TCTI: Too Crazy Too Ignore
 Dave Ross
AP: c9cb7864-ba90-4cec-8968-47b3eeafca18
Senate Judiciary Committee member Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., points to a chart as he speaks on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, Jan. 30, 2013, during the committee's hearing. Supporters and opponents of stricter gun control measures face off at a hearing on what lawmakers should do to curb gun violence in the wake of last month's shooting rampage in Newtown, Ct., that killed 20 schoolchildren. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)

The gun debate makes some progress

BY Dave Ross  on January 31, 2013 @ 5:54 am (Updated: 6:05 am - 1/31/13 )

Originally it was a Founding Fathers argument: that an armed citizenry is the only sure protection against an out-of-control government.

That has never stopped the government, by the way, from putting down the various armed rebellions that have broken out during our history, including a pretty big one in 1861, but that was in fact what the founders believed, and it's become a big part of our national psychology.

And actually, considering how many people believe the Founding Fathers argument, I'm surprised America isn't more heavily armed than it is. If the idea is to prevent tyranny, you could argue the citizenry should be able to match the army - gun for gun, grenade launcher for grenade launcher. Drone for drone.

It's remarkable that the gun lobby has pretty much conceded that we only have a right to own guns, nothing more.

But now - look at the other argument that's taking center stage. Even as the NRA called for putting armed cops in every school, Senator Lindsey Graham was warning police departments to expect LESS federal money for cops, not more, and then went on to say that because it might take longer to get a cop, well, that's why he himself has an AR-15.

"I would be better off protecting my business or my family if there was a law and order break down in my community - people roaming around my neighborhood - to have the AR-15 and I don't think that makes me an unreasonable person."

Right - So that when a weakened government lets the social order break down, he can protect his family. Which is the exact opposite - of the original argument!

So I guess the way this would work is, we the citizenry arm ourselves to fend off the government when it gets too strong, and then, once we've emasculated the tyrants, we turn the guns on each other to protect ourselves from the social collapse that follows.

Either way, we are going to need a lot of guns.

Apparently , somewhere along the line, we became Libya.

Dave Ross, KIRO Radio Talk Show Host
Dave Ross is co-host of The Ross & Burbank Show on KIRO Radio (weekdays 9-Noon) and never too far from the spotlight.
More Dave Ross

MyNorthwest.com - Purpose of Comments statement
Bonneville Media encourages site users to express their opinions by posting comments. Our goal is to maintain a civil dialogue in which readers feel comfortable. At times, the comments can descend to personal attacks. Please do not engage in such behavior. We encourage your thoughtful comments which: have a positive and constructive tone, are on topic, are respectful toward others and their opinions. Bonneville reserves the right to remove comments which do not conform to these criteria.

Comments (105)


  • Add A Comment

  • It's me! Ha ha! wrote...
    The Dear Leader CANNOT wage war on us Americans.
    January 31, 2013 9:08 am
    The American military is not about to fire on their fellow citizens. Not enough Obama "Blue Shirts" to be of any effectiveness.

    How about Jimmy Hoffa, Jr and the Obama unionist? Obama points at someone and says "Non Union" and/or "Not an Obama supporter" and they will be all over those Americans!

    This regime is fomenting hate and violence toward we Americans. We who do not support your Dear Leader and the "Fundamental Change" of AmeriKa!

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Ron_Spins wrote...
    http://www.infowars.com/nobel-peace-prize-nominee-obama-asks-military-leaders-if-they-will-fire-on-us-citizens/
    January 31, 2013 10:53 am
    Waco , Ruby Ridge and Kent state.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Rick W7PSK wrote...
    Dave Hates anything
    January 31, 2013 9:12 am
    No LOCK Step with the Ultra Liberal view point. We Get that.

    Maybe you should move to Sweden or something dave. They are super Socialist and take all your money.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Ron_Spins wrote...
    http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/shear_bravery_beats_guns_feds_d9BanDpupuVezePd6trYoM
    January 31, 2013 9:20 am
    Reading from my progressive to English dictionary this article states once the Government "has made progress" and disarmed everyone you can wield scissors and defend yourself against a madman or group of madmen.Don't you liberal cowards know al-Qaeda is planning something big and guess what the media has shown them our soft spots.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Hayduke wrote...
    Here's a question I have for right wing gun nuts that I've never seen asked:
    January 31, 2013 10:33 am
    We all know that conservatives profess to LOOOOVE the military, and that, in their view, it can never get enough funding deficit be damned. They want the US to continue to spend as much on it's military as the next 25 countries combined, so that we always will have vastly superior firepower to assert our will around the globe.

    Meanwhile, the "REAL" reason we are told by them that we need the 2nd Amendment, and no regulation WHATSOEVER of firearms, is not for hunting. It's not even for self-defense of one's home and family. The REAL reason, we are told, is so the citizenry can take up arms and fight back against it's own government.

    So here's my question to you RWNJ's:

    If you detest our government so much that you are finally ready to go to war with it, why would you want our military to far outmatch you in firepower?

    And really, if you pudgy wanna-be militiamen are serious about taking on our army, by all means, go for it.

