I’m always amazed by how the liberal mind works — or doesn’t as it were.
Here’s a question about guns from tennis legend Martina Navratilova:
As a law abiding citizen without a gun,how can I tell a difference between the law abiding citizen with a gun and the criminal with a gun?
— Martina Navratilova (@Martina) July 25, 2013
The question she should be asking is “How do the criminals with guns spot law abiding citizens without guns?”
Law abiding citizens with guns are easy to identify, Martina… they’re the ones not using their guns to commit crimes.
The flaw in her thinking is that if law abiding citizens were denied access to guns via radical legislation, then criminals wouldn’t have them either, and then Martina Navratilova wouldn’t have to spend time asking a dumb question. But that leads us back to “they’re called criminals for a reason.”
The only way Navratilova could have her mind put at ease would be if the government banned the possession and carrying of guns across the board. That way, Martina could rest easy in the knowledge that the only people who would be carrying guns were criminals, and as a result she wouldn’t have to try and spot the law abiding gun carriers (saves time). I don’t understand why that would comfort anybody, but then again I’m not a liberal.