Alphecca: Idiot Thinker of the Day

February 23, 2007

Idiot Thinker of the Day

That would be John Lawrence of South Bend, Indiana who writes in the South Bend Tribune:

Recently, a jury found a South Bend man not guilty of the murder of another South Bend resident. The defendant shot and killed the other man but the jury found more credible the defendant's assertion that he acted in self-defense.

What if the defendant hadn't had a handgun the day in question? Instead, what if the defendant had been carrying a knife? If the defendant had been carrying a knife, there still might have been a trial but for assault, not for murder. And quite possibly the alleged victim would have been able to testify, his wounds long healed.

So the law abiding shouldn't have the right to defend themselves, or at most, to only be able to maim a violent attacker! Because criminals should be able to spew their lies in courts and collect bogus civil suit monies as orchestrated by greedy trial lawyers. And, of course, with only a knife for self-defense, that allows the mutant attacker to get much closer to the victim, possibly killing him. And what if the attacker had a gun but the victim only had a knife? This guy needs his head examined!

I think his final, simplistic thinking says it all:

How can caring, sentient beings condone these recurring tragedies? Melt down all handguns and automatic weapons and beat them into plowshares.

Oh. Okay, let me know when all the mutant thugs and gang members and terrorists and drug addicts have done that and then I'll consider your proposal for a brief second or two...

Posted by Jeff Soyer at February 23, 2007 06:46 AM

Comments

I'd sure like to see this asshole's definition of "automatic weapons". Jack.

Posted by: Jack Lorenz at February 23, 2007 08:53 AM

For all their beliefs about how rational they are, firearms remain the antigunners' version of fetishism (not the fun kind either): inanimate objects to which evil moral qualities and agency are imputed. If they lived in the bush 200 years ago, the Brady crowd would probably sacrifice virgins to keep the evil god Roo-Ger Blackhawk from ruining their crops.

Posted by: Mike at February 23, 2007 10:01 AM

Since I attend college in South Bend, I seriously considered finding that guy and slapping him upside the head. But I figured the splatter factor was to high and dry cleaning is expensive.

Posted by: Rey B at February 23, 2007 10:36 AM

Somebody needs to remind the idiot that those who beat their swords into plowshares only end up plowing for those who don't.

Posted by: tkdkerry at February 23, 2007 10:36 AM

What if the defendant didn't have a gun but only a knife? He would probably be dead and the criminal would still be out running around to commit more crimes.

Posted by: Ron at February 23, 2007 11:17 AM

I often wonder, when I read idiots like that, if they even know what plow shares are and what they would do with them all once they had melted everybody's guns down.
Probably the same thugs that now lurk with other weapons would beat their victims over the head with them. Then the kind and caring folks would want to melt all the plowshares down into ball bearings or something.

Posted by: threecollie at February 23, 2007 11:20 AM

ah, so, how good is plough steel for home 'smithin?

Posted by: Ding Kong (the big chinaman) at February 23, 2007 01:16 PM

Destroy all handguns and automatic weapons (presumably Mr. Deeply Ignorant means semi-automatic rifles, as machine-guns are irrelevant in his context)?

So he'd prefer a 12 gauge shotgun at home-defense ranges as less, er, deadly?

Interesting idea.

(I'm a caring, sentient being, and the only "tragedy" here is that the dead man attacked someone else. His death in the commission of said crime is not a tragedy.)

Posted by: Sigivald at February 23, 2007 01:54 PM

"And quite possibly the alleged victim would have been able to testify, his wounds long healed."

This assumes something that is quite possibly _not_ true: that knifes produce less serious wounds than guns. I remember reading the results of a study several years ago about gun vs knife wounds. What they found was that if a gun was involved that injury was more likely to occur but that if injury _did_ occur that the knife wound was more likely to be fatal. (this was from before the internet -- no idea how to find a source to document it)

Posted by: bob at February 26, 2007 07:40 PM

I guarantee you I am more fearful of a knife wound than I am a bullet wound. I have had experience with both.

Posted by: straightarrow at February 27, 2007 12:12 AM

Note: Comments close down on posts after seven days and then
the comment input form disappears.

Your comments are welcome. You don't need to enter a URL and you don't need a "valid" email address, either. Note though that MT Blacklist is installed to flag suspiciously spam-like strings. Unfortunately, because of the bastard spammers, the strings "google.com" and "yahoo.com" (even in your email address) are currently banned as well. So are strings such as "cialis" (a common spam) which rules out words such as "socialism". Try putting a hyphan in a word like that.

By Golly, you're reading an archived post. Click Here to head to the main page and read current stuff...

Into science fiction? Check out my group blog novel, Colony: Alchibah.
See the reader's guide there for first-timer tips.

Alphecca

Check it out: My group sci-fi blog novel: Colony: Alchibah

February 23, 2007

Idiot Thinker of the Day

By Golly, you're reading an archived post. Click Here to head to the main page and read current stuff...

Check it out:

My group sci-fi blog novel:

Colony: Alchibah