"The Liberal Case for Gun Ownership"

I skimmed the piece, coming away with a sense of rehashed and repeated views piled together by someone who likes their own voice.

The essay and majority of the comments within the linked page cogently state the error of the liberal perspective: liberal/progressives are anything but "liberal"; they are of but one mind and so confident (wallowing in their self absorbed sense of superiority) that they can not understand that they live among others.

And, "government" was not necessary until others were sufficiently successful at producing excess that their ancestors were able to "screw around" and then claim "the disparity of wealth" entitled them to a "handout".

Progressives cannot imagine the world does not revolve, individually or collectively, around them. They are the reason the concept of "the Matrix" exists: all solely exists to manipulate and enlighten each of them. A contradiction in and of itself; but a virtuous, progressive cannot see the contradiction, only reinforcement when they recognize another who has memorized the same "sound bites".

[Riddle me this: "Which came first the 'the Matrix' or its object - 'the Progressive' ?"

And, if progressives all are advancing from unenlightened to enlightened so rapidly, how is it that the creator(s) of the Matrix have not stayed ahead of the development curve ?]

"Higher education" (another oxymoron) for a progressive is political science, sociology, psychology, and all the make-believe, three-credit "studies" (all "101" and "102") which add up to a proper amount of "full-time care fees" transferred to the "institution" that will pay a printer to issue a proper piece of oak-tag informing one's parents that their still-dependent is "really smart".

Note that most commenters (especially the worldly Brit who lived in "the states") believe the Second Amendment is about "guns", as if the "the hand bones are connect to the wrist bones; the wrist bones are connected to the gun bones; ..."

Yep. A rehash that goes nowhere.

Note: "well regulated" in British and Colonial English meant something like, "well implemented", "well designed", "appropriate", "well assembled", etc. Anything else is Leftist word play.

Note: The Left like to stress that the colonists had "muzzle loaders". In fact, the Colonists had firearms that were as good as their opponents. Kenosha, Portland and cities like Chicago make it clear that "normies" will likely be out numbered and will be facing opponents with modern highly capable firearms, thus it makes sense for individuals to have firearms that are equivalent to the likely threat. Kyle Rittenhouse had a rifle with a magazine that allowed him to resist multiple attackers from the mob. I doubt if a "muzzle loader" would have been sufficient to protect him from the multiple attackers. Obviously, the Kenosha Police were unwilling to protect an individual against the mob, so an individual was on his/her own against the Storm Trooper mob.

Also: Words like "Racist", "Nazi", and "Fascist" are meaningless Leftist jargon that just mean "bad" or "opponent". Those terms have no actual real meaning.

Most of the Leftist verbiage is targeting "staw men" from their own fabtasies.

....Out here in biscuit and gravy land, we look with shock and awe at the descent of Blue States and Cities into madness and perversions , crime and corruptions.
...And we arm and store provisions for the coming fight. Hard men and women stand ready. What will be the spark ? When, where, how , and who will strike the first blow ?
...We know why. That we know.