The Erosion Of The Second Amendment

Why “liberals” should be concerned about it.

They’re not concerned about it because they’re not liberals — they’re leftists who are perfectly fine with the government having a monopoly on firearms (as long as they’re in charge of the government).

[Update a couple minutes later]

Nice to see that some commenters at Glenn’s site are making similar comments to mine. Stop calling leftists liberals.

3 thoughts on “The Erosion Of The Second Amendment”

  1. Interesting. I’m (like others) surprised that Slate published such a balanced article.

    And I’m with you – take back “Liberal”. Now if you could just get the Liberal Party of Canada to change their name to the “Fascist Line Our Pockets With Your Money Party”. They aren’t liberals.

  2. To be fair, they went with ‘liberals’ because ‘liars’ didn’t test market as well.

  3. No, no, no, don’t take back “Liberal.” The label has been an epithet my entire life and I am approaching retirement age. It has been thoroughly trashed.

    If you start calling yourself a liberal, you will spend countless minutes or hours explaining to people that you are not *that* sort of liberal. Meanwhile, the important topics and ideas you are trying to get across will suffer from neglect.

    Better, I suspect, to re-label “classical liberal” heroes and ideas as pro-freedom or free market or Laissez-faire or any other label that doesn’t tie you in to college radicals, bomb throwers, or Hollyweird types.

    Don’t waste valuable ergs tilting at windmills.

Comments are closed.