Normally I don't pay much attention to the Blogging Tories, a group of conservative Canadian bloggers. Canadain Cynic usually does a good job of finding the most ridiculous postings so we can all have a good chuckle from time to time [see She's so adorable, with that folksy racism of hers]. The average IQ of these blogging Tories seems to be significantly below 80.
"Hunter" is a female blogger from Alberta—Canada's version of Texas. She really doesn't like Barack Obama and has taken it upon herself to warn all Canadians about the perils of socialism. Here's an example of her latest posting [Coming to America].
Are Americans going quietly into socialism? Here is a good take on freedom of speech, and the 2nd Amendment:Just in case some non-Americans are confused about the reference to the 2nd Amendment, let me remind you that it's the amendment Americans use to justify their right to have guns and shoot people who disagree with them.
Kind of says it all doesn't it.
It does say it all. Conservatives on both sides of the border seem to think it's acceptable to shoot someone who steals campaign signs. That says a lot about their mentality. Who wants to live in a society where such people have guns?
There are days when I secretly hope that McCain wins the election. Then maybe some of our conservative citizens from Alberta could move to Texas. This would benefit both Alberta and Texas.
7 comments :
Well, one of my good friends is a member of the 'blogging tories'. The real problem that I see is that there's been an increasingly blurry line between 'Fiscal Conservatism' and 'Social Conservatism' - what you've got now is one big 'ol conservative hoopla.
For instance, the logically tenable (in many cases) ideal of limited government and reduced taxation doesn't jive with the idea that the government should be telling people what they should believe and banning things like gay marriage. Some of my 'conservative' friends are as socially progressive as anyone I know, they just happen to be libertarian about their fiscal principles.
It takes all kinds, I suppose.
Shooting someone vandalizing your property is a felony in the USA:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/10/28/yard.sign.shooting/?iref=hpmostpop
I'm not sure what the laws are permitting firearm use - maybe self-defense only. Even then, I'm not sure I'd want to shoot someone. I'd be in court for the rest of my life, broke from lawyers fees, etc. Is that a life worth saving?
the laws about using deadly force to protect property vary from state to state. And, more importantly, how such laws are enforced vary from location to location.
For example, in Texas, someone has actually shot someone else for stealing a bike (the thief was riding away and not physically threatening the owner) and didn't even get charged.
On the other hand, prosecutors in Illinois would at least bring charges; whether the jury would convict or not depends on the situation.
I'm not an American and i haven't studied your constitution ... but wouldn't that actually not be what the 2nd amendment is about? Isn't it about bearing arms against the government, and not behaving as a vigilante against vandals?
The Second Amendment prohibits the U.S. government from "abridging" the "right to keep and bear arms." It is not limited to "bearing arms against the government." For example, the recent Supreme Court decision (D.C. v. Heller)was that the Second Amendment precluded the federal government from prohibiting otherwise law-abiding people from having operable firearms in their homes for self-defense. However, the Second Amendment does not prevent the federal government from regulating possession and use of firearms, such as prohibiting inappropriate people (e.g., felons) from possessing guns and, of course, legislating against improper use of guns.
Carlo -- Jibe. Not jive.
Carlo -- Jibe. Not jive.
According to multiple definition sources, both Jibe and Jive can mean 'to agree with'. However, Jibe is the clearer term, thus I shall endeavor to clarify my terminology.
Post a Comment