October 27, 2008

These two stories both headlining the news on the same day.


  1. I could go on and on. Not about gun control. About gun elimination. But I’ve probably gone on and on about enough stuff today.

  2. Seriously, if a gun isn’t safe at a GUN SHOW with the maximum supervision possible, how many of the children (and spouses) of the people in this recent gun buying surge are destined to die in the next couple of years?

  3. What kind of idiot let’s his 8 year-old fire an Uzi?

    I was required to purchase a gun safe or a trigger lock when I purchased my gun after 9/11 (can’t be too safe from them terrorists you know). I opted for the safe; trigger locks can actually cause the gun to fire while you’re removing them.

    My safe uses two locks, and because it’s 1/4″ thick steel, it would take my children a very long time to pry it open (the door is recessed making it very difficult to get any leverage). And, of course, it’s in a locked room.

    However, it’s pure fantasy to think that the second amendment provides for individual gun ownership. All you have to do is read it, and it’s clear that the framers intended guns to be owned by members of a militia, not private citizens.

  4. I agree with you in principle. The framers of the constitution intended to arm a militia, but it has been taken to an extreme.

    Much like Porn was not intended as free speech, but those in that industry use the constition all of the time to defend it.

    Funny how both sides use the constitution when it fits THEIR cause.

  5. I absolutely agree with Mr Nelson; the framers of the Constitution would be appalled if they saw how either the 1st OR the 2nd amendment in the Bill of Rights were used to defend extremist views.

    The core difference, of course, is that 1st amendment defenders are apologists for awful things like simulated rape pornography, or fictional stories about incest, while 2nd amendment defenders are apologists for over 30,000 gun deaths a year (and an additional 65,000 gun injuries).

  6. Unfortunately, “simulated” rape and “fictional” stories of incest, often lead to the real thing; Resulting in disgusting things like human-trafficking, sex-tourism, and the rape and expoitation of underage children. THAT is not freedom of speech.

  7. As the father of a 2 year old girl, I’m not interested in defending rape fiction, but I’ve never subscribed to the belief that fiction leads directly to real world actions. Whether or not you agree, as a reasonable person you can certainly see the leap in causality between 2nd amendment rights leading to an increase in gun deaths & 1st amendment rights leading to an increase in prurient stories that may then lead to an increase in sex trafficking.

  8. I’ll bet that guns lead to many more gun-deaths than erotic fiction leads to instances of sex trafficking.

    It just wasn’t possible for the framers to imagine internet pornography, but it can be protected as freedoms of expression. From Texas v. Johnson, the “government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea offensive or disagreeable.”

    I have a daughter too, and I don’t want her abused or raped. But we can’t just go around making otherwise legal activities illegal without a great possibility they could lead to a crime. Pornography is incredibly widespread in America, yet human trafficking isn’t. Instances of pornography have increased exponentially with the rise in popularity of the internet. Rapes have not risen proportionally, and I’d doubt instances of child molestation have either.

    On the other hand, gun-deaths can’t simply be tied to the number of guns, or Canada would have much higher gun-death rates. I know this will piss you off Nelson, but maybe Michael Moore was right, and that Americans are spoon-fed so much violence and fear that they engage in much more gun-related crime.

  9. I think it’s fairly safe to say that I’m on my own little island here. I’m not only an Obama-voting Democrat in L.A., I’m also a former Junior NRA member who used to own a gun and is very pro-hunting. I don’t even have a problem with home protection firearms.

    We have too many guns to ever make gun elimination even a remote possibility, and I would even go so far as to say that in some cases, guns are good. Ranchers need them to shoot wolves, coyotes, or injured/diseased livestock. You might not like the idea of someone shooting Bambi, but hunting license fees go directly into maintaining the wilderness areas that us city folk speak so longingly for, yet never go anywhere near. Having said all that, nobody needs an Uzi. Automatic and semi-automatic guns are completely absurd and have only one purpose – kill as many PEOPLE as possible.

    What seems to have been trampled on isn’t the Constitution, but rather common sense.

  10. Sadly, today, Gerard Damiano passed away. He was the director of classic porno “Deep Throad”.

    I heard the studio he worked for will be flying their flag today at “half-shaft”.

  11. More to the point, a British man was arrested this week for writing a dirty story and putting it online. We say it could never happen here, but of course it could.

  12. How dirty was the story? It wasn’t about not wanting to pee next to someone and lying about having a funny shaped penis, was it?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: