Two sides competing to strip rights?
Tim Carney:
There is something to this argument. Trump tends to overstate his arguments and the media tends to put their own interpretations on those arguments. He can be incoherent at times which gives them more ammo to use against him.
The Democrats, including Hillary Clinton tend to speak in focus group tested phrases that can also be misleading. One of their latest phrases in their attempt to outlaw guns they see as scary is to describe them as "weapons of war." I suppose you could have applied to same phrase to muskets at the time the 2nd amendment was written. But you would be hard pressed to find anyone in the US military who uses an AR-15 or similar weapon in a combat operation. If it were a weapon of war that was as good or better than what is being used the Pentagon would be buying them and they are not.
The two sides, despite what some media coverage may imply, are not equal.There is more.
One candidate wants to take away your rights if you're a Muslim, a would-be immigrant or a reporter who does his job.
The other side, meanwhile, has a totally different set of liberties it wants to trample: it wants to curtail the gun rights of law-abiding people, strip the right to bear arms altogether from thousands of people, limit the right to criticize politicians, and force religious people to choose between their consciences and their livelihood.
It turns out that stripping people of their natural rights and their constitutional liberties is something most politicians in both parties really enjoy. The difference is that some people care mostly about one set of rights and freedoms, while other people care mostly about a different set. The 2016 presidential election, and the political reaction to the massacre at an Orlando gay nightclub, have brought this cultural divide into clear view — for those with clear enough eyesight.
...
There is something to this argument. Trump tends to overstate his arguments and the media tends to put their own interpretations on those arguments. He can be incoherent at times which gives them more ammo to use against him.
The Democrats, including Hillary Clinton tend to speak in focus group tested phrases that can also be misleading. One of their latest phrases in their attempt to outlaw guns they see as scary is to describe them as "weapons of war." I suppose you could have applied to same phrase to muskets at the time the 2nd amendment was written. But you would be hard pressed to find anyone in the US military who uses an AR-15 or similar weapon in a combat operation. If it were a weapon of war that was as good or better than what is being used the Pentagon would be buying them and they are not.
Comments
Post a Comment