more anal-cranial inversion

Not even close, Skeeter

VIDEO REMOVED FOR AUTO-PLAY CUSSEDNESS
~ vid ~

In what possible version of America is a citizen required to cede their right to an effective self defense in order to make it “safer” for law-enforcement?
It’s the cops’ duty to assume risk in order to protect citizens, not the other way around.
(What? No, I’m gonna skip the argument about whether his doublespeak even makes any sense, operationally.)

Okay, okay, I confess that this doesn’t actually puzzle me one little bit.
It’s the way Progs think. It’s endemic to their world view.
The gov’t is not there to protect us from badness,
the gov’t exists to make us better persons, more worthy of our place in the collective state, if you will.
It is our duty to make governing as easy and painless to our rulers as possible.
Hey, they’re only doin’ it for our own good, after all. You know, the greater good. The ultimate in “moral ends.”

Nah, I don’t find it difficult at all to interpret Skeeter’s words as an inversion of our reality.
It’s just how his brain works.
… and mine.

9 Comments!

  1. mojo
    Posted February 4, 2013 at 2:56 pm |

    Great line from NY hearings:
    “Why do the cops need them? Who are they fighting a war against?”

  2. Jess
    Posted February 4, 2013 at 4:00 pm |

    I read that the war on ideas is much better supported on the side of those wishing to preserve the Second Amendment. Whether the progressives push the envelope remains to be seen. I have the feeling their ranks are diminishing daily; especially with law enforcement folks. It’s bad enough having to deal with criminals. Placing honest, resourceful and determined citizens in that category is a recipe for disaster.

  3. Caged Insanity
    Posted February 4, 2013 at 5:02 pm |

    If we don’t get off our collective asses and start shooting 10 years ago, we won’t be able to save the country.

  4. Steve Skubinna
    Posted February 4, 2013 at 5:42 pm |

    What the hell does this metrosexual mom jeans wearing putz know about “weapons” or “war?” Somebody should ask him if arming Mexican drug gangs is an act of war.

  5. Posted February 4, 2013 at 6:01 pm |

    I look at these photo ops and can’t help but wonder just who those people are standing behind “that man.”

    Can they look at themselves in the mirror and not feel nauseated at what they’ve done? Can they look their spouse/children in the eye and not feel that they’ve betrayed them? Their friends? Their neighbors?

    The people they’ve sworn an oath to protect and serve?

    Or are they just a bunch of out-of-work “B grade” actors taking a day job ’cause obamabucks just don’t go as far as they used to?

  6. geezerette
    Posted February 4, 2013 at 6:10 pm |

    Next stop on his anti gun tour is Chicago. Things are going so well there.

  7. DougM (Progophobe)
    Posted February 4, 2013 at 9:26 pm |

    ^ Good answer to any anti-gun-for-self-defense jackass question/accusation is, “Chicago.”

  8. dick, not quite dead white guy
    Posted February 4, 2013 at 10:32 pm |

    ^Doug (7) Another good answer would be “South Africa”
    If one can get a permit for a gun there, it takes about two years to get through all the bureaucracy, checks, permits and training, and the firearm is registered.
    In spite of the strict ‘gun control’, their murder rate is more than ten times the US national rate/capita, and nearly double Chicago’s murder rate.

  9. rickn8or
    Posted February 5, 2013 at 6:43 pm |

    dick, yeah, the place sure went to shit after Kim DuToit left.