Typically I try to restrain my more fascist tendencies. It is endemic in all deep lovers of law and order to tend towards right-wing extremism but I have to say, after reading about the foolishness in Pittsburgh over the weekend I’d really like to shoot two or three of these folks.
Folks in Pittsburgh organized an anti-war rally. No problems there, every man-jack of us is entitled to declare our opinions as loudly as we please. Here’s the rub. Several of these left-wingnuts decided they’d impersonate the dead Iraqis that will surely result from “Mr. Bush’s War.” To that end they laid down in the street, impeding traffic and generally causing a publicly noticible nuisance. It all went very calmly and for a change even the bunny huggers were respectful of police authority and calmly got up and left when the police said it was time to leave. All well and good. My problem is with their actions in the first place. We are all entitled to air our opinions, that’s a right.
Amendment I – Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Fair enough, I’ve no problem with their right to spout the most vile, wicked sort of peace-nikery that bubbles up from their sick little cesspools of minds. What I do have a problem with is them incoveniencing other law-abiding citizens to do so. Where in the First Amendment does it give any of us the right to affect any other of us in our “petition[ing] the government for a redress of grievances?” Me, I’d have announced, “You have ten seconds to disperse.” And at the end of that ten seconds I’d have shot one of them. Annouce again, “You have ten seconds to disperse.” If they hadn’t already gotten the picture shoot another, and so on. They’d shortly get the message and get the hell off the street.
This method would have the extra added bonus of doing much to relieve the gun-control controversy. On the one hand the lefty nit-wits could begin to clamor that the police shouldn’t be armed either with the happy result of thereby shattering much of their arms control argument (Only the police and military should have guns. Since it’s their job to protect us, why do we need to be armed?). On the other hand they could all realize exactly what the Second Amendment was designed to protect and therefore they’d all get armed and become as staunch defenders of the Second Amendment as Charleton Heston. Bollocks to the ACLU. What about the Civil Liberties of those folks trying to drive downtown? Don’t they have the right not to be bothered, nay assaulted, by these libertoid twits?
Oh for a good old-fashioned civil emergency. Then the burnings could commence aplenty.