Gun control activist extraordinaire David Hogg took to Twitter recently to pose a serious question, one whose answer has eluded philosophers and theologians for Millenia: “If you need a license to kill deer why don’t you need one to kill humans?” The precocious Harvard whiz kid added, “Plenty of people will think this is dumb- good for you. I’m not looking out for an election and I’m entitled to my own opinion no matter how much you disagree.” Huh?
The reason a license isn’t needed to kill humans is because murder is against the law. Has been for a long time. It is wrong to kill one’s fellow humans for sport. Ergo, hunting them is not allowed. Anywhere. Anytime. No “license” is needed for that which is not permitted.
Also, we in the U.S. have the right to bear arms to prevent those who, unlicensed though they may be, wish to threaten us or our loved ones with grievous bodily harm. Our rights don’t come from other humans. Just because “Bob” says it is okay to imprison Jews or kill my neighbor doesn’t make it so. Much as “Bob” should not be able to prevent you or me from exercising our inherent natural right to defend ourselves. For some reason, progressives have difficulty understanding this most basic concept.
The hyper-progressive Hogg ironically proclaims that he is “entitled to my own opinion no matter how much you disagree.” Yet, progressives everywhere incessantly insist that those who disagree with them are not entitled to their own opinion, and should, in fact, be: censored, prevented from speaking, kicked off campus and social media platforms, pilloried, fired, and cancelled.
Perhaps David should have to get a license before he is allowed to go Hogg wild on Twitter again. What do you think?