Shop now for Christmas!

Saturday, April 20, 2013

My "So-Called" Rights

From a comment on my previous post:
You know, I like most of what you post, and followed you even though I disagreed with you on your position on so-called "gun rights".
Oooh. Isn't that just delicious contempt ? It's so thick and creamy you could drizzle it on a pancake. I especially like the one-two punch of  so-called and the scare quotes. They aren't rights, they're "rights". That's quality passive-aggression right there.

Here's what you fuckers need to know about me:  I am not a nice person.  Yes, I am geeky, and I like girly things like magical talking cartoon ponies. I even do generous things for people. This does not make me sweet and nice and kind.

Do not, for one second, assume that I give a shit about your disdain for me.

I do not need your permission to be who I am, and I do not seek your approval. I am not a placid doe-eyed submissive.  I will spit in your face and laugh at your tiny penis, even as you try to rape me of my rights. And maybe you will succeed, but by God you will know you've been in a fight, because I'll have bitten off your ear and gouged out an eye and squeezed your testicles until they ruptured.

Because fuck you, that's why.

You fear me. You are scared of me and you want to weaken me, marginalize me, diminish me. You want me unable to defend myself and utterly at the mercy of men, so you seek to rob me of the great equalizer.

Here's the lovely thing about rights: They aren't up for a vote. That's why they're rights.

Let's put it another way:
  • your so-called "suffrage"
  • your so-called "emancipation"
  • your so-called "integration"
  • your so-called "religious freedom"
  • your so-called "freedom of speech"
  • your so-called "right to due process"

Are you offended yet? You should be. You should be screamingly furious that anyone would diminish these rights with the phrase "so-called". And yet my inalienable right to defend myself with the most effective means possible is threatened because one, ONE asshole out of 10 million law-abiding gun owners decided to commit a raft of crimes that another law would not have stopped. 

You say "Gun control."  I hear, "We want you to defend yourself against a man who is a foot taller and a hundred pounds heavier with your bare hands."

You say "Common sense regulations."  I hear, "We don't like these cosmetic features, like an adjustable stock or a foregrip, that make it easier for a woman to use."

You say, "If it saves just one life."  I hear "Except yours, you stupid bitch. We'd rather you get raped and murdered while waiting for the police to arrive."

You say, "Think about the children."  I hear "But not yours. We won't let you defend them, and if we find out you have a gun in the same house as a child, we'll take them both away."

You say, "Compromise."  I say, "Fuck you, you mewling cowards. I will not embrace victimhood. I will not willingly disarm. If you demand I give up my life just to make you feel better, you are selfish on a level that is beyond comprehension."

Does this frighten you? Does my passion offend you? Have I somehow crossed beyond the pale, and forever lost the sublime privilege of your eyes reading my words?

I

DO

NOT

CARE. 


I am me, and that is all the justification I will ever need. If you cannot stand that, go elsewhere. I won't censor myself for your benefit, and I won't allow your weakness to dictate what I do or say or write. 

If you will not accept me as I am, you are not welcome here.

Now, kindly fuck off.  The cool kids are going to talk about ponies, and role-playing games, and guns. 

91 comments:

  1. W00t! And that's why I like reading your posts.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "Hope has two beautiful daughters. Their names are Anger and Courage." Augustine forgot the third, whose name is Erin.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Folks like that don't grasp that gun rights are directly connected to the right of self defense. That is connected to one's right to one's life.

    If they say so called gun rights, then challenge them on why they have a right to defend themselves.

    As Neal Boortz opined today on Twitter, "I'm sure glad I don't have a gun in my home" says no Bostonian right now."

    ReplyDelete
  4. I am flattered beyond words at this. Thank you so very, very much.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Excellent post!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Testify. The gun grabbers only care how they feel now, it doesn't seem to enter their selfish minds there could be a time when others deem their rights and saftey something that is uneneeded and worthy of "compromise".

    ReplyDelete
  7. Jesus, how did you know I have a small penis?

    ReplyDelete
  8. You're as eloquent as ever, Erin. I could not have put it better myself.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I gotta party with you, Cowgirl.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Evyl Robot MichaelApril 20, 2013 at 10:52 AM

    Well said, my friend! I love it when you get all rialled up.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Preach it! There is no such thing as "gun rights". Guns are objects and thus devoid of rights. The right to have a gun is a human right.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Nice Job! But the Enemy still doesn't get it, even in Plain Language like you used.


