Believe It or Not! What Anti-gunners must believe

It’s Amazing What One Has To Believe…To Believe In Gun Control
Found by Alzada Slim on rec.models.scale newsgroup of all places and it has a lot of good remarks in it.

That the more helpless you are, the safer you are from criminals.

That you should give a mugger your wallet, because he doesn’t really want to shoot you and he’ll let you go, but that you should give him your wallet, because he’ll shoot you if you don’t.

That Washington DC’s low murder rate of 69 per 100,000 is due to gun control, and Indianapolis’ high murder rate of 9 per 100,000 is attributable to the lack of gun control.

That “NYPD Blue” and “Miami Vice” are documentaries.

That an intruder will be incapacitated by tear gas or oven spray, but if shot with a .44 Magnum will get angry and kill you.

That firearms in the hands of private citizens are the gravest threat to world peace, and China, Pakistan and Korea can be trusted with nuclear weapons.

That Charlton Heston as president of the NRA is a shill who should be ignored, but Michael Douglas as a representative of Handgun Control, Inc. is an ambassador for peace who is entitled to an audience at the UN arms control summit.

That ordinary people, in the presence of guns, turn into slaughtering butchers, and revert to normal when the weapon is removed.

That the New England Journal of Medicine is filled with expert advice about guns, just like Guns and Ammo has some excellent treatises on heart surgery.

That one should consult an automotive engineer for safer seat belts, a civil engineer for a better bridge, a surgeon for spinal paralysis, a computer programmer for Y2K problems, and Sarah Brady for firearms expertise.

That the “right of the people peaceably to assemble,” the “right of the people to be secure in their homes,” “enumerations herein of certain rights shall not be construed to disparage others retained by the people,” “The powers not delegated herein are reserved to the states respectively, and to the people,” refer to individuals, but “the right of the people to keep and bear arms” refers to the states.

That the 2nd Amendment, ratified in 1787, allows the states to have a National Guard, created by act of Congress in 1917.

That the National Guard, paid by the federal government, occupying property leased to the federal government, using weapons owned by the federal government, punishing trespassers under federal law, is a state agency.

That private citizens can’t have handguns, because they serve no militia purpose, even though the military has hundreds of thousands of them and private citizens can’t have assault rifles, because they are military weapons.

That it is reasonable for California to have a minimum 2 year sentence for possessing but not using an assault rifle, and reasonable for California to have a 6 month minimum sentence for raping a female police officer.

That it is reasonable to jail people for carrying but not using guns, but outrageous to jail people for possessing marijuana.

That minimum sentences violate civil rights, unless it’s for possessing a gun.

That door-to-door searches for drugs are a gross violation of civil rights and a sign of fascism, but door-to-door searches for guns are a reasonable solution to the “gun problem.”

That the first amendment absolutely allows child pornography and threats to kill cops, but doesn’t apply to manuals on gun repair.

That a woman in a microskirt, perfume, and a Wonderbra, without underwear, is a helpless victim, but someone getting paid $6 an hour to deliver the cash from a fast food place to the bank at the same time every night is, “asking for it.” And you won’t allow either of them to carry a gun.

That Illinois’ law that allows any government official from Governor to dogcatcher to carry a gun is reasonable, and the law that prohibits any private citizen, even one with 50 death threats on file and a million dollar jewelry business, is reasonable. And it isn’t a sign of police statism.

That free speech entitles one to own newspapers, transmitters, computers, and typewriters, but self defense only justifies bare hands.

That with the above, a 90 lb woman attacked by a 300 lb rapist and his 300 lb buddy, has the “right” to kill them in self defense, provided she uses her bare hands.

That gun safety courses in school only encourage kids to commit violence, but sex education in school doesn’t encourage kids to have sex.

That the ready availability of guns today, with only a few government forms, waiting periods, checks, infringements, ID, and fingerprinting, is responsible for all the school shootings, compared to the lack of school shootings in the 1950’s and 1960’s, which was caused by the awkward
availability of guns at any hardware store, gas station, and by mail order.

That we must get rid of guns because a deranged lunatic may go on a shooting spree at any time, and anyone who owns a gun out of fear of such an lunatic is paranoid.

That there is too much explicit violence featuring guns on TV, and that cities can sue gun manufacturers because people aren’t aware of the dangers involved with guns.

That the gun lobby’s attempt to run a “don’t touch” campaign about kids handling guns is propaganda, and the anti-gun lobby’s attempt to run a “don’t touch” campaign is responsible social activity.

That the crime rate in America is decreasing because of gun control and the increase in crime requires more gun control.

That 100 years after its founding, the NRA got into the politics of guns from purely selfish motives, and 100 years after the Emancipation Proclamation, the black civil rights movement was founded from purely noble motives.

That statistics showing high murder rates justify gun control, and statistics that show increasing murder rates after gun control are “just statistics.”

That we don’t need guns against an oppressive government, because the Constitution has internal safeguards, and we should ban and seize all guns, therefore violating the 2nd, 4th, and 5th Amendments of that Constitution, thereby becoming an oppressive government.

That guns are an ineffective means of self defense for rational adults, but in the hands of an ignorant criminal become a threat to the fabric of society.

That guns are so complex to use that special training is necessary to use them properly, and so simple to use that they make murder easy.

That guns cause crime, which is why there are so many mass slayings at gun shows.

