Thursday, May 30, 2013

For Us But Not For You

By Dave Dargo

This article highlights another outrageous moment in the gun-control movement.

Essentially, a Texas lawmaker wanted to pass a law that would allow prosecuting attorneys and Texas lawmakers to carry firearms where firearms are currently prohibited.  Regular folk would not be permitted to carry in those areas.

For those of you against guns it may be difficult to see the arrogance and dangerous precedent such a move would create.

Republican Representative Drew Springer said, "We face a higher degree of risk because we're known and people might not like our opinions," in defending the right of legislators to be given extra areas in which to carry a firearm.

It's not a matter of the degree of risk you may or may not face as an individual.  It's a matter of everyone having the same fundamental right to self-defense.  If the expanded areas are areas where you feel protection is needed then everyone deserves to be protected in those areas and not just lawmakers and prosecuting attorneys.

Democratic Representative Ryan Guillen said, "In light of Gabrielle Giffords and others, those in the public eye need to protect themselves."

What chutzpah!

O.K., Representative Guillen, you've identified a reason why you feel you need protection and, because you're a lawmaker, have decided to introduce legislation that would exempt you from the gun-control laws of your state so you can defend yourself.

Now you've placed yourself in a position of recognizing that people should be allowed to protect themselves but only if those people are special, i.e., elected to public office.  What about the public. Perhaps I have a reason to protect myself in those areas as well.  Perhaps the victim of domestic violence and stalking feels unprotected.  Shouldn't that person have the same right to protection as you?

Rather than start down the "some animals are more equal than others" path, perhaps you should just remove the barriers in your state that prevent people from protecting themselves.

But then again, why hold public office if you can't give yourself special privileges?

No comments:

Post a Comment