).

But Bush is "just like Hitler"?

tom gunn | December 13, 2007 9:51 AM | Reply

for anon at 0750

So what is the reason you are now willing to view the second in a 'new' light?

In the final analysis it makes no diff - just be glad you are able to arm yourself now, if the libs get their way you will be sol, and that *IS* what happened in Germany when Hitler took full advantage of the gun laws put in place for the good of the people b4 he got there.


tom gunn

- | December 13, 2007 10:19 AM | Reply

I keep trying to respond to Tom, but the spam filter blocks it for some reason.

Short answer, I've not changed my mind on weapons rights, I've always disagreed with the "received wisdom" on the left about that point. Lots of people like me do, it's just that most of them don't consider the point important enough to fight for, as they focus on other political issues instead.

RKV | December 13, 2007 5:32 PM | Reply

Godwin's law is in effect on this thread.

Greg Lyons | December 13, 2007 6:19 PM | Reply

Here's something Peter Clothier might want to consider, as spoken by a fellow Buddhist;

"If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun." -- The Dalai Lama, (May 15, 2001, The Seattle Times) speaking at the "Educating Heart Summit" in Portland, Oregon, when asked by a girl how to react when a shooter takes aim at a classmate.

Personally, I counln't agree more with the Dalai Lama. He may be a pacifist, but he sure isn't stupid. Perhaps Mr. Clothier needs to study his scriptures a bit more, eh?

As for a Hindu point of view? Well, let's see what Gandhi has to say, shall we?

"Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest." -- Mahatma Gandhi (An Autobiography OR The story of my experiments with truth, by M.K. Gandhi, p.238

The trouble with fools like Mr. Clothier is that they just don't get it, nor are they ever likely to. But they will try with all their might to shove their idiocy down our throats....or worse.

Wade Jensen | December 14, 2007 6:05 AM | Reply

Dear David,

Thanks for bringing things like this to our attention. It is always instructive to read what the "other side" is saying. You said this in your post, but it bears repeating. The problem is not that someone believes in absolute pacifism. They are free to believe such, and to personally act on their beliefs. They are thus free to live fully and wholely according to their beliefs. Where Mr. Collier crosses the line is when he attempts force, through legislation, those who may have other beliefs to act on his beliefs also. Now, I happen not to be a pacifist, and to believe that I should be able to defend myself. How am I to do that, when I have been disarmed? If Mr. Collier truly believed his ideas were better, then he would be happy to advocate his ideas, but would not advocate for government action to limit the freedom of others who hold different beliefs. The two CAN live in the same society, quite peacefully. Really!

Regards,
PolyKahr

anon | December 14, 2007 9:03 AM | Reply

This is not mine, but I don't remember where I saw it first:

To the "Bush is Hitler" crowd: If Bush was Hitler, just for saying so, you'd be a lampshade by now.

(but don't let me burst your delusional state)

Windy Wilson | December 17, 2007 11:34 AM | Reply

Anon 9:03 is right. Clayton Cramer blogged once about a co-worker of his whose father said something sort of mildly critical of the war effort when he was a German "citizen" in Germany during WW2 and was hauled away by the Gestapo for two days for it. If he hadn't been a valued and necessary engineer whose employer asked for him back, he would be less than a footnote to history right now.
Contrast this with my grandfather who said something sort of mildly critical of the war when he was an American Citizen in Saint Louis during the same war. The FBI came and questioned him at work, and nothing more was done.

I'll believe Bush=Hitler when people stop shouting it from the rooftops. Two pop psychology signs of ruthless dictators are an ego the size of Europe and a sensitivity to criticism to match.

Leave a comment