I haven't been able to post much (at all) because I'm still computer-free and, therefore, one-click-blogging bereft as well.

However, I took pains to make sure I kept this ludicrous quote alive.

From:
Shooters seek handgun law change (UK)



The government has been urged to relax gun laws which make it illegal for Britain's top pistol shooters to train in England, Scotland and Wales.

...

A Home Office spokesperson said the laws had been voted in by an "overwhelming majority" of MPs.


"The banning of handguns wasn't a matter of eroding personal freedoms, it was a matter of ensuring that what had been shown to be a terrible, if statistically small, risk was removed," she said.


Oh, it hurts.

Statesman -- Letters

Well, in less than a week here in Austin I managed to get a mini-rant published in the "American" Satesman.

Here's the text (in case it disappears off of the site):

Refuting anti-gun letter


Re: Aug. 4 letter to the editor, "Protecting gun makers":

The letter was full of the usual (well-refuted) obfuscation.

The writer said, "Do Americans really believe the slogan of the National Rifle Association, 'Guns don't kill people, people do?' "

Well, reasonably educated Americans do. The letter writer has perhaps been deprived of a thesaurus — one that includes other words for "kill" such as "bludgeon," "strangle" and "stab."

She then, although quoting the full Second Amendment, states that it refers solely to militias. I'm impressed that she managed to type the words "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed" without actually reading them.

ANNA ZETCHUS RAETZ

hipsocket@gmail.com

Austin

I'm such a troublemaker.

I've already received a reply. I'll paste it, and my response, here as well.

[Her]

Who's guilty of obfuscation here? I might gently redirect your attention to the Second Amendment – all of it: A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. Sorry, there’s no way of getting around it; the right to keep and bear arms is inextricably linked to the militia. And it’s not without a bit of irony that I noted YOU were unable to include that introductory phrase.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[Me]

What the 2nd is stating is that (among a plethora of other reasons), an armed people (stated James Madison - "A well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people , trained in arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country. ""; and George Mason - "What is the Militia? It consists of the whole people." ) was the best, perhaps only, defense of a free people. And, in fact, the true difference between the free and the slave.

The history of gun control in this nation stems from attempts to disallow newly freed blacks access to weapons -- gun control is racist, and elitist.

The 2nd could easily have stated: "God made man and woman, Colt made them equal, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". Or "When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

You get the idea.

Thank you so much for taking the time to engage. Hope this helps.
All the best,
~Anna

*evil grin*