    But that's why they are called "The Enemy."

    ReplyDelete
  13. Well said. It's all about their feelings, their concerns.
    I had one argument on FB a couple nights ago with someone that wrapped himself in the smugness of the morally righteous.

    He was indignant that "background checks" did not pass, but had no idea what was actually being voted on. For example he had no idea what Toomey Manchin was. And when pressed guessed that there was a Senator Toomey Manchin.

    He then steadfastly refused to even lookup what said legislation would have prohibited and not prohibited. But he maintained that a full Private Sale Ban was just, and that the only reason the NRA was against it was so the Gun MFG's could selll more new guns. (Yes, you can puzzle that out given that private sales only apply to used guns.)

    This is also the guy that said the Machine Gun Ban in the 30's proved there was no slippery slope. Yeah... you can puzzle that one out.

    But his real "gotcha" the folks arguing with him refused to provide their own Private Sale bans.


    You see it didn't matter that this guy was totally ignorant of the very bills he was advocating. It didn't matter that he had no idea about the current state of the law. He was in the moral right, and we were ignorant sister-humpers that needed a lesson.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I got this one from a friend: "Your right to own a gun does not trump my right to feel safe."


    Really? Which one is in the Constitution?

    ReplyDelete
  15. I eagerly look forward to the day someone answers with "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness," wherein I can then say "That's in the Declaration of Independence, you thundering ignoramus."

    ReplyDelete
  16. And now I've got someone on FB going "Well people in NYC should have different gun rights than people in rural NY"

    Funny how it's only that right where that argument can fly.

    ReplyDelete
  17. I've been pointing out to the antis that they're trying to take away my civil rights for a while. Thank you for saying it better than I ever managed to do. And thanks to Jay for leading me here. Now I'm tweeting this.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Oh hell yes! That wasn't a bitchslap to the gun grabbers, that was a bitchrunoverwithadumpsterequippedwithJATOS.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Nice job Erin...you hit the nail on the head with what they would call your rant...They need to be afraid...very afraid...

    ReplyDelete
  20. Erin, I got linked here. from a FB post. I agree with your stance completely.

    On the other hand, I'd like to point out a flaw in your counter argument...and I totally mean this in a respectful fashion.

    A few days back, I made a post outlining the logical progression, right to life to self-defense, to arms. In the course of discussion, random tard pipes in with the "that's in the Declaration, not the Constitution"a

    ReplyDelete
  21. Well, to be honest, people in NYC have fewer 4th Amendment rights as well, with that whole "Stop and frisk" thing.


    But when you live in daycare, expect to be treated like children.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Anyway, the gist of my reply after he got done gloating about his education was that he couldn't ignore the DoI, as it set the stage for everything else. Justified, if you will. Disregarding the DoI is tacit admission what followed was invalid.

    Now, he was arguing Life Liberty, Happiness was DoI, so it shouldn't be listened to... your position is there's no safety right, which is correct. Figured it might be informative to highlight an incorrect usage, pitfall if you will.
    Hopefully, I didn't assume too much.

    ReplyDelete
  23. And then you can say "Sure, and George Washington TOTALLY crossed the Delaware to go hunting, That's why we have the Second Amendment." If they persist, usually with the "It only applies to muskets!", ask them if Freedom of Speech doesn't apply to cell phone and the internet, because the Founders didn't envision those, either.


    You didn't assume too much at all. Thank you for commenting!

    ReplyDelete
  24. I'm kind of turned on, Erin. I love having you on my side.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I can get along with you, despite your moderate stance on the subject.

    ReplyDelete
  26. I only feel safe when carrying a gun. Don't I have a right to feel safe, too?

    ReplyDelete
  27. I get that all the time. "The Constitution guarantees me a right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and your guns violate two of those."


    Durrrrr.

    ReplyDelete
  28. You know, I'm thinking if the NRA can overrule 90% of the American people, we should turn them loose on something else. What big position should the NRA tackle next?

    ReplyDelete
  29. you just tried convince yourself you don't care what others think about you because no one liked you........

