“It’s probably not a good idea to argue with a stranger over a parking space at a state park or confront a reckless cyclist on your local greenway. They might have a loaded handgun hidden in their belt.” – Chris Fitzsimon, Executive Director of N.C. Policy Watch, thepilot.com
How bout we stop thinking of the average armed civilian as a mentally deranged gun carrying freak who does not have enough self control to not murder everyone in sight. What is with the worry that guns will encourage people to commit crimes of passion?
Well, funny you should ask. There’s a nice, long “discussion” about that over in the Question of the Day, as I’m sure you know. We could ask that question over there, and we will likely get an answer, incoherent and nonsensical as it may be.
It’s reflection/projection. Many gun-grabbers fear what they themselves would do with a gun in such a situation, so they believe everyone else is like that too, either because believing so gives comfort that they’re not alone, or they’re jealous of responsible people.
If someone is fearful of confronting a citizen with a gun, chances are that person is the kind of a-hole who loves provoking and arguing with strangers.
You probably have a point.
Arguing over parking spaces and confronting reckless idiots is lose-lose behavior. The first makes you an ass-hat, the second is a violation of the rule about avoiding bad places.
“It’s probably not a good idea to attack or assault a stranger over a parking space at a state park or attack or assault a reckless cyclist on your local greenway. They might have a loaded handgun hidden in their belt.”
There. I fixed it for them. 🙂
I have seen a bumper sticker that said “Don’t be a Dick”. That almost always keeps you out of trouble.
+1 f’ing million
This is called Wheaton’s Law (not in a legal sense) and it serves to be a pretty good law…
On the other hand, whenever I see a bumper sticker that says “Don’t be Mean” I wonder if that person is mean for calling other people mean.
“It’s probably not a good idea to argue with a stranger over a parking space at a state park or confront a reckless cyclist on your local greenway. Its rude, and really none of your damn business to tell anyone what to do.”
Fixed.
+10
So many gun guys love that Heinlein quotation. I’m not sure why. Heaven help us if guns are the reason we’re civil to our neighbors.
Then heaven help you. People are generally polite as a matter of efficiency. They defer because they do not know the power, now or in the future, of the person they are dealing with. When the facts are clearer we see that people demand what they believe they can extract. Bullies start fights over parking spaces and often get their way. The holder of greatest corporate power demands and gets the biggest paycheck, regardless of her marginal value. People with power are used to receiving deference because it became well known that the first person who did not offer it was soon crushed. What world do you live in? Yes, an armed society is a polite society. A society of well-distributed power to enable a collection of average people to punish physically or financially powerful bullies is also polite. Two descriptions of the same thing.
I’ve gotten into a number of arguments while carrying and never once did I think to draw it. It’s just there, unless I am afraid for my life…
Well if you are in an argument and dont just walk away and you end up needing to defend yourself your gonna have a long trial ahead of you.
Pretty much my experience. In fact, in one instance, my firearm prompted me to cool of a situation that was heating up.
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2011/11/tim-mcnabb/in-which-your-correspondent-is-confronted/
That whole politeness thing is overrated. There’s nothing more emotionally satisfying than telling some a$$hole to go f^ck himself, and you all know it. C’mon, tell me I’m wrong. I double-dog dare ya.
I’ll take that dare.
I find it much more emotionally satisfying to defeat an a$$hole with superior logic that demonstrates to him and everyone nearby that he truly is an idiot or an a$$hole. If you descend to their level, you have already been defeated.
Now what will YOU do – tell me to go f^ck myself? Then who would be the a$$hole?
Ixnay. You are not an a$$hole. I have a well-tuned a$$holemeter and you’re not registering.
Seems to me to be just repeating the same arguments we have heard over and over every time another state was debating a shall-issue carry law. Unfortunately for those arguments, the dire predictions of blood in the streets just have not happened. I am sure there have been a few cases where something like this has happened but not rampant or even enough to get the news programs reporting on it.
Speaking for myself, once I started carrying I noticed that I was even more tolerant and forgiving of others’ actions that might have caused me to say something before. Now I just let it go because I wouldn’t want to do something that would escalate tensions when I could have avoided it. Carrying to me is only for situations where there is an unavoidable and existential threat not for pride or property. This coming from someone that lives in a “castle doctrine” and “stand your ground” state.
It’s not a good idea for a motorist to use their vehicle as a deadly weapon against cyclists, even if they think they are reckless. That’s attempted vehicular assault, or even drop the attempted part.
Comments are closed.