March 29, 2024, 08:04:08 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: NEW CHILD BOARD CREATED IN THE POLITICAL SECTION FOR THE 2016 ELECTION
 
   Home   Help Login Register  
Pages: 1   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: "A Political Appeal To The Ignorant"  (Read 1210 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
WhiskeyGirl
Monkey All Star Jr.
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7754



« on: January 27, 2013, 11:29:44 AM »

"FORMER ‘BRAIN DEAD LIBERAL’ FILMMAKER PENS SCATHING COLUMN ON GUN CONTROL: ‘A POLITICAL APPEAL TO THE IGNORANT’"

Quote
In an article for Newsweek, the writer of “Glengarry Glen Ross” and “Hannibal” begins with a cutting analysis of centralized government (all subsequent emphasis added):

Karl Marx summed up Communism as “from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.” This is a good, pithy saying, which, in practice, has succeeded in bringing, upon those under its sway, misery, poverty, rape, torture, slavery, and death.

For the saying implies but does not name the effective agency of its supposed utopia. The agency is called “The State,” and the motto, fleshed out, for the benefit of the easily confused must read “The State will take from each according to his ability: the State will give to each according to his needs.” “Needs and abilities” are, of course, subjective. So the operative statement may be reduced to “the State shall take, the State shall give.”

Mamet proceeds to tackle gun control head-on, writing:

The Left loves a phantom statistic that a firearm in the hands of a citizen is X times more likely to cause accidental damage than to be used in the prevention of crime, but what is there about criminals that ensures that their gun use is accident-free? If, indeed, a firearm were more dangerous to its possessors than to potential aggressors, would it not make sense for the government to arm all criminals, and let them accidentally shoot themselves? Is this absurd? Yes, and yet the government, of course, is arming criminals.

"Violence by firearms is most prevalent in big cities with the strictest gun laws. In Chicago and Washington, D.C., for example, it is only the criminals who have guns, the law-abiding populace having been disarmed, and so crime runs riot."

read more here - http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/01/26/former-brain-dead-liberal-filmmaker-pens-scathing-column-on-gun-control-a-political-appeal-to-the-ignorant/

For some reason, gun laws target law abiding citizens.   The government walks guns into the hands of Mexican gangs.  The guns end up killing Mexicans, Americans, and perhaps thousands of others.  Why won't Obama/Holder come clean about 'Fast & Furious'?  Benghazi?

What is wrong with this picture?

just my humble opinions
Logged

All my posts are just my humble opinions.  Please take with a grain of salt.  Smile

It doesn't do any good to hate anyone,
they'll end up in your family anyway...
WhiskeyGirl
Monkey All Star Jr.
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7754



« Reply #1 on: January 27, 2013, 02:40:04 PM »

Benghazi, a gun free zone....

Do good citizens really take rocket launchers to peaceful protests?


Quote
... If they were serious about reducing gun violence, they’d quit yapping about guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens, and go after the people who use them not for hunting or for defending their homes and families, but to murder.

I’m referring to the black and Hispanic gangs that terrorize inner cities. Rahm Emanuel, the mayor of Chicago, the city in which 506 murders were committed in 2012 – only a handful as the result of assault weapons – doesn’t declare war on the punks responsible for spilling most of that blood. Instead, he demands that the city divest itself of any investments it might have in gun manufacturing firms. Displaying the wisdom for which big city mayors are renowned, he not only does nothing to diminish violent crime in his locale, but he makes certain that the city fails to profit financially from the only growth industry that exists in Obama’s America.

In fact, I think it’s fair to suggest that Benghazi was Obama’s and Mrs. Clinton’s idea of a gun-free zone.

When every massacre from Columbine to Newtown has taken place where firearms are banned, you would think that even liberals could get their pointy heads around the fact that just as outlawing guns guarantees that only outlaws will be armed, gun-free zones promise would-be killers that they have nothing to fear. They might as well post signs for the convenience of armed psychos that read: “You are now entering the Happy Hunting Grounds. Be a responsible killer and pick up your spent shells before you leave the park.”

read more here = http://www.bernardgoldberg.com/weapons-of-mass-distraction/
Logged

All my posts are just my humble opinions.  Please take with a grain of salt.  Smile

It doesn't do any good to hate anyone,
they'll end up in your family anyway...
Pages: 1   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Use of this web site in any manner signifies unconditional acceptance, without exception, of our terms of use.
Powered by SMF 1.1.13 | SMF © 2006-2011, Simple Machines LLC
 
Page created in 3.84 seconds with 20 queries.