Frankly, if we wanted our readers to look at something ugly and evil, we’d repost that photo of the Umpqua Community College shooter. New York Times Magazine contributor and Foreign Policy columnist Julia Ioffe instead posted a photo of a gun held by no one, further asking how something so ugly and evil could become “a symbol of freedom and liberty.”
Look at this ugly, evil thing. How is it that this has become a symbol of freedom and liberty? pic.twitter.com/USXbRn4Im7
— Julia Ioffe (@juliaioffe) October 3, 2015
https://twitter.com/DanFosterType/status/650379058899849216
@DanFosterType well done! You have all the NRA talking points memorized.
— Julia Ioffe (@juliaioffe) October 3, 2015
Foreign Policy columnist: American history = NRA talking points. Please have a seat at the back of the classroom next to Piers.
https://twitter.com/ElBuehn/status/650379503034732544
@jamestaranto @ScaldingHotTake So @juliaioffe is following the editorial guidelines from Buzzfeed, apparently.
— Patrick H. (@trogdor8768) October 3, 2015
@jamestaranto @ScaldingHotTake @juliaiofe Only moral agents can be evil. Inanimate objects are just things: Neither evil nor good.
— David Pecchia (@dpecchia) October 3, 2015
https://twitter.com/DMiddletonCbus/status/650383142998532096
https://twitter.com/WaynesterAtl/status/650380005009178624
@jamestaranto @ScaldingHotTake @juliaioffe Well, Hi-Points are kind of ugly.
— Lilith the Cat (@TehLilNinja) October 3, 2015
https://twitter.com/dad_of_jacob/status/650381032244514821
But is it evil?
Look at this ugly, evil thing. How is it that this has become a symbol of freedom and liberty? pic.twitter.com/jYdXLwtVdO
— James Taranto (@jamestaranto) October 3, 2015
Guns are neither ugly nor evil, @juliaioffe. They are amoral. However, they've a symbol of liberty because of prohibitionists like you.
— jon gabriel (@exjon) October 3, 2015
@exjon @juliaioffe Good grief. What the hell! I'm sure she'd sing a different tune if she was liberated from Auschwitz. This angers me.
— Craic (@TwerkingSpider) October 3, 2015
@juliaioffe Maybe you should ask the people in the Warsaw Ghetto. Oh, that's right, you can't.
— Joel Engel (@joelengel) October 3, 2015
https://twitter.com/EmmetONealIII/status/650379967449141249
But what about it becoming a symbol of freedom and liberty?
@juliaioffe Well, that's easy. Because the gov't keeps wanting to take it away. #Control
— Richard Channell (@allfieldnohit) October 3, 2015
@juliaioffe For vast majority of owners, it protects their lives & property (defending freedom and liberty). What do u think the govt uses?!
— franks_3111 (@franks_3111) October 3, 2015
@juliaioffe Probably because it descends from this. A weapon is a tool. Men give it purpose. pic.twitter.com/vDr1YnTENZ
— (((≠))) (@ThomasHCrown) October 3, 2015
@juliaioffe @davidharsanyi Muskets were even uglier, yet Framers made sure to give them constitutional protection for very sensible reasons
— Chris Conover (@ConoverChris) October 3, 2015
@juliaioffe pic.twitter.com/x5LSee978r
— Brian (@PalmguyActual) October 3, 2015
@juliaioffe It is a tool that protects my humpty dumpty arthritic old self when my husband works nights. It is an equalizer.
— Hartwell, Georgia (@GeorgiaHartwell) October 3, 2015
https://twitter.com/exsacerdotal/status/650382305643634688
Good question — probably a copy of the Constitution with the Second Amendment torn out.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member