Wow. That was a close one. In a 5-4 ruling, the Supreme Court struck down the unconstitutional gun ban in our nation’s capital.
As I’m watching CNN, I’m becoming more and more convinced by the media bias. Instead of reporting on any kind of actual statistical facts that surround the presence of guns in a community vs. a community where guns are banned, they bring on a Chicago police officer whose son was killed around Mother’s day as he went shopping for a gift. Heartbreaking story, I know.
And I don’t mean to dimish the man’s pain at all, but let’s look at the whole news story here. Why did CNN bring him on and conveniently leave out any kind of data on the subject? They seem real quick to report data on anything that upholds their agenda, but in line with classic the current strain of liberalism, they’re right at home with using people’s emotions to change their opinion when facts don’t support the agenda.
Listen, it’s real sad when people die at the hands of a gun. But people: more often than not, it’s not the gun that’s the problem. It’s almost never an accidental shooting. Only in the rare case is it not intentional. In that light, I’d submit that the perpetrator would use whatever means they have. If they don’t have a gun, they’ll use a knife. And in Australia, they’ve banned those as well. Hasn’t really curbed the violence though. (Hell, even Australia’s Herald Sun Times has better coverage on the ruling than our own media.)
Quite rarely do we see stabbings in America. And liberals, being quite short minded as usual, are far too comfortable in their simple math. Lots of murders + Guns being used = Guns are the problem. Get rid of the guns, they philosophize, and you get rid of the problem. What’s the real problem? Lots of people who use violence to solve problems + A Gun Ban = Criminals move on to other means to weaponry.
I’m glad the Supreme Court upheld the Second Amendment. It means I can stop arguing with gun control loonies who have this misguided notion that if you deprive criminals of their weapons, they’ll just be sad and give up.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, the only proven deterrent to violent crime is a well-armed public.
“Undoubtedly some think that the Second Amendment is outmoded in a society where our standing army is the pride of our nation, where well-trained police forces provide personal security and where gun violence is a serious problem…That is perhaps debatable, but what is not debatable is that it is not the role of this court to pronounce the Second Amendment extinct.” - Justice Scalia
Tags: Gun Control, SCOTUS
Posted in general | Comments (3)
June 27th, 2008 at 7:41 pm
i suggest you make a distinction between classic ‘Locke-sytle’ liberalism and the current mode of ‘i’m alright, you’re alright, the government should wipe my ass’ liberalism. the former is quite the ideal while the latter is something of which a thinking man wants no part.
June 28th, 2008 at 1:22 am
I suppose my response should be asking which part of this post prompted your comment. There clearly is a distinction between the two, not the least of which involves the amount intellectual exercise required to reach a conclusion. In the former, a great deal. In the latter, apparently only enough to raise the heartbeat and kick-start the tear ducts is required.
I couldn’t agree with everything he posits in his writings, but Locke’s philosophies were certainly instrumental in the formation of the US, especially in regards to the separation of powers and property rights. Unfortunately, we are still seeing a nasty form of residual from his thoughts on the equal distribution of wealth. Apparently, it is quite impossible for America’s useful idiots to imagine that a complete equalization of property, wealth, healthcare, or any other commodity or access to a service is not only outside the realm of real possibility, it would have the same effect on the economy as the absence of movement in the water has on a shark.
There are always going to be classes in society and obstacles in life. The blessing that comes with being a citizen of our Great Land is that everyone has the opportunity to choose his or her own destiny. The option so many are gunning for right now is, quite unfortunately, for a Nanny State with a Robin Hood Government at the helm.
June 28th, 2008 at 9:23 pm
“They seem real quick to report data on anything that upholds their agenda, but in line with classic liberalism, they’re right at home with using people’s emotions to change their opinion when facts don’t support the agenda.”
i was not implying that all Locke’s propositions were to be in play, as it were, but simply that from his foundation came much later elucidation on the ideas of rationality, personal property rights, natural rights, et al.