Texas Monthly’s liberal editor posted a story headlined “Jerry Patterson Wants You to Bring Your Guns to the Alamo” today.
The column begins with:
“I consider myself to be as much a representative of a true Texan as anybody I know, but I have to confess to one shortcoming: I just don’t get the gun culture, and I don’t think I ever will. That’s not to say that I don’t like shooting. I was Deadeye Dick at my CHL class, scoring 236 out of a possible 250 with a borrowed Glock. But I don’t own a gun and have no plans to get one. I know that the vast majority of gun owners are people just like me, but my experience in my CHL class confirmed once again that there is a small segment of gun enthusists [sic] who are some of the most paranoid people I have ever encountered. They are absolutely certain that a government agent will knock on their door at any moment and seize their private arsenal. If someone handed me a flier that declared, “Get your guns & Head to San Antonio,” I would probably get in my car and head for Dallas as fast as I could.”
The piece continues on in the same vein of being perplexed at why so many Texans are focused upon, or sensitive to, the issue of personal ownership and bearing of firearms.
In an effort to help Mr. Burka and his out-of-touch liberal readers understand, I give this good faith effort to at least give them some idea of why the issue is so important to many of us:
“I consider myself to be as much a representative of a true Texan as anybody I know,…” Thanks for one of the most laughable lines in recent memory! I needed a good, deep laugh after the pressures of this week.
As to the guns, someone who makes a living with words surely will understand the concept of a word being “perfect” meaning it can’t be modified. Well, that’s how the Second Amendment was written despite rulings and others saying otherwise. It says “… the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” So, anything seen as infringing on the right to have AND carry arms is seen as a clear attack on rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights.
Such may seem silly to those who don’t take the amendment to mean what it says in plain language but, would you support some abridgement of a free press just because many, or a majority, find that some press restrictions are “reasonable” or “needed”? This argument is underway in the mother country of England at present. The same applies to all other rights.
When does a right cease to be a right? Some seem to think that 1% of a right left is still a right while others of us see 1% taken, leaving 99% intact, as the destruction of a right, or at least a clear sign such destruction is upon us.
Your thoughts?
Well, if he thinks a 236 on the CHL qualifies him as a “Deadeye Dick” then there are more problems than his politics, IMHO.
Ha! I thought much the same.