The Right To Shoot Liberals Shall Not Be Infringed

In Knoxville, Tennessee Sunday morning began like any other Sunday for the congregation of the Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church. It did not end that way.

Two people are dead, seven others are injured, because a gunman motivated by frustration over his inability to get a job, and hatred of the “liberal movement,” took his frustration out on the congregation. The gunman, Jim Adkisson, allegedly chose the church because of the liberal values of the congregation including their open willingness to accept homosexuals.

It seems that the gunman had been convinced, probably by right-wing radio talk show hosts like Hannity, O’Rilley, Lindbaugh, Dobson, and Robertson to name a few, that “liberals” are to blame for everything that is wrong in one’s life. Their hate filled rants are just the spark needed to ignite the fuel of discontent created by the policies of the current Republican administration.

In the past few days there has been an uproar from Republican activists in Orange County over Sheriff Sandra Hutchens’ decision to review all Conceal and Carry (CCW) permits issued by here predecessor, Mike Carona. It is widely believed that some permits may have been issued as political favors, possibly in return for campaign contributions. Opponents to the Sheriff’s decision to review existing permits have cited the “right” to bear arms” as the only necessary justification for the permits. They have objected to medical and psychological evaluation; background checks, and most loudly to the possibility that applicants may be subject to a polygraph tests to receive a permit.

While backgroung checks, or medical and psychological evaluations, would not have prevented the horror of this past Sunday, the wisdom of using them to decide who gets to carry a concealed weapon cannot be dismissed simply because this disraught assassin used a shotgun instead of a handgun.

Now I can imagine that the “2nd Amendment” activists will argue that the mere fact that there are crazy people out there with access to shotguns is sufficient to demonstrate the need to be issued a CCW permit for self defense. That logic is rooted in the same flawed rationale that guided Mr. Adkisson in his belief that he had the “Right to Shoot Liberals.”

The shooting in Tennesse demonstrates that the right to bear arms is one which should be fairly and rationally regulated. I have no problem with people who have a compelling need to carry a concealed firearm having the ability to do so. I just think we are all safer in a society where the number of people carrying guns is limited to the few that really have a compelling, and substantial need to.

And for the record, just because the economy sucks doesn’t mean it is open season on liberals and homosexuals.

  3 comments for “The Right To Shoot Liberals Shall Not Be Infringed

  1. anon
    July 28, 2008 at 2:29 pm

    Given the recent Supreme Court decision with regard to \”the right to bear arms\” the debate will likely now move to the KINDS of guns one can own. That\’s where the NRA\’s agenda starts to break down.

    They have a tendency to oppose any regulations in that area with the specious logic that “now we’ll be just one more step closer to overturning the 2nd Amendment”. Uhhh, ain\’t gonna happen.

    The notion that ordinary citizens need, or should be allowed, to own semi-automatic or automatic weapons is a much tougher case to make. And the “guns don’t kill people, people kill people” argument breaks down when one considers that some guns kill far, far more efficiently and effectively than other guns. Witness the Virginia Tech shootings. Anybody want to convince to me that Cho would have killed that many people with a knife?

  2. Anton
    July 28, 2008 at 3:30 pm

    This is a very sad and tragic event and my sympathies to all parties hurt by this violent act..

    What people on both the right and the left fail to realize is that many of these terrible incidences usually stem from the feeling of an individuals lack of self determination and whether they occur in a church , school , home , countryside or city is secondary to this underling problem.

    In this case the violence is possibly due to this sick individuals feeling that the views of the church were going to influence government who would then possibly enact some policy he was against

    In many school shootings the problem seems to be caused by the alienation felt by these children because they are different. This feeling eventually builds up antisocial tendency’s in them which then is usually triggered into violence by some type of bullying by classmates who refuse to accept them due to their own intolerance to the fact that their peers are different.

    The homogenizing of society and the attempt by BOTH political parties to mold individuals from childhood into one camp or the other is to blame in most of these cases as it will tend to polarize a person (sometimes violently) into a rigid belief system that will erupt sometime in their lifetime.

    A solution that might cure these type of acts from eventually occurring or at the very least diminish them from happening so frequently would need to start at childhood. Education both in the home and primarily in schools at all age levels would need to stress the development of the mind and encourage “free thinking” starting at a very early age and NOT sow the seeds of “party polarization” with typical socialist mantra and parrot like regurgitation of facts that it is found in schools “programing” students today.

    It is the responsibility of people from both parties to put aside their individual feelings which hamper logical thought so they can work together to create a society that not only stresses liberty and freedom as
    a national policy but at the same time advocates a type education that builds a persons mind so they are capable of actually thinking rather than parroting a particular view.

    It saddens me to see all the negative comments about liberals being posted everwhere, I am a long time liberal and it is not a dirty word, however, in recent times the term has been hijacked by extremist on the left who espouse a “socialist” ideology and who are only “liberal” when it comes to left wing issues while ignoring any freedom issues brought up by the other side. This is of-coarse the height of hypocrisy as a true liberal believes in all freedom issues whether they come from the right or left and to be blind on 1/2 of these is a betrayal to the philosophy of liberalism itself.

    Paraphrased from Wikipedia;

    “Classical liberalism (also known as traditional liberalism and laissez-faire liberalism in much of the world is a doctrine stressing individual freedom and limited government. This includes the importance of human rationality, individual property rights, natural rights, the protection of civil liberties, constitutional limitations of government, free markets, and individual freedom from restraint as exemplified in the writings of Adam Smith, David Hume, David Ricardo, Voltaire, Montesquieu, Thomas Paine and others.”

    I believe most rational people from BOTH political parties would agree with all the above so lets put aside all the rubbish and diversions that both parties produce to divide us and work together for a safer and better society that promotes freedom for all of us.

  3. July 28, 2008 at 3:45 pm

    Please tell me, how would denying this person a CCW permit have stopped this tragedy?

    If you want to talk about regulations, at least pick a regulation that your example would benefit from maybe?

Comments are closed.