    Let us know how that works out for you.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Cbrew wrote...
    I'm no conservative but your argument is flawed
    January 31, 2013 10:45 am
    Look at any civil war in history, it's never JUST the Government versus the people... it's always segments of the people and parts of the military that defect and fight the central Government, Just because the US Military is large doesn't mean that every soldier would side with the Federal Government, this is all hypothetical but look at the civil war for reference, all the soldiers and equipment in the South became part of the South's Army, it's not like it was just the people in the South that rose up, the military in the South were part of the US Army before the war broke out, they took over armories and US Army Generals joined the Confederacy... the citizenry also joined with their arms... so don't be stupid... you know your argument is flawed.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    CBREW
    January 31, 2013 2:08 pm
    Your post interested me and I did a little reading on the topic before responding.About the makeup of Confederate and Union forces at the time of the Civil war.It seems that the majority of the two Armys were made up of Local militia units who banded together to form larger Armys.The milita units seemed to have followed the side that the representatives of their State voted to support. In todays world that is no longer possible except for State National Guard Units.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • circuitfr wrote...
    Hayduke
    January 31, 2013 2:00 pm
    Maybe if you read something other than MSNBC, you'll realize a large segment of conservatives oppose the military and their meddling in every countries problems. The defense spending is out of control, we are going into false wars. Do some research before you say conservatives are war lovers and mongers. Congress and the Senate do NOT speak for the people...they speak to the retards who voted for them and couldn't even tell you there name now if you asked.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • DesertRez wrote...
    Yup
    January 31, 2013 3:41 pm
    I was going to say the same thing. You forgot about us Ron Paul type of right wing gun nuts. heh
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Cbrew wrote...
    Dave Ross is an idiot
    January 31, 2013 10:41 am
    I know his line is "too crazy to ignore" but They should have just stopped at "too crazy" or maybe change it to "too crazy to listen to" This dude is a moron. To get one point out of the way you can indeed own a tank, you can own a wide variety of military vehicles as long as you got the money and the proper permits. So that immediately makes you stupid and wrong Mr. Ross. Aside from that, are you really that stupid? You really believe if there was a civil war in the US that ALL of the military would side with the Government? That Soldiers would simply go along with killing thousands and thousands of defenseless citizens? They wouldn't moron. Did the South in the Civil war only have muskets or whatever the citizens had in their homes and no cannons or navy? No moron, they had the military arms and units that were in the South when it broke out. You're not a very smart person Dave Ross, how you got to be in a position like the one you have is beyond me.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Ron_Spins wrote...
    Someone's logic is tarnished with excessive name calling.
    January 31, 2013 10:54 am
    .
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Cbrew wrote...
    Ron_Spins
    January 31, 2013 10:59 am
    Name calling or not, my point is valid, and if in this day and age you can't handle the name-calling which is limited by a very conservative censorship on this website... then you don't really have a hope of surviving in online conversations.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • WiIliam Lawn wrote...
    to the Left Wing Nut Job hayduke
    January 31, 2013 11:09 am
    The military would not be one giant coherent force policing it's own people. The military consists of U.S. citizens, not robots. The level of dissension and desertion would be huge in such a scenerio. Your lack of common sense is obvious to all.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • William Lawn wrote...
    You posted from the wrong ID
    January 31, 2013 11:38 am
    Flounder
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • It's me! Ha ha! wrote...
    What a pitty
    January 31, 2013 11:14 am
    that Obama did not try this before re immaculation. We would have had President Romney for certain.

    I wish we could have the elections again today!

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    haha "I wish we could have the elections today"
    January 31, 2013 12:01 pm
    Hmm my 401 K has gone through the roof and is up 7.8% since election day and I'm not alone.I have about an extra $20,000 added to our retirement program.Obama would win in a HUGE LANDSLIDE if another election was held today.He's at a 60% APPROVAL rate.He was running with a high unemployment rate as well as a huge public debt but smart American understood that lots of the countries problems were inherited from GW Bush and your side of politics is NOT in touch with todays America
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • irony wrote...
    the progress would be in arresting the criminals
    January 31, 2013 11:32 am
    so that law abiding gun owners could be left alone to have guns. it's idiots who want to take guns away from good people and leave them in the hands of criminals. but idiots believe taking guns back from good people will remove them from criminals.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • lausyone wrote...
    Dave's inability to understand the 2nd Amendment.
    January 31, 2013 12:02 pm
    My typical response to Dave's lack of logic ( I usually can only shake my head or roll my eyes) and sanctimonious refusal to understand even the most simple of Conservative ideas leads me to believe that he may indeed be just a wandering, aimless Progressive. His lack of understanding, or is it actually disdain,of the Constitution confirms it.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • It's me! Ha ha! wrote...
    your side of politics is NOT in touch with todays America
    January 31, 2013 1:47 pm
    Messiah my political ideas ARE today's American ideals. And tomorrow as well.

    I remind you that Bush is not in office. Your DEar Leader owns ALL of this!

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    haha Only in your tiny World haha
    January 31, 2013 2:13 pm
    Only in your tiny world.And obviously the American people PROVED me correct.Are you still waiting for Mitt to give his state of the Union speech? I suggest you don't hold your breath
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }