My fellow wolf, [or whomever, right?]
Professor Roth seems conflicted.
Gee, ya think?
He doesn't seem to like guns but he has the intellectual honesty to go where his research takes him. For that we owe him much.
I don't get this at all. If "his" research takes him someplace, how could it possibly be valid if he purposely misinterpreted it in public to fit some preconceived notion consistent with his "conflicted" nature? Gun owners "owe" him "
much" for simply telling the truth? Man! I've been telling the anti-gunners the truth for several decades now! I must be owed 100 times as
much as Prof Roth!
I owe him absolutely nothing, except maybe a bill for the extra Ibuprofen I had to take after getting a headache from reading the longest answer ever given to a simple question, "Why didn't you address the availability of guns?"
The foundation that all of the gun rights haters BS is built on is that the availability of guns is the cause of murder & mayhem. For example, this was in one of their
recent emails "It is the illegal gun trade, which begins with rogue gun retailers selling to ‘straw buyers’ and gun traffickers, that fuels Philadelphia’s disastrous rate of gun violence." Professor Roth demolishes that argument.
Everyone on this site if they're here for the purpose for which it was created, to further knowledge about carry laws and participate in the Great American tradition of self-reliance and responsible citizenship, demolishes that argument every day that we strap our weapons on, go forth in public and live our lives in a law-abiding manner. We all know that the "illegal gun trade" anywhere in America is so statistically infinitesimal as to be largely a myth, a made-up canard by anti-gunners to vilify the most responsible, prepared and proactive segment of our society. We also know that to the extent that the supposed "illegal gun trade, which begins with rogue retailers selling to 'straw buyers' and gun traffickers" exists at all, the bulk of its existence is owed to Eric Withholder, his BATFE and the gun-running program known as Fast & Furious for which no one but the whistleblowers who participated in exposing the story have suffered any deleterious consequences yet, and probably never will. Did he use any of that
truth to "demolish" the gun-grabbers' lies?
He gets other things wrong but in destroying the foundation their house of horrors is built on he helps us immensely.
He hasn't helped me one iota. I wouldn't ask a "conflicted" anti-gunner for help in the first place, nor would I (or do I) accept any "conflicted" help from them. They are the enemy, and I don't see why the pro 2nd Amendment side of the argument is constantly groveling for acceptance by our enemies. Screw 'em. I'm a "you're-either-with-us-or-against-us" kinda guy when it comes to the rights that God created us with, inherent by our very Creation. No man has the authority to override any part of that inheritance from God, and I will never relinquish and sliver of it willingly or knowingly. Some academic intellectual from Ohio State University that nobody's ever heard of before this thread was posted, doesn't even have the
potential to "help us immensely" just because his anti-gun nature couldn't find a valid way to blame murder on one specific weapon instead of on the men and women who commit them.
Blues