That guns aren’t necessary to national defense, which is why the army only has 3 million of them.

That banning guns works, which is why New York, DC, and Chicago cops need guns.

That the Constitution protects us, so we don’t need guns, and can confiscate them, thereby violating the 5th amendment of that constitution.

That women are just as intelligent and capable as men, yet a woman with a gun
is “an accident waiting to happen.”

That women are just as intelligent and capable as men, and gun makers’ advertisements aimed at women are “preying on their fears.”

That a handgun, with up to 4 controls, is far too complex for the typical adult to learn to use, as opposed to an automobile that only has 20.

That a majority of the population supports gun control, just like a majority of the population used to support owning slaves.

That one should ignore as idiot politicians who confuse Wicca with Satanism and exaggerate the gay community as a threat to society, but listen sagely to politicians who can refer to a self-loading small arm as a “weapon of mass destruction” and an “assault weapon.”

That Massachusetts is safer with bans on guns, which is why Teddy Kennedy has machinegun toting guards.

That most people can’t be trusted, so we should have laws against guns, which most people will abide by, because they can be trusted.

That a woman raped and strangled with her panties is morally superior to a woman with a smoking gun and a dead rapist at her feet.

That guns should be banned because of the danger involved, and live reporting from the battlefield, which can keep the enemy informed of troop deployments, getting thousands of troops killed and perhaps losing a war, is a protected act that CANNOT be compromised on.

That the right of online child pornographers to exist cannot be questioned because it is a constitutionally protected extension of the Bill of Rights, and the claim that handguns are for self defense is merely an excuse, and not really protected by the Bill of Rights.

That the ACLU is good because it uncompromisingly defends certain parts of the Constitution, and the NRA is bad, because it defends other parts of the Constitution.

That a house with a gun is three times as likely to have a murder, just like a house with insulin is three times as likely to have a diabetic.

That police operate in groups with backup, which is why they need larger capacity magazines than civilians, who must face criminals alone, and therefore need less ammunition.

That we should ban “Saturday Night Specials” and other inexpensive guns because it’s not fair that poor people have access to guns too.

That guns have no legitimate use, but alcohol does, which is why we issue cops beer instead of guns.

That police and soldiers are the dregs of society who were unfit to get any real job, which perfectly qualifies them with the high moral standards and keen intellects to handle these complicated tools and be our guardians.

Copyright 1999, 2000 by Michael Z. Williamson.
Permission is granted to copy in part or in total for non-profit purposes, provided due credit is given.


If you like Military Sci Fi, very few do it better than Mike. He was a. British SAS commando. Start with Safehold and read everything he has. Which will lead you to some other great authors. He is a friend of a friend of mine.


@David38 Very good read, thank you. :+1:

1 Like

Thanks for the suggestion. i’m looking for new authors to read.

1 Like

As a woman with multiple guns and a firm belief that the constitution and amendments should never be infringed, that you may make bad choices at times but being a victim is never your fault, that double speak and censorship should stay in “1984” dystopian fictional novels and that the Art of War is right when it proclaims the strongest person has no need to prove their strength ( hence if you have to proclaim you are not racist you are by definition thinking about race as a factor and are therefore racist, let alone pointing out others as such, etc). It kills me to see the lack of critical thinking skills employed in our country.


As I posted in another thread: If you have to tell people that you’re rich, or an honest person, or a good Christian, then you’re probably not.

Critical thinking has gone out of fashion (exit stage lefty) in favor of bumper sticker philosophies. “If it rhymes, it suits the times.”


For the left, not everything about “critical thinking” has gone out of fashion, only the “thinking” part.


Disturbingly, for many, many people, and not only those on the left, the desire to think, let alone the ability to think effectively, seems to have become one more thing that is just too much bother. Logical thinking cuts into their facebook and twitter time, cuts into reality tv watching time, and, worst of all, might make them appear to be just a little bit different than “the crowd”. Oh, the horror! Sure, “standing out” with purple hair and face tattoos and nose rings is one thing, but challenging the lightly held and little understood bumper-sticker talking points of you peers is really just too much.


As a nation, we have become so superficial, and I mean that both figuratively and literally. Outward perception has become what people strive for, the “optics” of an act rather than the intent of the act, virtue signaling instead of being truly virtuous. The thing about everyone trying to prove how different they are is it merely shows how they’re all the same.


Actually, that’s not a bad idea.

“Whoa there, son. You seem really agitated. How 'bout you put down that knife and I’ll give you this cold beer?”


Starts to sound like that whole “pay criminals to not commit crime,” or at least bribe them not to.

Meh. A good beer is still cheaper than incarceration and attorneys. Maybe every SWAT team should be assigned a good bartender. Don’t defund the police, distill the police.

Even more effective in Colorado, the fuzz can bring the buzz.

I don’t believe people who are anti-gun hate guns, they hate the people who own guns. Firearms and the owning of them symbolize independence and taking responsibility for your own existence. Not the dependence on a government agency for every thing in life, especially your personal safety. The American pioneer spirit lives on in gun owners and is contrary to their “It takes a village to raise an idiot “ philosophy.


For the majority of leftists, the only people they are aware of that even have firearms are the ones their media wants them to see.


Oh, the number of my friends that would drop their jaws to the floor if they discovered I own, let alone regularly train and carry.