…from a hoplophobic college professor. As Glenn writes, people thought about quitting when blacks were admitted to universities, too.
Here’s the thing that I can never understand: the people who generally despise “authority” the most, believe that the whole system is corrupt, believe the police are all just assholes on a power-trip, believe the armed forces are full of baby-killing murder monsters, believe that the rich (the 1%) have the ability to control everything because they can buy elections and control politicians, etc. Those people are often the same ones who want to disempower and disarm the populace and put everyone’s safety solely in the hands of the government, the police, the army, the politicians, etc.
Is it just an intellectual blind-spot or is it some form of psychosis?
Decisions based on emotions are difficult to overcome with facts.
The zillion “logically inconsistent” splinters are held together because “my pet issue” gets sufficient lip service from someone they’re emotionally vested in. And my guy wouldn’t abuse any extra power needed to get er done.
The inner cities pretty much encapsulate the entire thing on just the one issue of cops precinct by precinct. Active firing on cops/firefighters … and yet voting for the party of a larger police state 80%+ for the claim of more free cheese.
It pretty much explains the entire dichotomy in the treatment of tarnished leaders also.
I find his revulsion of “Mutually Assured Destruction brought to the interpersonal level” amusing. MAD actually *worked*. WWIII didn’t go hot. So he’s saying he dislikes the idea of using a tactic that has a good historical record of preventing disasters. Maybe he has a death-wish?
The other thing is that it’s… not remotely MAD.
What we call MAD in the personal arms context is the so-called “Mexican standoff” (both parties with guns trained on the other, ready to fire the moment the think the other has or is determined to) … which is precisely what never happens with concealed carry, outside of movies.
I believe Lenin called such people “useful idiots.”
They’re normally the first up against the wall when their Glorious People’s Reviolution finally comes.
I’m guessing this brain farting idiot is NOT a history teacher. As a veteran I’d LOVE to be able to sit these people down and ask them the differences in American prosperity over the last 100 years, weighed against places with Totalitarian governments.
And I’ll give them racism and racists in America, if I can mention Communists and Socialists subjugation of entire countries. I can’t ever understand how these people think there lives would be without those of us who separated souls from this earth. It’s been my experience and reading of history that tells me that such separations kept goof ball liberal professors in their ivory towers and out of the killing fields.
How is it that the more education some people acquire, the dumber they become?
I hope he resigns and is replaced by someone more sane. I don’t want he or those like him having any influence over college students. I hope its a trend.
Good thing he wasn’t teaching when my dad was going to school–he’d probably have gone into convulsions when the secondary school students leaned their hunting rifles against the back wall.
I had a roommate pull a knife on me once in college–I can kind of see his point about about college students being on the edge. But even if campuses did allow concealed carry, I’d think he’d be more prone to attack outside the classroom than inside.
I have a knife phobia, but my reaction is anger. I’ve only had one fool pull a knife on me. It was in PE at the end of class and I was naked in the locker room. That was a very bad decision on his part. He became superman, flying past the lockers into the far wall of the showers. At the time, I could not even remember doing it.
I don’t own any guns, but have no fear of them at all. I’d feel perfectly secure if everyone around me was displaying a shootin’ iron. Just don’t sharpen any points onto them.
Hmmm… fixec bayonets hold no terror for me either. I wonder why?
He believes that because there is a sign that says no guns allowed he is safe. He leaps to the conclusion that because they made the rule that no one in his classroom is armed. That flawed logic is precisely what will in fact, get him killed. And if he is fortunate enough to have a student willing to disregard their stupid rule in his classroom, when a crazed student decides to terminate him, he would be the first to persecute his savior.
It’s fascinating how some people have such blind faith in the power of their rules and signs. It’s like how they believe making a speech about a problem is the same thing as solving it. Their grasp of reality is tenuous at best. I suppose academia is a safe haven for them, isolated as it is from reality.
“Sign, sign, everywhere a sign
Blockin’ out the scenery, breakin’ my mind
Do this, don’t do that, can’t you read the sign?”
Some people think, “because I say so” is reality. My mother has that problem and there is no counter argument. Historical examples should be, but do not make a dent. Yes, everywhere a sign…
Part of it, I think, is that these people believe that everyone is nice…or if they aren’t nice they are driven to it by the evyl society. And since they are nice, they will obey the signs.
At the same time, they think NRA members are psychopathic maniac killers.
Yes they are two ideas totally in conflict with each other – I never said the people were sane.
These are not well people…..
Or perhaps they believe that by simply making more rules and posting more signs, society will just be better. How many academics got where they are by breaking the rules?
This may also be a manifestation of their dream of a centrally planned world (with them in charge, of course).
Wouldn’t it be simple enough to pass a campus policy that no bullets traveling more than 500 fps are allowed to pass within six inches of any person? That would render everyone immune to gunfire.
All they really need to do is post signs reading, “It is prohibited to do anything that makes anyone unhappy” and all the world’s problems will be solved. All kneel before the almighty signs! No one ever disobeys a sign, right?
…until I brought out my ’58 Remington clone. A reduced load of APP behind a roundball probably gives just about 500 FPS, but I still wouldn’t want to stand in front of it…
I think this explains a lot about our good Herr Professor:
“Nate Kreuter is an assistant professor of English at Western Carolina University, where he teaches rhetoric and writing. He is currently completing his first book manuscript, which is tentatively titled Rhetorical Intelligence: The CIA, Iraq, and the Uncertainties of Knowing. Nate’s personal blog and additional professional information are available here.”
I especially like his admission that he was taught safe gun-handling in kindergarten. So, if he was taught properly, and has never harmed anyone, even at the “risky” ages of 18 to 21, why does he assume that no one else has been properly taught, and would shoot him on a whim? Logical thinking seems to have escaped this member of the educated elite.
The danger always exists that someone else will not act the way control freaks would like them to. This is too much for a control freak. Totally unacceptable.
We should only be so lucky to have them all resign en masse. They think that is a deterrent?
I read the story a bit differently than most. This was a man thinking about what he would do, not someone telling the rest of us what to do. Acting on personal fears is legitimate. I think a personal decision to not fly, ocean swim, or pet the pit bull is OK. Even if the fear is a delusion, acting on it is a personal choice as long as others are not forced to go along.
And a man hoping he has the courage to act on his convictions.
I agree that an unstable person with a gun can be a problem and can see why he doesn’t want one in his classroom. I do not see why he is unwilling to be able to defend himself if such a person does come into or even near his classroom.
I wonder if he proof read his piece before posting it. If not why not since it reflects on his fitness to teach. If he did then he should have quit teaching before now.
Skin colour is not a matter of choice. Whether to carry weapons is.
That depends on circumstances, actually. A woman whose ex has a history of ignoring restraining orders might argue she has no choice.
A restraining order is a legal document. It’s written on a piece of paper and everything. Violating a restraining order is against the law! No one ever does that, do they?
True — it’s as rare as viiolating a gun-free zone law.
Comments are closed.
©2001-2013 Transterrestrial Musings | Powered by WordPress with Easel
| Subscribe: RSS
| Back to Top ↑
Switch to our mobile site