Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
That Settles It!
I saw the above on Facebook. The comments were:
According to Trump and the NRA, you make everyone buy an AR-15.
D. Sell them a stick, available now, at 1-800-national stick association. Operators are standing by. As are ER personnel.
Buy stock in the stick manufacturers.
I did not truly believe that there could be people who saw our government as a parent. I’m going to go worry about the future of the American people now.
Published in General
If your child kills another child using a stick, and you spend all your time obsessing about sticks, you’re not doing it right.
Join the club, my young friend. Most of us here have been there for decades.
The more appropriate analogy would be, “If your child is killed by a stick…”
I saw something like that. I thought:
I am an adult, not a child.
I did not misuse a stick.
The government is not my parent.
Get your hands off my stick, or I’ll be forced to defend myself with it.
Yes, you take the stick away from that child. In that instance. And you may need a bigger stick to get the stick away from him. But you do not take all sticks away from everyone. You do not take sticks away from people who like to throw them for their dogs. You don’t take sticks away from people who are gathering kindling for a camp fire. You don’t take sticks away from people who pick them up to shoo away a raccoon.
The clearly implied premise is that every American adult (whose right to keep and bear arms is guaranteed by the Constitution) is a child.
A less clear implication is that government is the parent.
Some adults don’t want to be grownups. I’d rather restrict those Americans’ rights than take away everyone’s Constitutionally guaranteed rights.
That is more or less what I said when I saw this tripe. The government is *not* my parent.
Unless the prosecutors are completely inept, the Florida school shooter should spend the rest of his life behind bars, where he will not be allowed to own a gun.
Therefore, we took his stick away.
So, what’s all the fuss about? Problem solved, right?
Reminds me of all the rich Dems who want government to make them pay more taxes.
D. Cut down all the trees and make it illegal to grow trees or possess any tree related byproducts.
Been ‘abroad’ these past few years?
Except they wanna take everybody’s sticks away.
C should read “take away all the sticks from all the kids who would never do violence with them, and might even use them for self defense and defense of others.” Because that’s what gun controllers really want to do.
Your stick hitting kid has already decided not to obey your stupid rules.
As usual, the Constitution is nowhere to be seen in these glib analogies. It’s such an inconvenience.
If you take everyone’s stick, they’re just going to grab a rock. Is that what you really want?
I follow no organized religion, but even I can see that this all goes back to the ouster of God from lots of people’s lives. The rights enshrined in the Constitution are in there to keep Government from interfering with rights endowed by our Creator. If there is no Creator, then the rights in the Constitution are nothing special. They are granted by man…man can restrict them or take them away. So the Constitution, from that point of view, ceases to carry the weight it does for us.
What he said!
And if a child punches another child with his fist, is the solution to cut off everyone’s hands?
Don’t be silly …. only the hand of the offending child.
This is the problem, isn’t it? Evidently people don’t know how this country was founded nor who is the owner of the country, who is sovereign.
First, I remove his stick. Second, I’m taking a stick to that child, personally, and give him a good lickin’. Of course, following my sainted Grandmother’s example, God rest her soul, I’ll make him pick the new stick and then I’ll check it for strength and pliability.
I can’t recall ever having talked to a person on the Left that didn’t feel the Constitution was an impediment to Utopia.
D. Totally misunderstand the issue and ban bark.
I want a stick with a nail on the end of it.
Then someone else is just going to get a bigger stick with a bigger nail.
NO! The founding fathers never conceived of the populace having sticks larger than the diameters they had. Also, Thelonious’ assault-stick is clearly a weapon of war.
The problem, of course, is that you cannot simply take away the stick. You’d have to burn down all the trees, too… It’s a classic straw-man, because there aren’t any people arguing that kids ought to bring guns to school, they are simply saying that “take away the stick” is neither practically possible, nor effective. Allowing teachers to arm themselves is certainly appropriate.
Of course, you could play all day with a ridiculous analogy like this one. How do you take away someone’s stick when he brings it to school. If you get too close to him, he’ll just hit you with the stick, right? I suppose you could take a few blows to the head before grabbing the thing and ripping it out of his hands – but this is an analogy, and it’s a bit more difficult to take a few bullets to the head and still disarm the shooter. At the end of the day, you either accept quite a lot of casualties or you find someone with a bigger stick.
Further, the Left has their narrative straight on this one: they insist the 2nd Amendment is about federalism, it was written to guarantee the right of states to maintain “well-regulated militias” which today exist in the form of the National Guard. The idea that the right to bear arms applies to private ownership of firearms, they say, is a lie invented and spread by the NRA, which conservative justices erroneously read into the Constitution in the Heller decision. In any case it’s a Living Constitution*, so a future liberal majority can simply reverse Heller and return to the prior “correct” understanding of the 2nd Amendment.
(*except when it comes to Roe, then and only then the principle of stare decisis applies and the decision can never be overturned)
Uh…are you sure? And why not? We had them at my high school.