Confluence Of Moonbats

Humans are prone to try to find connections in things that may at first seem unrelated.  It’s one of the traits that has allowed us to make sense of the world around us and formulate scientific laws through empirical observation.

However, examining the website of Confluence Against Gun Violence (a group that’s planning protests at the NRA Annual Meeting in Pittsburgh) I’m starting to be convinced that a number of things are related in such a way as to form a giant hairball of stupidity.  I can only hope society survives the wretching required to cough this sucker up.  I suppose that it remains to be seen whether this is so.


They seen very sincere in their hatred of the NRA, as if it were somehow an organization that sprang fully formed from the gates of hell with the sole purpose of pushing lethal death machines on unsuspecting rubes (like yours truly).

As usual, they’re planning to trot out the memory of victims of violent crime in their candlelight vigil to remember the victims of “gun violence.”  I am always moved when an innocent person is killed by a criminal (or through an act of stupidity), but I fail to see how the NRA or I could be responsible for this.  And assigning blame to an inanimate object is just silly.

But this, along with their “Teach In” entitled “Militarism and the NRA” got me to thinking a bit.  The very term “gun violence” is a collectivistic thing that seems to hold all guns and gun owners responsible for the actions of criminals.  And that’s where our fundamental difference lies, one that is likely unbridgeable in our lifetimes.  The antis see this as some kind of societal, collective issue that is addressable through the public sphere in the legislature and in the courts (when the legislature rightly ignores them).  We, on the other hand, understand that this is an issue of personal responsibility that cannot be collectivized (further, it makes no sense to even try).  Combine this with the fundamental right of a sentient being to self-defense and most gun-owners’ understanding of the evils of socialist schemes and you’ve got a impasse that cannot be resolved without fundamental changes to either side (which would effectively eliminate the side that changed).

How did I get to the evils of socialism from “Militarism and the NRA”?  Of late we’ve seen the socialists and communists coming out of the woodwork and scurrying around like roaches at the antiwar rallies.  The topic of militarism was the final link in the chain between the anti-gunners and the barking moonbats. 

It should be interesting to see just what kind of people show up for these protests.  I’ll be taking my camera to the annual meeting and depending on the scheduling I may try to get some shots of the crowd.  I’ll have to be careful not to get sucked into the hairball, though…


  1. Mrs. du Toit says:

    Only one minor quibble with your logic (but you should definitely post spew alerts the next time you use a hairball analogy like that):

    You say: 

    Combine this with the fundamental right of a sentient being to self-defense

    That underestimates (under? over?) them.  That is the fundamental difference.  They do not recoginze the concept of fundamental rights.  All rights are derived from the state (the civil magistrate) and distributed to worthy citizens like beads at Mardi Gras.  Further, they do not believe that sentient beings have a right to self-defense, because there is no such thing as defense or offense.  That’s just cosmic, man, it’s like the same thing, ya know, violence and death and stuff, and like violence is bad.  And we don’t believe in death.

    You’d know that, if you spent more time with a bong and had patchouli petals in your daily bath.

  2. Outlaw3 says:

    Nothing those people hate worse than having clear, identifiable pictures taken of their faces and then getting them posted in public.  Not really the courage of their convictions, if you ask me.  Heavens, what if their gun-owning boss saw them at the rally goofing off instead of being at work where the boss thought they were?

  3. I was just kind of rambling on this post—sort of thinking “aloud” about something that started tickling the back of my brain last night.  The fundamental rights point is a good one.  If I hadn’t been so taken with the collectivization issue I might have mentioned it, since it’s a core part of their political philosophy.

    You know, I don’t think I’ve ever encountered a patchouli petal.  I probably wouldn’t know one if I saw it.  smile

    As for the pictures, I guess I’ll have to be really careful they don’t identify me as an NRA member (lest they reveal their true natures and attack).  I suppose the Molon Labe hat and NRA life member button are out…