Once you strip away the raw emotionalism of the carnage at Sandy Hook, or the Aurora theater, or Columbine, or Luby's, or whatever, you're left with a series of inconvenient truths for gun-control advocates: Over the past 20 years or so, more guns are in circulation and violent crime is down. So is violent crime that uses guns. Murders are down, too, even as video games and movies and music and everything else are filled with more fantasy violence than ever. For god's sake, even mass shootings are not becoming more common. If ever there was a case to stand pat in terms of public policy, the state of gun control provides it (and that's without even delving into the fact that Supreme Court has recently validated a personal right to own guns in two landmark cases). It's probably always been the case but certainly since the start of 21st century, it seems like we legislate only by crisis-mongering and the results have not been good: The PATRIOT Act, the Iraq War, TARP, fiscal cliff deals, you name it. Would that cooler heads prevailed then and now.Answer: because facts don't form the basis of their belief structure.
Tuesday, January 15, 2013
Why Gun Control
Question: Why is the so-called reality-based community so wedded to gun control in the face of facts?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Unfortunately, an observation like "facts don't form the basis of their belief structure" merely moves the goal posts. If facts don't form the basis of their belief system then what does and why?
There's also a distinctly self-congratulatory aspect to the contention - oh look! conservative's belief system is based on fact so are we ever smart! - which is also not supported by the facts; I know conservatives who are pretty dumb and I know lefties who are pretty, damned smart.
This isn't a matter of smart or dumb, as both exist on both sides of the political spectrum. This is a matter of which side of the political spectrum has a reasonable, fact-based and logic-based, rational worldview that can be implemented by mortals. Only conservatism offers that.
"This is a matter of which side of the political spectrum has a reasonable, fact-based and logic-based, rational worldview that can be implemented by mortals."
...and when that doesn't work. Redraw the lines.
http://rslc.com/_blog/News/post/REDMAP_2012_Summary_Report
The rationale was straightforward: Controlling the redistricting process in these states would have the greatest impact on determining how both state legislative and congressional district boundaries would be drawn. Drawing new district lines in states with the most redistricting activity presented the opportunity to solidify conservative policymaking at the state level and maintain a Republican stronghold in the U.S. House of Representatives for the next decade.
;)
My state sends more Democrats to the Congress than any other, and I'm supposed to be upset about this? Please.
Post a Comment