Wednesday, April 06, 2005
Pretty much unbelievable: In the news: Florida eyes allowing residents to open fire whenever they see threat. Excerpt: emp add) Florida's legislature has approved a bill that would give residents the right to open fire against anyone they perceive as a threat in public, instead of having to try to avoid a conflict as under prevailing law.
Outraged opponents say the law will encourage Floridians to open fire first and ask questions later, fostering a sort of statewide Wild West shootout mentality. Supporters argue that criminals will think twice if they believe they are likely to be promptly shot when they assault someone.
Republican Governor Jeb Bush, who has said he plans to sign the bill, says it is "a good, commonsense, anti-crime issue."
Current state law allows residents to "shoot to kill if their property, such as their home or car, is invaded by an unknown assailant."
The bill, supported by the influential National Rifle Association, was approved by both houses of the Republican-run legislature on Tuesday. It's looking more and more that the only way to reverse the current pro-violence, extra-judicial trend is to have a big messy event that discredits these folks.
posted by Quiddity at 4/06/2005 05:44:00 PM
9 comments
Uggabugga wrote:
"It's looking more and more that the only way to reverse the current pro-violence, extra-judicial trend is to have a big messy event that discredits these folks."
I think the Floridians are not being sensible. That's easy to say. I can imagine a lot wierd people being shot and a few long court cases to decide if the guy fooling with the day-glo plastic water pistol was easily mistaken for a dangerous lunatic or not. And there will be cases where people use the new law to shoot others they don't like much. Fine and large and probably this won't be on the legislature books for too long.
But... The comment by Uggabugga was extremely unwise.
"It's looking more and more that the only way to reverse the current pro-violence, extra-judicial trend is to have a big messy event that discredits these folks."
It's precisely to avoid horrible outcomes that we think something modest should be done in advance. This longing for disaster is plain wrong. It is like saying "We need a few thousand deaths to prove the factory is poisonous.. We need some serious mass injustices to prove the system is failing... We need a big explosion to prove terrorists are a threat..." This line of thinking is appalling. "Yep, the best thing for Bob is that he gets lung cancer. Then he'll see he should give up those cigarettes..." Etc etc etc.
I can understand the emotional reasoning behind comments like this but I always the thought one of the differences betweem the conservative and liberal outlook was that liberals tried to be consistent and rational as opposed to looking at problems in isolation and trusting gut instinct too much.
"...big messy event..."
I cannot conceive of an event big enough or messy enough to discredit the gun nuts. Simply look back at recent history in this country and you will find that there is no atrocity egregious enough to make the gun nuts admit any potential flaws in their philosophy.
Columbine? Killeen, Texas? The California McDonalds massacre? The Arkansas school shootings? Nothing matters. No heap of dead children will ever be an obstacle to the notion that anyone should be allowed to own as many of any kind of gun as they want.
Florida is simply extending that philosophy one step closer to its natural conclusion: Anyone can shoot and kill anyone else at any time for any reason--or even no reason at all. The resulting buckets of blood running down the streets will simply be more justification for letting more people own more and bigger guns that they can use more freely.
What can I say, it's time to start learning Dutch. This crap starts down south and it moves closer and closer to home. Eventually our only option will be to abandon the new world entirely and return to our liberal European roots.
You talkin' to me, Uggabugga? You musta been talkin' to me, there's nobody else around...
VKW
PS: I find Republicans and their friends threatening, on principle. Should I move to FLA and defend myself?
This must be that "culture of life" that the Bushes keep talking about.
One of the previous comments mentioned the gun nuts. I don't want to defend the gun nuts but I wondering is it them or is it the paranoia group that is pushing this. Are they one and the same? Is it worth distinguishing them apart?
I think it is worth distinguishing the gun nuts from the paranoids. The gun nuts have a philosphical stand. The paranoids are a product of the media. The media have learned that the best way to sell dog food and hygene products is to fan the flames and beat the drum of paranoia.
maybe we should incourage this in all the red states until there is no one left but the folks on the blue states?
What, no one with the fine intellectual capacity to link this with its South Park progenitor, Stan's redneck Uncle Jimbo?
'A bald eagle! We can't shoot them because they're an endangered species. It is only in the service of self-defense that we as hunters would be allowed to get away with shooting such a noble creature. Look out! It's comin' right for us!'
Richard, I don't think uggabugga is wishing for a big messy event. I think uggabugga, by criticizing the legislation, wishes for the opposite. I take uggabugga's post as an observation of what may tragically happen as a consequence of legislation that is shortsighted and tailored to serve the interests of a few over the interests of the many.
I think Sully's right.
If that doesn't happen, then maybe the next law we'll see is one making unarmed shooting victims guilty of a misdemeanor for not carrying a weapon . . .
|
