Or the article, apparently.

This is truly odd. So many people are missing the point of this article, and when they do, they somehow manage to practically quote that same point in their complaints!

"The Bill of Rights is not subject to balancing tests."

Check my comment history. I talk about it frequently enough.

You're confusing Luke with Lando.

Precisely.

OTOH, our levels of civility and interpersonal respect seem to have markedly decreased as well, though its much harder to quantify that kind of thing.

Urkel?

Fire is awesome and beautiful, but its still one of the most dangerous things on the planet.

I'm pretty sure they do, as its the thesis of the whole essay.

"The NRA is not a "gun owner's rights" advocacy group. It's a corporate
lobbyist outfit to help ensure the profitably of an industry. THAT'S IT."

I understand where you're coming from, really, I do. And I wouldn't call myself anywhere near staunchly anti-2A.

Dude, learn to understand context and sarcasm.

Here's my basic test for whether or not I trust someone with a gun (and I wish I had a way to enforce it):

Thanks for articulating a feeling I've always had but never properly considered, Sean.

Then by all means, provide a link or two.

Apparently, being a bunch of whiny little bitches is habit-forming.

I'm trying to count how many things are wrong with this comment, and I'm just at a loss.

Its too bad he only has 32 comments. Someone could probably make a hell of a gimmick account reposting him, especially now that Trump coverage is a mainstay of AVC.

Its basically the satire/exaggeration rule of comedy— for it to be funny, it has to distance itself enough from reality that the intention is to be clear. While Kathy Griffin obviously isn't a credible assassination threat for Trump, that's about the only thing that was off about it.