Recent Kent State graduate Kailin Bennett knew her graduation photos would ruffle some feathers. That was kind of the point, to show the absolute stupidity of the law that said one day she couldn’t carry a firearm on campus, but the next day she was suddenly good to go. Nothing really changed except she graduated from college.
So, she made her point.
In the process, she became a focal point for the “tolerant” anti-gun zealots to focus their hatred on. People like former funnyman Jim Carrey who has completely forgotten how to be humorous.
And the devil said, “Thanks a bunch Goldilocks. Enjoy the show in Santa Fe tomorrow. Someday, real soon, I’ll have you for dinner.” pic.twitter.com/h1G6smzK5t
— Jim Carrey (@JimCarrey) May 19, 2018
Note also the veiled threat to Bennett’s safety. Why else would she be meeting with the devil “real soon?” I mean, she’s a young woman. There’s no reason to believe she’ll pass away of natural causes anytime in the near future, and accidents are unpredictable by their very nature, so what else could that possibly mean?
Oh, wait, I know. They’re still laboring under the delusion that the presence of guns somehow increases the likelihood of being the victim of a violent crime. That’s bogus in so many ways it’s not even funny.
Carrey and his sycophants on Twitter would do well to remember a couple of key points.
- Jim Carrey can’t paint a decent picture to save his life.
- Guns don’t cause crime. Those statistics are skewed by people who had guns because they were criminals, thus had a gun in the house but were killed because of criminal activity, and women who purchased a firearm for self-defense from abusive spouses.
- Guns actually save lives. It was two good guys with guns who ended the massacre at Santa Fe High School on Friday. There were several other instances of school resource officers ending the attacks with minimal or no loss of life. Those are good guys with guns. Period.
- Jim Carrey is a really bad painter.
But anti-gun zealots are radicals who don’t actually care about the truth. That’s not what they signed on for. They don’t want reality, they want their fantasy world where guns will simply vanish because of legislation saying they should vanish. It’s like they think all the guns already in criminal hands will suddenly disappear or something.
Well, it won’t happen like that. All that happens with any gun law is that the law abiding are negatively impacted, including their ability to fight back. If you’re really, really lucky, the disarmament will trickle down to the criminal population, but don’t count on it. In England–an island whose nearest neighbors also have strict gun control–have seen a 42 percent uptick in gun crime.
And that is a country that has never been as free with firearms as the United States.
Here, it would be virtually impossible to disarm the entire population. At best, you’ll get the law-abiding citizen who will be law-abiding pretty much no matter what. I mean, they might balk at a government-mandated sacrifice of their own child’s life, but anything short of that and they’re fine with it.
For the criminals who rely on their guns to ply their trade, so to speak? It’s not likely to happen. They’re not turning them in at buybacks and they’re not likely to.
But then there are those of us who recognize that once the right to keep and bear arms is gone, the other rights aren’t far behind.
I wonder if Jim Carrey wants to paint that.