    ReplyDelete
  30. I did not know that the American Constitution provides "rights" to Guns. I figured that because they were inanimate objects they were considered legal property. And as such we had the right to own them. When did Guns earn these "rights", is that what all these "Gun Control" talk has been about? Are folks thinking that we have somehow "enslaved" the Guns and are depriving the Guns from having basics inalienable rights that we grant to Humanity and small cute puppies?Stinking Leftist in this country, providing "rights" to inanimate objects!
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .

    Wait, did I read that wrong?


    BTW, you have the absolute best Pro Gun rants on the net. Sorry for trying to ruin the mood by injecting my poor attempt at levity.


    ERIC!

    ReplyDelete
  31. All living things have a moral right to using lethal self defense against any attacker. However, that power can be used to attack as well. We do not grind down the hooves and antlers of deer because they might use them on a hiker while in rut. You may seek life, liberty, and happiness but that doesn't mean you are given them. Merely, you allowed to seek that with your own power.

    ReplyDelete
  32. If this was your attempt at an insult, tbird89@earthlink.net, it's pathetic. I've heard worse from first-graders.

    ReplyDelete
  33. I always wanted an Mk 19. Can we work on the whole NFA thing?

    ReplyDelete
  34. that was AWSOME! good going Erin.

    ReplyDelete
  35. <3 You win 10 internets, and I've never even read your blog. I have been saying this forever.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Seems whole lots of people like her Mr. Bravely Anonymous unless you just deliberately ignore the dozens of supporting comments she's getting. Seems to me, her post hit the nail so squarely on the head you were driven to make a comment to try and demean her. The kind of childish, school-room taunt I seen from 1st and 2nd graders. It certainly says alot about you.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Exactly, though my my take on the matter is to bypass all the arguments that amount to sidetracks or red herrings.

    I don't mention hunting for pretty much that reason. I cut straight to the point: self-defense against ALL aggressors, be they the common criminal or agents/members of a larger group.

    ReplyDelete
  38. In the end, there can be no compromise between freedom and slavery. You are either free and have the means to remain so, or you are under the thumb of someone who styles themselves your master.

    Pretty sure seeking to disarm peacable citizens is a good indicator to what the offender wants that relationship to be.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Epic - and right on.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Thank you. Your point of view inspired a rather large smile to grace my face. I wish more people understood what you are trying to say. I hear conservatives, mostly males, sound off about this very frequently. That's fine, but they aren't at risk in the same sense as you, and as women across the country and the globe.

    Have you heard the old adage: "God made man, Sam Colt made men equal"? Well, I don't see evidence that god made anything at all, and I'm damn sure that we males aren't the only ones that can rock a revolver like it's 1899. Men aren't the ones that are more likely to be at a height/weight disadvantage in a violent conflict. Men aren't the ones at greater risk of being raped or victimized.

    Women, IMHO, have the most to gain in the gun rights debate.

    ReplyDelete
  41. When I want an intelligent argument the last thing that passes through my mind is a gun grabber. They are so far from critical thinking it's painful. It's critically important that I protect myself from the risk of head explosion they may cause.
    They are dangerous.


    Eck!

    ReplyDelete
  42. linked on FB ~ FANTASTIC!

    ReplyDelete
  43. Powerful post! Anyone with a good fire in their belly and a passion for spirited sarcasm are worth my time. I despise false victim-hood and there too much of that these days. Thank you for your passion and articulation!

    ReplyDelete
  44. Bravo! I feel the same way, and have had to put up with so many little whining fools here in Maryland, so it was quite a treat to read such a well-done rant. No one's feelings get to trump any of my rights. Rights are those concepts that are endowed on every person, such as their own life and the defense thereof. Anything that requires someone else to pay for it or give up some thing or some right, is a desire, not a right. So "feeling safe" is NOT a right, because others have to surrender their rights so some whimpering, sweaty-palmed snowflake won't mess himself. It's like the joke about the little old lady stopped for speeding in Texas who tells the cop where in her car every one of her guns are. He asks her, "What are you afraid of?" and she replies, "Not a damn thing." And that's the attitude I get from this rant. So, Bravo! again.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Erin - I just randomly stumbled across this blog from an internet link. I wish I could articulate a good sounding response, but I'm just as tired as you are from this fight. I'm so glad you were able to post something like this; we as gun owners need responsible people to share their opinions. I share your frustration on every level - I have written to government officials, newspapers, and even had someone track me down to try to get me to interview for an international (European) news site. It's tiring. It's so, so tiring. It's tiring to constantly be under the gun (pun not intended) from gun control activists who are literally blaming responsible citizens for criminal and terrorist acts. I hear all sorts of things about how we are so unreasonable and insinuations that our stubborn, ignorant, supposedly regionalistic ways are putting people at risk. After all, won't someone think of the children!?


    But it's refreshing to know I and a few others I know aren't the only ones. We aren't alone in our beliefs that the Constitution guarantees citizens the right to defend themselves, and that we aren't the only people who feel surrounded by a bunch of idiots who would risk people's lives to "feel safer".


    Also, I like roleplaying. And ponies. I'm sure you have a billion messages but I'd love to chat sometime.

    ReplyDelete
  46. operative word feeling, as in not rational or fact basedopinion

    ReplyDelete
  47. "If you demand I give up my life just to make you feel better, you are selfish on a level that is beyond comprehension.”

    What's ironic, is that the other side of the debate make exactly the same argument.

    ReplyDelete
  48. I'm a 69 yr old white retired white male. You are exactly right! Wish I still believed in magical ponies.

    ReplyDelete
  49. You had me at "Because fuck you, that's why",,,,swoon

    ReplyDelete
  50. Well, of course, but, given the Ninth Amendment, we can take the Declaration as a statement of original intent, and consider L,L,PofH as incorporated. But WRT guns, so what? The right to defend one's life and liberty are small things?

    ReplyDelete
  51. I would like to add to your wonderfully succinct, "Because 'Fuck you!' That's why." this assertion [addressing libtards]: You Don't Get To Waive My Rights.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Which 90%? Another poll of specially-selected people who have no idea what they are being asked, probably.


    Now if we could get the NRA to tackle Obamacare, the EPA, and the Department of Education, we might really get somewhere.

    ReplyDelete
  53. I have reached a point with people who want to argue about this that I am telling them "This is why I have guns. So that when you think you're better than me and can usurp my rights, I can shoot you."

    ReplyDelete
  54. Well.... crap. I think I love you now :/

    ReplyDelete
  55. You nailed it. Thank you. I do not need anyone's permission to exercise a right. When someone comes to take that right away from me, let's just say that everyone involved will have a very interesting day. When those in power act like thugs, they should be treated like thugs.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Some guy said "I disagree with your position", and you accused him of metaphorically raping you with quotation marks...

    This was a ridiculous, shrill overreaction.

    ReplyDelete
  57. Wonderful post. Passionate, authoritative, and articulate. I reposted this on a blog I write for. Full credit given, and linked back to your blog, of course.

    http://therealrevo.com/blog/?p=97331

    Cheers. :)
    --Uke

    ReplyDelete
  58. This is my first visit here (so be gentle)
    damn that was good

    ReplyDelete
  59. Awesome post. It especially irks me when people trot out the argument, "your right to a gun doesn't trump my right to feel safe."

    I talked with an very anti-gun family member and he said if his neighbor has a gun, he doesn't want his kids playing with his neighbor's kids. I told him that was his prerogative and I have no issue with that stance. Then he said his neighbor shouldn't have guns because the neighbor kids might get ahold of their father's gun and bring it over to my relative's house and shoot his kids. I told him that his neighbor should keep his guns secured when not in use, but that you can't legislate mistakes or irresponsibility away. My relative said I would understand when I had kids, but I hope I don't have that position ever.



    It's understandable for him to be terrified at the thought of his kids getting hurt, but the real risks need to be weighed and evaluated. And I don't want to be someone who advocates taking away rights from millions of law-abiding people because of irrational fear.


    Props.


    /)

    ReplyDelete
  60. Aww, if you had just added that I was "hysterical" and that I had "bought into the NRA's culture of fear", you could have had Bingo.


    So close, dude.

    ReplyDelete
  61. Huzzah! Damn, you're awesome!

    ReplyDelete
  62. *Wild applause*

    ReplyDelete
  63. Yup. "Constitution? What Constitution? Those Founding Fathers clearly intended for me to be 'happy.' The rest of that stuff is open to interpretation..."

    ReplyDelete
  64. And yet only one side demands its right to PROTECT anyone's life.

    ReplyDelete
  65. I have to confess, that one pulled me up short and I had to give it serious thought. I want to thank you for the paradigm shift, however brief.


    There is a counter to this: sadly, it's logical and therefore won't be regarded as legitimate. What you do is, you reference police and FBI statistics of innocent bystanders wounded or killed by concealed carriers vs. those wounded or killed by criminals, and then you bust out the stats of how many crimes have been prevented/lives saved by concealed carry.


    Then you say "I appreciate your concern, but it is ill-founded. As you can see by these official statistics you are more likely to be killed by the police than you are by a concealed carrier" or similar. And then I would challenge them to provide counter-examples of innocents killed by concealed carriers and we would see which was, in fact, greater.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Leaving a message under my Eve Online name: YOU GO GIRL! Great blog, loved it.

    ReplyDelete
  67. My response: "But my guns guarantee I can keep MY life, liberty, AND pursuit of happiness. My three trumps your two."
    :)

    ReplyDelete
  68. tbird89

    think about all the awesome cool guys driving an 1989 T-bird

    I am sure he has LOT of freinds

    ReplyDelete
  69. you just tried to convince yourself that the coat-hanger sticking out of your neck was an accident and not a sign of your mother regret

    ReplyDelete
  70. Very well said.

    ReplyDelete
  71. Amen sister, I'd be proud to call you friend.

    ReplyDelete
  72. Whoa... NICE rant. I know you probably don't care, but... I like it. Well said.

    (BTW... JayG sent me.)

    ReplyDelete
  73. Yes, it was because she "disagreed", and totally *not* because he was a flaming condescending passive-aggressive doucheneedle. How ever do you manage to dress yourself in the morning, O ye of lacking reading comprehension?

    ReplyDelete
  74. A big THANK YOU to everyone who posted. I can't comment on every single one of these, but I assure you that I read all of them. Thank you so very much.

    ReplyDelete
  75. I don't know if you remember Steve Allen reading letters to the editor with the feeling and passion that the writer meant, but I have to say that I just read this well deserved rant to my wife with the feeling and passion you conveyed, and she loved it. It is an EPIC rant, that should be read to every mewling liberal gun grabbing a-hole in the world.And it should be read to them with feeling. Thank you for the clear, concise list of reasons that gun grabbers can suck it. And I just love "BECAUSE FUCK YOU' Thank you for the smile and the assurance that others feel like we do.

    ReplyDelete
  76. I usually respond with "So if Gay People make me feel unsafe, I can have them banned? Have you really thought through the consequences of your position here, yet?"


    Then they just usually sneer at me and say "That's different." Because realistically, 90% of the people who want to ban guns don't have any solid principles besides "I want what I want and it's right because I want it. It makes me feel good."


    And then I remember that their vote counts just as much as mine and they outnumber me about ten thousand to one.



    *sigh*


    (Footnote: I don't actually have anything against gay people.)

    ReplyDelete
  77. I'd like to see that statistics too - I'd like to know the real picture, whatever it is, but I couldn't find that exactly.
    The statistics I was able to find is that when murderer/victim relationship is known, 78% victims are killed by people they know: family, friends and acquaintances, and only 22% by strangers. There's other interesting info there.
    http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2008/offenses/expanded_information/homicide.html

    There is an article on the justified/illegal gun use by permit holders in Minnesota, which is closer to what you are looking for, but it's just one state. So in MN, there were 5 justifiable uses vs. 124 convictions.
    http://www.minnpost.com/glean/2013/02/permit-holders-had-5-justifiable-uses-guns-9-years

    ReplyDelete
  78. I'm gonna have to remember stop by now and then, if there's a chance of reading something like this.
    While we may disagree vehemently about something (for now - you know what I'm talking about ;-) , ) you do have my respect.
    Take care.

    ReplyDelete

Expecto Patreonum!

Become a patron via my Patreon page and you can help me produce quality nerdy things.

For more information on how this works, please read this post. Thanks!

Flattr this blog

The Fine Print


This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution- Noncommercial- No Derivative Works 3.0 License.

Creative Commons License


Erin Palette is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to amazon.com.