On the way home tonight, I stopped at the grocery store. In the parking lot, I ran into an old acquaintance. As these things happen, we got talking, catching up on things. As with most people in Wisconsin, especially Milwaukee, our conversation turned to horrific events of yesterday when a damned fool racist bastard shot and killed six innocent Sikhs and shot many others including the heroic Lieutenant Brian Murphy of the Oak Creek Police Department.
Things started breaking down when the conversation turned to the issue of guns and gun control. I think the gentle reader knows what side I came down on. After a few rounds of the usual talking points, my conservative acquaintance stated the line I've been waiting for someone to utter and that's where I'll give you the dialogue:
Conservative Acquaintance (CA): Yeah, if those Sikhs had guns, there wouldn't be as many people dead.
Me (Me): Sikhs are non-violent. They wouldn't be carrying guns.
CA: Still, they should be more like us and believe in protecting themselves.
Me: And if we were more like the Sikhs, there would be no need to worry about protecting ourselves or carrying guns.
CA: ....
See? Best argument ever.
Monday, August 6, 2012
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
Well if you look at their history, they have armed and fought to protect themselves many times. They and Hindus have done some horrific things to each other in modern times India. However typically in defense, not offense. Their history in the U.S. has been nothing but peaceful from their side, but they have been attacked too many times. Their basic tenants do believe in peace however they are not pacifists.
ReplyDeleteAs a mental experiment imagine the reaction of the conservative "white" public upon seeing armed men wearing turbans and long beards.
ReplyDeleteMorons.
We are fighting a war against muslim extremism. Remember, the one your president said he would end? Your experiment is played out almost everyday on TV news coverage of the middle east. Look at how we treated Japanese Americans during WW2. And your surprised there is animosity towards these people? I realize they are not muslim, but if I shaved my head and tattooed hate on my neck, you wouldn't assume I was an innocent.
DeleteAnd we have a war at home against racist extremists. But when it's pointed out that there ARE white extremists, y'all do sure squeal like stuck pigs.
Delete"we" are not fighting a war.
DeleteA real war would be a total annihilation of an enemy's resource base.
It's too bad conventional military resources are being wasted on something that the CIA just about had put in a basket.
Thanks, George!!!
Another argument:
ReplyDeleteThe Oak Creek cop first on the scene was armed, and he was trained to handle such a scene.
And yet, he was shot numerous times. And he did not stop the shooting of many more people.
The shooter was military trained. Bad argument.
DeleteOh well, they all come home to roost. Hope Walker didn't cut our veterans services too much...,
Delete"And if we were more like the Sikhs, there would be no need to worry about protecting ourselves or carrying guns."
ReplyDeleteYou must live in a fantasy world if you believe this is actually possible. There will always be criminals and evil people in this world. Criminals who use violence. You can outlaw guns if you want, but that won't take guns away guns from criminals. It'll only deprive law-abiding citizens a means to defend themselves and there are plenty of law-abiding citizens alive today because they have defended themselves with the use of firearms.
Um, who said anything about outlawing them. Your paranoia is running rampant.
DeleteCarl M- Where is it you think that criminals get guns? This idea that if guns were outlawed only criminals would have them is completely myopic. The vast majority of firearms that are obtained illegally come from the readily available supply of legally obtained firearms. Criminals get guns via straw purchase, from licensed FFL's (Federal Firearms Licensees) who sell them in violation of the law, theft from legal owners, and from unlicensed street dealers who obtained them from one of the aforementioned methods. If firearms were outlawed for sale to the general public, and to retailers and FFL's, criminals too would lose their methods of acquisition.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nytimes.com/1992/03/11/us/how-criminals-get-guns-in-short-all-too-easily.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/guns/procon/guns.html
This idea that all of us should be armed so we can shoot it out when the bad guys show up is simply insanity.
Should we outlaw cars? Many, many times more people are killed each year by cars. What about airplanes, the method used to attack us on 9/11? Or knives, the method of choice when a gun isn't handy… or rope, or fire, or bare hands. People will kill other people, it's never going to be avoided. And I'm glad I have the tool to defend myself when someone's tries!
ReplyDeleteso anon, Lets talk about planes, they were used to kill people and now you know everything we have to do to get on an airplane...are you advocating the same for guns?
DeleteThere are two points about this inane comment.
DeleteOne, cars, planes, knives, etc. have purposes other than killing. Guns are useless except for killing. Can't compare apples and oranges.
Two, to drive a car, you need a license, lessons, and you have to get regularly tested. What's so wrong about that for guns?
Ah yes, the predictable non sequitur. How many people drive an automobile, on average, per day? At any given time, how many automobiles are on streets and roads in the US? You might be able to make a comparison if every day Americans had to pack together and fire guns in close proximity to one another as part of their daily routine. Since we don't, it's a completely invalid, and let's face it, stupid argument. Now, to be clear, I wasn't advocating outlawing guns. I was responding to the inanity of the criminals still get guns if they're outlawed statement.
ReplyDelete