It seems more and more anti-gunners these days are displaying violent tendencies. Just last week, uber-anti-freedom advocate Peter (Petey) Hamm jokingly threatened to shoot Uncle. This incident was even picked up on by the NRA.
First thing this morning, I see several references to this editorial by Stanley Crouch of the New York Daily News, followed shortly by the revelation that Mr. Crouch has a sordid history of wanton violence himself.
It has been proposed that proponents of gun control suffer from irrational fears that result in the application of psychological defense mechanisms such as “projection”, “denial” and “reaction formation”.
What if it’s even more sinister than that?
Based upon Mr. Crouch’s penchant for physically attacking those with whom he has disagreements, might his opposition to gun ownership be rooted in something much more selfish and overt, like…say…self-preservation?
Isn’t it possible that Mr. Crouch fears that, at some point, he is going to violently attack someone who has the means and will to defend themselves from his unprovoked violence? Isn’t it possible that Mr. Couch is so determined to force his opinions on others…even by using violent force if necessary…that, as any good tyrant would, he simply wants to disarm those inferior beings who may not be capable of readily grasping his obvious superiority; those who may have the sheer audacity to refuse to embrace his rightness and insist upon the ridiculous premise that they have some sort of justification for resisting the imposition of his will upon them?
Could it be that he simply fears that someday, he’s going to attack the “wrong” person and get shot for his trouble?
Far be it from me to profess the ability to see into someone’s heart, but the possibility of his motivation being somewhat less than honorable cannot simply be dismissed out of hand.
“The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false-face for the urge to rule it.”
— H.L. Mencken