Reply #85: Erm, speaking of "ignorant" [View All]

[DirkGently]

"Castle Doctrine" is the old, good law. "Stand your Ground is the new, 'liberal' law" we're talking about.

And no matter how you put it, "Stand your Ground" can be argued by a bad guy as well as by a good guy. That's the essence of the problem. Good guys are happy to leave rather than kill if they can. When you give good guys "the option" to stand and kill, you give bad guys the same argument.

I think that's really key to the disagreement here. Those in favor of these ever-broader laws don't ever seem to contemplate any scenario but Good Citizen Shoots Thug. It's a compelling vision, but it's not how the majority of killings or shootings occur. Lots of times it's Guy Shoots Guy. Or girl. In those situations, you're giving a murderer a gift letting them argue that the fact they could have walked away and left everyone alive is irrelevant.

Look, I feel good about the points I've tried to make here. I think I've articulated an argument against these new laws, but I don't need to "win" or convince anyone. I thank the most reasoned pro gun folks I've run into so far for the conversation.

But I'm also noticing from others a decrease in reasoned discourse and and in increase in "You're ignorant / Go read the dictionary / You want to hold hands and sing with the bad guys." For those that feel like pro gun control folks get out of hand and insult you and ascribe false, extreme positions to you without justification, this COULD be why, in some cases. :)

If anyone cools down and wants any further lip out of me, drop me a line and I'll see if I can take a break from "reading the dictionary" and "singing kumbaya with the thugs." Otherwise, I think this foray into the Gun Forums is over for now.