Reply #73: For those of you who don’t already know iverglas,

[TPaine7]

I thought I'd help with the introductions:

Individual has obligation -- "moral" and, in civilized societies, legal -- to exercise whatever reasonable option is available, to avoid an assault, before choosing to use force...

Civilized, isn't it? Highly evolved. Refined. Doubtless iverglas is a fine example of what we should all strive to be.

Compare from yesterday (or so):

And no, I wouldn't rule out grabbing the person trying to make off with the purse from my shopping cart. ... And I wouldn't have ruled out beating up the person who did it, if I'd found him/her, frankly, but I'd recognize I was committing a crime ...

Source.http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x230249#230697

One "principle" of gun control and other pseudo pacifist BS is that it's always for the other guy. She can rule out violence for us in standing our ground in our own homes. That is perfectly proper, civilized, and evolved. Her defending her purse in public? Now that's different.

Your home. Her purse. Can you see the difference? Can you tell why one is worth defending with force and the other is not?

Sadly, many gun control advocates are like that. Your life, your children, your husband or wife, and your property are in one category--theirs in another. That is why, for instance, Mayor Bloomberg can wonder--with his bullet-proof limo and 24 hr armed detail--why anyone would want a gun. "Guns kill people." Gasp.

Debating hypocrites is embarrassing sometimes; it feels like boxing a paraplegic.