Liberal Says Using Guns for Self-Defense Violates Rights of Criminals

Over the years, I’ve heard several bogus and ridiculous arguments used to promote strict gun control.

One of the most frequently used arguments is that guns cause crime. When I’ve heard that argument used, I always ask them if a gun has a conscious mind with which they can control the actions of a person? Do guns have some form of Jedi mind control? Once they scoff at that, then I ask them to explain exactly how guns cause crime and the person quickly realizes that it’s not guns but the people.

Then they try to say that if people didn’t have guns, then they probably wouldn’t have committed their crime or hurt someone. That’s when I ask them about violent crimes committed with knives, baseball bats, hammers, ice picks, screwdrivers, bombs, poison, cars and trucks? That generally ends the conversation.

Then there are those that espouse that if there were fewer guns in the hands of the people that there would be fewer violent crimes. That usually causes me to chuckle before I ask them to look at locations with very strict gun control laws like Chicago and Baltimore. I like to mention how violent crimes skyrocketed in Australia when they banned most private gun ownership, followed by asking them why most mass shootings take place in gun free zones instead of gun friendly places. That also generally ends the conversation.

I have had several people admit that it’s their opinion that people should not be allowed to own guns. I ask them what makes their opinion any more important than mine? I follow that with saying that no one forces them to buy a gun, so if someone like them doesn’t want to own a gun, they don’t have to buy one, but that shouldn’t prevent someone like me from buying one. I especially like it when the person pushing their opinion is a smoker because I tell them I feel strongly that tobacco is an addictive drug that should be outlawed, just like heroin. When they start to protest, I point out that tobacco kills ten times the people in America than guns do. I also point out that the cost of healthcare would go down if it weren’t for tobacco caused cancers and heart disease, so my argument against tobacco is stronger than their argument or opinion on guns. That generally ends the argument.

Trending: Trump Accuses Media of Biggest Coverup of Our Time

However, I have never heard the absurdly ridiculous argument made by one liberal. The worst part about this stupid argument is that it was posted by a prestigious media outlet like Huffington Post. Justin Carmi wrote:

“The Second Amendment is highly contested. There is no doubt that people do have the right to carry and have a stockpile of guns (‘the right of the people to keep and bear arms) and a state has the right to organize a well-regulated Militia. But, the main issue is on the right to self-defend with a firearm.”

“The main problem with the notion of self-defense is it imposes on justice, for everyone has the right for a fair trial. Therefore, using a firearm to defend oneself is not legal because if the attacker is killed, he or she is devoid of his or her rights. In addition, one’s mental capacity is a major factor in deciding whether a man or woman has the right to have a firearm. There are two reasons for ensuring mental capacity. First, one of the Five Aims is to ensure domestic tranquility and there can be no tranquility if one does not have the capacity. Second, if one’s brain is distorting his or her reality, they do not have the proper reasoning and deduction skills to use a firearm…”

What about the right of the person being victimized? What if it’s a matter of life and death between you and the criminal? Is Justin saying that if an intruder breaks in and starts to sexually assault someone’s daughter or wife, that the husband does not have the right to shoot the guy? Is he saying that an intruder, rapist, burglar, mugger, carjacker or murder has more rights than the person being victimized? Does he know that just wounding someone still allows them to shoot back if they are armed? That leaves lethal force as the only viable form of self-defense.

I wonder what planet this guy is from or what reality he lives in, thinking criminals violating you, your family or your home have more rights than you do?



Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.