Arguing with idiots: Gun control edition

The goal is confiscation, not mere gun “control.”

That’s what is behind the full-court press from progressives against the Second Amendment after each and every time someone does something terrible with a gun.

Yet this is the one issue conservatives rarely surrender any ground on, despite all the raw emotion that cascades over us during such a time. You would think Rahm Emmanuel’s dictate that a good crisis should never go to waste would be able to score more often.

Why can’t it, then? Well, it’s not just one thing, but the leading reason might be that progressive arguments during these times simply suck.

Along with their willful ignorance of the simple, easily verifiable fact that murders with guns tend to be lower where the rate of legal gun ownership is highest, here are some of the other intellectual travesties committed the last few days in the aftermath of the massacre in Las Vegas:

“If we don’t want North Korea to have a nuclear bomb, we shouldn’t want people in America to have rifles.”

For starters, if you are comparing the average American citizen as a matter of principle to the crazed man-boy leader of one of the worst nations on the globe, then your principles might be irredeemably broken. That’s your standard? That keeping matches out of the hand of a pyromaniac means we shouldn’t use fire, either?

Furthermore, Second Amendment supporters don’t just want guns because it is a slightly louder version of a stamp collection. Rather, they understand they must have them so that aspiring dictators — foreign and domestic — don’t end up abusing the very same tool and turn us all into another version of North Korea. You have identified an actual enemy worth fighting and prescribed a kick-me sign as a remedy.

Hard pass.

“If only buying a gun were as hard as Republicans want to make it to vote.”

Let’s check the math. I have to provide photo identification, among other background information, to buy a gun. I don’t have to do that to vote. Hmm. Did I forget to carry the one or something? Progressive math is hard.

Or is this just a typical progressive dog whistle to loyal minions who need to believe at their deepest emotional core that Howard Zinn’s America is the true gospel? That the little guy, instead of viewing it as an honor to be recognized by the Constitution as the rightful heir to determining the course of his own destiny through self-defense, is better served by perpetually spinning a tale of victimhood and woe for some ambulance-chasing lawyer to glom on to?

“Why do women have to go through more in order to get an abortion than men do to buy a gun?”

One of those I saw making this claim on social media used the following as her exclamation point: “No woman getting an abortion has killed a room full of people in seconds, right?”

Actually, that’s exactly what abortion is doing. Killing. In seconds. Every. Single. Day. That’s the point. In fact, if you do the math, the Las Vegas killer used 23 guns to kill as many people as abortion does every 15 minutes in this country.

See, without variation or exception, abortion always kills. Legal gun owners, on the other hand, almost never kill.

And when legal gun owners do kill, it’s often to defend the innocent. Like the heroic usher in a Tennessee church who recently used his Second Amendment to take down a would-be mass murderer. On the other hand, when Planned Parenthood kills, it’s always to murder the innocent.

But hey, since those of you cheerleading for Planned Parenthood are the maestros of the macabre, maybe I’m missing something? After all, when it comes to killing, you’re most certainly the experts.

“Don’t give me your slippery slope arguments about taking all your guns away.”

Yeah, you’re probably right. I mean, it’s not like you also promised us your gay marriage wouldn’t affect us at all, or that if we liked our current doctor we could keep him. So what on earth am I worried about?

Nope, no slippery slope to see here. Carry on.