Doakes Sunday: Romper Nation
By Mitch Berg
Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:
The gun control debate is a language problem: Liberals don’t speak “Logic,” they speak “Fear.” Or, if you prefer the old terms, “Dialectic” and “Rhetoric.”
Old White men committing suicide are no threat to me, I don’t fear them and don’t care if they have guns. Gang-bangers killing each other in the ghetto are no threat to me, I don’t fear them, let them keep their guns. Policemen shooting Gentle Giants, domestic abusers shooting spouses, children accidentally shooting themselves, none of those are threats to me, I don’t fear them, I don’t care about their guns. I include those deaths in the total of “gun violence” because it makes the problem sound more pressing so I can convince ignorant people to let me solve the problem that really concerns me.
A 20-something White male with mental health issues, inspired to become famous by copying other mass shooters, who has access to guns and to my church, school, shopping mall or movie theatre – that guy’s a threat to me. That guy, I fear. That guy’s guns, I want to take. If the only way to do it is taking everyone else’s guns, well, that’s how we did it in grade school: when one kid farted and nobody would own up to it, the entire class lost our recess privileges. Why expect different behavior from adult Liberals?
Joe Doakes
Collective Guilt is a hallmark of authoritarians and totalitarians everywhere.
November 15th, 2015 at 12:59 pm
So, Joe, you’re saying the right doesn’t foment fear of Muslims? I mean, when Fox News puts up a video of Muslims on a train shouting “Allahu Akbar!”, with a footer that reads “Terrorists Inbound?” and then says, a recent video shows Muslims on a train .. in response to the immigration of refugees from the civil wars in Iraq and Syria, but the thing is, the video was from 2010, and while they SAY they’re not calling them terrorists, the script at the bottom clearly suggests it.
Also, Joe, I care plenty about some guy killing himself, or a woman shooting her husband in a fit of rage, or any of a host of things you claim I don’t care about. Next time you want to know, you might want to ask. All of those are horrible, but I don’t think any thing can be done to stop that because you can’t entirely ban firearms. Conversely, you CAN limit the scope of the threat someone who seeks to shoot a lot of people at once MAY pose, mentally ill or a terrorist, by making it harder for them to obtain high capacity/high output weapons. Those ARE constitutional limits. That’s not fear talking Joe, it’s recognizing the framework People V. McDonald set once it incorporated the 2nd Amendment upon the states.
November 16th, 2015 at 5:26 pm
Damn that Second Amendment! Why, if it weren’t for the pesky constitution, Americans would be as safe walking the streets of New York as the French are strolling down the boulevards of Paris!
November 16th, 2015 at 6:26 pm
Head Case;
It’s a damn good thing that libidiots didn’t run the country during the American Revolution. We would still be swearing allegiance to the king of England.
Of course, Obumbler wants to be a king instead of president and he has low information, ignorant drooling minions like you that would like to make him one.