You Can’t Have it Both Ways

The anti-gunners are clamoring for more stringent laws preventing the mentally messed up from obtaining firearms. Of course these same advocate never explain exactly how we’re supposed to detect crazy with 100% accuracy (as far as I’m concerned without 100% accuracy you can’t even talk about revoking somebody’s rights).

Besides blaming guns and gun laws many people are also blaming “right-wing rhetoric.” Of course this is also bullocks as the Arizona shooter wasn’t what you could call right-wing (he was basically just crazy if you read anything he posted).

With these two arguments in hand I bring up a third advocacy that these people should be making, requiring a mental health evaluation before you are allowed to post any material on the Internet. When I state this people making both of the above claims are quick to state guns kill people while words can’t. Well which way is it? Can rhetoric cause somebody to kill other people or not? Do words incite violence? If the answer to both questions is yes then you most certainly must support mental health evaluations for people wanting to post online. If the answer to both questions is no then you should shut the fuck up and stop being a hypocrite.

If you believe there should be mental health evaluations for things that can kill and you believe speech you don’t agree with can kill then you must support required mental health evaluations for people wanting to post on the Internet. Of course that would be a restriction of free speech which most anti-gunners are against.