The Smallest Minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities. - Ayn Rand
Next time you write to someone who may take little time to read your response, you may want to put a brief "executive summary" at the top and expand it below. At the very least, that doesn't leave any excuses for failing to address all the points you raise.
Excerpt: I wish I possessed one tenth of Kevin's eloquence and clarity of thought. I don't know how many times I've raised these points poorly in two or three pages. He has hit most of the pertinent and important facts perfectly in about a page.
Blog name: Captain of a Crew of One
I thought that as long as your were not counting handguns, that you could get 5 weapons per 4473 (might be 4).
But other then that it was a very well thought out and clear response I hope that he replies back soon.
As for me, the number of guns that would make me feel safe, is once I have one of every model in every barrel length, and in every caliber.
You say "It is easier to carry than to get served for the youth in North Philly." I'm sorry, I don't understand what that means, exactly,
I think he's referring to getting served alcohol. If he's saying that it's easier for a law abiding 18 year old to go into a gun shop and buy a rifle than it is for him to go into a bar and buy a beer, he's right. It is perfectly legal for him to buy a rifle...after filling out the requisite paperwork and getting a background check.
If he's saying that it's easier to buy a handgun, which is, by several orders of magnitude, more commonly used in crime, he's full of it. Perhaps he means that it's easier for "a child" to buy a handgun on the street...but then, for the comparison to be valid, you'd have to compare that with buying alcohol (or drugs for that matter) on the street...which means he's still full of it.
Basically, he's being intellectually dishonest...first, in calling teenage gang bangers "children", then in comparing purchasing guns illegally with purchasing alcohol legally. He's not arguing, he's propagandizing.
"He's not arguing, he's propagandizing."
Well, DUH! ;)
Amazing how someone can get a graduate degree, and still have such a simplistic view of the world.
I am of two minds here. On one hand, the good doctor's editorial writing style contains hints of "MD ego disease." On the other hand, our doctor did get down in the dirt with a blogger--leading me to believe that there are open parts of the doctor's brain.
The Irish in me tends to train people with a large stick: "Hey, Doctor, do you think your time would be better spent teaching other doctors to save lives by, say, WASHING THEIR FREAKIN' HANDS!!!"
However, in this case, maybe our doctor's mind can be prepared by reminding him about history in his profession--just to remind the doctor that, even in our modern age, we can be WRONG about things. For example, we all know that stomach ulcers are caused by acid and are unrelated to bacterial infection. Any doctor who says otherwise should be thrown out of the profession. Oppsee, turns out there is bacteria involved and the doctor who discovered this got a Nobel Prize. Second example, there will be a future Nobel Prize given to the doctors who found that broad based hormone theropy prescribed to millions of menapausal women was, in fact, unnecessarily killing a portion of these women with breast cancer.
In one case, THE FACTS made bad medicine good medicine. In the other case, good medicine became bad medicine. Mankind will be better for it--and how did this occur??? One doctor kept his mind open while searching for the truth.
There is a remote change our doctor can be saved!! Kevin can do it!!! But the doctor's brain must be prepared.
Just goes to show, you can be extaordinarily well educated and still be a fool, still have no common sense.
A firearm is a tool, like a hammer or a lathe. Sure, it's hard to kill someone with a lathe, but it's been done. It's easy to kill someone with a hammer, it's happened locally here several times in recent memory. And yet, it's easier for someone to buy a hammer than to get served alcohol. In fact, this season, I saw a ten year old kid buying a hammer. Now, some might say he was buying the hammer as a gift, but anyone with eyes can see he was buying it for nefarious purposes.
I think we should encorage criminals to strangle people to death with granny-panties. In fact, set up a legal defense team for anyone convicted of murder using granny-panties. THat way, criminals would be encouraged to use them. And liberals would be up in arms to eliminate granny panties, which I could get behind completely.
"I'm sorry, Ma'am, you need a special permit for that, and since you have a fine ass, we cannot issue you a permit to wear them. Please move along to the thong section"
Re: PA and handguns
All new or used handgun purchases in PA must go through an FFL or the state police so that (1) a state police background check can be done on the buyer and (2)info on the handgun serial number and owner can be recorded in the PA Handgun Owner Database (yes, PA has one).
Thanks, k-romulus, I was not aware of that.
Another reason I won't be moving to PA.
Oh, and DAMNED fine post, Kevin. As usual.
Nicely done, Kevin, but you missed a golden opportunity. I would LOVE to read the good doctor's response to Joe Huffman's "Just One Question":
Can you demonstrate just one time, one place, throughout all of human history, where restricting the access of handheld weapons to the average person made them safer?
Doc, are you reading?
DJ, I asked him Joe's "just one question" in the original fisking. He ignored it.
So you did. I read the original, but I didn't remember it in detail. Shame on me for not doing my homework.
I see he invokes the good old "Slavery Exception" to the Constitution. See, anytime there's something in the Constitution you don't like, just point out that, "Hey, those guys owned slaves, and counted Black People as 3/5 of a human being!" Therefore, who cares what the Constitution says?
One word describes your response, Kevin, BEAUTIFUL!
Very well done, Kevin. I hope the good doctor reads and responds. An MD should theoretically have enough mental horsepower and ego to see his points have been crushed and respond.
Only 1227 words? Are you feeling OK? Hope you are well and can keep up the good debate.
Kinda OT, but the slave owners were not the ones who wanted to count slaves as 3/5ths of a person. With representation based on population, non-voting slaves gave the south an advantage which the non-slave states didn't like.
"I think we should encorage criminals to strangle people to death with granny-panties."
Congratulations. That was my "coffee-snort" moment of the day. You owe me a new keyboard.
Great exchange, Kevin. The doctor is obviously intelligent enough to comprehend what you're saying; it remains to be seen whether he's humble enough to admit the possibility that he might be wrong.
Proud owner of "too many guns."
IO think one of the big problems can be traced to giving outsized and elevated credibility to a proefession that originated as barbers...