General Categories > Newsworthy

Targeted, the Movie (Review)

<< < (2/3) > >>

depserv:
The idea of civilian disarmament being based in our culture valuing life is a lie, and one that patriots should expose at every opportunity.

First, civilian disarmament does not save lives, it costs lives, by leaving the victim unable to defend himself.  This truth was proven by research done by John Lott, among others.

Second, if saving life was the purpose of gun control, the same people who support it would have done the same things with driving, since far more people are killed in auto accidents than with guns.  Plus if guns are taken away there is no end to the other weapons that can be substituted; for example, the biggest mass murders in America have all been committed with things other than guns, but if cars are taken away, or miles driven reduced, what is substituted for them, if anything, is far less lethal, such as walking, bicycling, public transportation, etc. 

Look how easy it is to lose your right to bear arms; ANY gun crime can make you lose it, at least for a number of years.  So why don't those who supposedly value life so much that they want to make us less free apply the same thing to a driver's license?  One mile an hour over the speed limit and you lose your license for ten years.  (I don't support this by the way; I just mention it to point out the hypocrisy of anti-gun bigots.

Obviously cars are an important part of our lifestyle.  But most of the miles we drive are not essential.  There is a direct correlation between total miles driven and fatalities.  So why are anti-gun bigots not trying to find ways to reduce the total number of miles driven?  For example, they could put a really high tax on gasoline, and have a tax refund for "legitimate" miles driven, which would be to work and back, to the doctor, etc.  This alone would save far more lives than could ever hope to be saved through civilian disarmament.  So why is something like that not even being mentioned by those who supposedly value life so much?

More important, if everyone who says they support civilian disarmament voluntarily stopped all nonessential driving, more lives would be saved than could ever possibly be saved by gun control, even in the wildest liberal fantasy (well maybe not their wildest fantasy, but any fantasy with even a remote connection to reality).  So why haven't they done that, if protecting life is more important to them than freedom?  Why have they not given up some of their own freedom to reduce their risk of death? 

The answer of course is that gun control really is not about saving lives and never has been.  It's all about control, over the many by the few.  This makes gun control advocates hypocrites, as well as liars.  And when the lies and hypocrisy are stripped away from their propaganda there is nothing left but intolerance, of a mindset they don't agree with.  This is why I refer to them as bigots.

Add in the fact that keeping and bearing arms is a Constitutional right while driving is a privilege (as I was reminded of a few times by the nice patrolman in my younger days), and the double standard is even more egregious.  They are willing to trample all over a fundamental right, to supposedly do something they could do many times better by infringing on a privilege.  They try to destroy our right, but will not even give up a little bit of their own privilege, even though it is verifiable fact that doing so would accomplish the end they claim to be after far better than taking away our right.

And driving is only one among many examples of this hypocrisy.

This hypocrisy is a fundamental lie of gun control, and patriots should not allow our enemy to get away with it.  We should make the truth known far and wide.  I didn't see the movie, but from one of the comments here it looks like this lie was allowed to stand unchallenged in it.

Mali:

--- Quote from: depserv on October 01, 2016, 10:58:21 AM ---<snip>
The answer of course is that gun control really is not about saving lives and never has been.  It's all about control, over the many by the few. 
</snip>
--- End quote ---
First let me start by saying that I am not arguing with you here.  But I wonder if this is about control or more about fear. Most anti-gun people I have met are afraid of guns because they either don't understand them or don't understand the people who own them. Like many in society today they would rather legislate the fear away then face it and learn that there isn't really anything to fear.

As far as them not doing anything about cars, again, they aren't afraid of cars because nobody really has made a huge deal about the numbers of people who dies in vehicle related situations each year. However, the media screams from the highest mountain every time someone dies in an incident that is even tangentially related to firearms.
"There as a Ruger poster on the wall so this must have been gun related!"

Although I am sure we cannot easily change the current environment, we need to continue to stand our ground and speak the truth about guns and the shooting sports. If even one of us decides it's just too much work then we lose that voice that could change a mind and open someones eyes to the truth.

depserv:

--- Quote from: Mali on October 01, 2016, 12:32:43 PM ---First let me start by saying that I am not arguing with you here.  But I wonder if this is about control or more about fear.

--- End quote ---

The fear was planted into them by those who seek power.  Gun control is an extension of something that is as old as civilization: absolute power over the many in the hands of the few.  Gun control, in other words, predates guns.  Those who seek power always want those they want power over disarmed.  America's founding fathers knew that, and it's why they wrote the 2nd Amendment. 

Fear of guns but no fear of cars is irrational, so much so in fact that I doubt it would exist if it was not planted into people by those who manipulate them.  Liberal media are saturated with gun control propaganda; guns are commonly shown as evil, and the good they do is ignored.  This is where the irrational fear comes from.

NE Bull:
depserv, While the final comments were not replied to, the points you made were very much discussed earlier on in the debate. 
Please keep this discussion on the reviewing of the movie.  If you did not take the time to go to one of the 5 theaters to partake... respectfully- SHHHH!

Lorimor:
The gun control debate was hot long before that staunch law and order Senator Teddie (D-Chappaquiddick) drove his Olds and his secretary off the bridge.  And before Metzenbaum called the NRA the "Taliban." 

There are waaaaayyyy more alcohol related deaths every year in the US than there are firearms related deaths but no one appears to have their panties in a twist over the easy accessibility of alcohol. 

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page