Ah, victim-disarmers being reasonable again.
Column: Firearms have no place in civilized society. We should repeal the 2nd Amendment
“Constitutional Carry”: What a euphemistic, “newspeak” concept!Passed to the governor for signature a day ahead of the announced schedule, depending largely on his political ambitions, not merit or lack, for passage. Next probable and equally “logical” step: Unregulated firearm ownership for every man, woman and child in America.
The weirdly disjointed sentence structure, and the peculiar “logical” leap from “one state passed Constitutional Carry” to “totally unregulated firearm ownership for absolutely everyone in America” was an instant warning that I was reading the ravings of a not-entirely sane person. I scrolled down to see who this Paul Shriver is.
Paul Shriver, EdD, is a forensic and clinical psychologist.
Sad to say, but in my experience (and others*) psychologists have a strong tendency to be b–f— nuts. As you’ll see, this appears to be the case with Shriver. Couple that with a pointless EdD, and we have a perfect storm of irrationality. He doesn’t have both oars in the water. The elevator doesn’t go to the top. Pick a metaphor.
Firearm use is by definition a violent act (homicide when a human is the recipient) and has no place in civilized society.
He seems to be unaware of target practice; which would explain another statement he makes later. He also seems to think that humans invariably, without exception die when shot. Chicago says otherwise.
No reasonable person could possibly imagine that expressing one’s feelings or opinions with a bullet could be equivalent to “free speech” or even exist as a “right” on the same piece of paper.
Projecting much, Shriver? Offhand, I don’t recall ever firing a round to express an opinion.
But let’s get to the meat.
The only real solution must begin with the repeal of the 2nd Amendment in its entirety and without delay. It might then be re-written in clear language as a privilege to be strictly regulated — the details to be worked out later by usual democratic means.
Never mind that the Supreme Court has already found that it is a right, not a privilege; and that it pre-dates the Amendment he finds so bothersome. And he seems to be ignoring Indiana’s own pesky constitution.
Section 32. The people shall have a right to bear arms, for the defense of themselves and the State.
He’ll be needing to convince his neighbors to repeal that one, too. Based on my time living in Indiana, I’d say not damned likely.
In the interim, of course, all guns in current ownership, manufacture, storage, etc., would need to be recalled, and if not “re-legalized,” eliminated. Some current types and uses, would be restored, regulated and licensed as appropriate with little real inconvenience. Thus, this idea is not anti-gun per se, nor in any sense extreme.
Repealing the Second Amendment and confiscating all firearms in the country is anti-gun. And it sounds pretty damned extreme. And about as “anti-gun” as one could get.
Hmm. No exception there for police. Universal disarmament. hat should be interesting.
Meanwhile, I and my personal gun: Locked, no bullets, single action, and not very accurate (and therefore little threat) remain very truly yours for peace, good will, and universal disarmament in our times.
I imagine the “not very accurate” issue lays mainly in his lack of practice, since he wouldn’t want to violently attack a peice of paper. But if all firearm use is violence, why does he have one? Perhaps Paul Shriver should be red flagged, starting his “universal disarmament” with himself.
* I knew a woman with a doctorate in psychology. She once told me she left the field — research psychology — when she realized that most of her peers were nuts. She also told me that clinical psychologists are worse.
That dog don’t hunt.
His pony isn’t turning the 3rd barrel.
Half a bubble of plumb (except he’s more than half a bubble).
Kind of entitled isn’t he? Thinking he has all the answers on how to run someone else’s life. Sounds like control issues, if he feels he’s losing control of those he thinks he’s entitled to control, will he become violent? Red flag indeed! He needs to seek competent mental heal…..oh wait, never mind.
My ex wife remarried, then while I worked 50-60 hours a week in a foundry for 35 years, she moved my last child, who was 6 months old when we divorced, and moved to Kentucky. Then she started college.
She got her BA and her MA in social work, of some type. She actually got a job working at some governmental agency with troubled youth, but they fired her after some 6 months. She got another job later and the same thing.
It says a lot when you are so insane that you cannot hold a job working with the gate keepers of the asylum.
By the way, does the guy who wants to confiscate all guns know that they estimate there are somewhere around 300 million guns in America, and I think that is low? Or does he understand that many people have said that they will defend their right to keep and bear arms, with those same arms?
It does seem like the leadership of the left may be fighting against guns, but the citizens could not give a care about that, not while it costs close to 70$ to fill your gas tank, and 4$ to buy a gallon of milk, ……
The Democrats are scrambling to try and salvage the midterms. I cannot see any way they can avoid the coming blood bath. But of course, with the Republicans around to screw things up, I would not count on a change in either house.
I think it’s closer to 400 million after the recent covid buying binge.
Talk about loss of life, if they start going door to door and total confiscatiin . 3 things will happen. One, gun owners will hide them, two, use them, 3 sell them to criminals.
Some years ago, my training officer had an interesting hypothesis. The Second Amendment is not about the right to keep and bear arms. That is guaranteed outside the constitution. Rather the second amendment is a tripwire for aspiring tyrants. A government that infringes on the second amendment can no longer claim to be a free government. Read the declaration of independence for remedies.
Offhand, I don’t recall ever firing a round to express an opinion.
I’ve heard lots of rounds fired “to express an opinion”. It was at about 10 PM on Election Night in 2008. I knew when McCain conceded, because I could hear celebratory gunfire over much of Chicago.
I am slightly confused as to his credentials. He lists an EdD – okay that is a doctorate in Education. Not the most rigorist of Doctorates but he does not list anything giving credentials for Psychology. Normally, to call yourself a psychologist you would have a PhD in it. But it is possible he has a Master’s in it. If that is what he has he is not that qualified and to call himself a Clinical Psychologist is most likely a misappropriation of a title. IIRC a Clinical Psychologist is licensed to practice, though that may have changed.
Overall I would assume that he is giving himself qualifications he probably has not earned and besides what he writes is pretty stupid also.
I looked him up. He does have a psych practice, so I presume he has the degree.