------------------------------------------
The author attempts to make a case for gun control by appealing to the lack of foreknowledge by the founders. Unfortunately, his ignorance hinders his reasoning.
The author attempts to make a case for gun control by appealing to the lack of foreknowledge by the founders. Unfortunately, his ignorance hinders his reasoning.
Read on:
----------------------------------------
You are familiar with the oft-quoted phrase, “…guns don’t kill people, people do…”.
Wrong! (With finality he asserts this statement to be wrong. Yet in the very next sentence he refutes himself.)
Guns, with their various technologies, give people the ability to wound or kill many individuals quickly and from an impersonal distance. ("Guns give people..." means that people kill people. Guns are simply a means.)
You are familiar with the oft-quoted phrase, “…guns don’t kill people, people do…”.
Wrong! (With finality he asserts this statement to be wrong. Yet in the very next sentence he refutes himself.)
Guns, with their various technologies, give people the ability to wound or kill many individuals quickly and from an impersonal distance. ("Guns give people..." means that people kill people. Guns are simply a means.)
Try to kill 10, or 26, or 32 people in a few minutes with a knife, arrow, spear, bludgeon, or other personal weapon, and not be pretty damn certain that another person would not “get you” in seconds. (Why is the number of potential deaths relevant? People are murdered with alarming regularity, particularly in heavily gun restricted locales like Chicago and D.C.. Is murder somehow worse if several are killed within seconds of each other?
This is a classic leftist meme that sounds oh-so-good until you consider it more carefully.
This is a classic leftist meme that sounds oh-so-good until you consider it more carefully.
If the number of potential deaths are relevant, then what does Rev. Shelden do about the Timothy McVeighs of the world? He used a fertilizer bomb. Or what about the World Trade Center bombing? They used airplanes. Or the Sitka, AK mass murder, which involved a knife? Or the six who were bludgeoned to death in Florida?
Mass murder has been perpetrated by fire, IEDs, and poisoning. Governments are particularly adept at mass murder, killing thousands at once with bombs and napalm. Yet Rev. Shelden reserves his outrage for guns.)
People hear gunfire and the response is to run, duck or hide.
After the Sandy Hook shooting, President Obama called for America to come together to solve this crisis. One party in Congress refused to act. (Those eeevil Republicans! They didn't cooperate with a gun grab? They neglected to support more [ineffective] gun control laws? They refused to knuckle under to emotional manipulation? I hate those guys!)
Did the writers of our Constitution have these existential situations in mind as they wrote the Second Amendment? (Implying they didn't, which is prima facie evidence he lacks knowledge. However, a cursory examination of the writings of the founders reveals they wrote extensively on the second amendment. There is no dearth of info available, of which Rev. Shelden apparently is not acquainted.
Further, the Reverend appears to be laboring under a misapprehension. The Second Amendment, like all of the Constitution, describes the powers delegated to government by The People. Thus, the Amendment informs government that it shall not infringe upon the right of The People to keep and bear arms.
The founders did not confer rights via the Second Amendment. There is nothing in the Constitution that limits the powers of The People. Quite the contrary, the The People retain all rights whether or not enumerated. This is acknowledged by the 9th Amendment: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
The 10th Amendment completes the case: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.)
Of course, I have not addressed the enormity of our tragedy; I don’t have the answers; no one does! (Really, no one has the answers? In the next sentence, you will find the Reverend himself has the answer.)
After the Sandy Hook shooting, President Obama called for America to come together to solve this crisis. One party in Congress refused to act. (Those eeevil Republicans! They didn't cooperate with a gun grab? They neglected to support more [ineffective] gun control laws? They refused to knuckle under to emotional manipulation? I hate those guys!)
Did the writers of our Constitution have these existential situations in mind as they wrote the Second Amendment? (Implying they didn't, which is prima facie evidence he lacks knowledge. However, a cursory examination of the writings of the founders reveals they wrote extensively on the second amendment. There is no dearth of info available, of which Rev. Shelden apparently is not acquainted.
Further, the Reverend appears to be laboring under a misapprehension. The Second Amendment, like all of the Constitution, describes the powers delegated to government by The People. Thus, the Amendment informs government that it shall not infringe upon the right of The People to keep and bear arms.
The founders did not confer rights via the Second Amendment. There is nothing in the Constitution that limits the powers of The People. Quite the contrary, the The People retain all rights whether or not enumerated. This is acknowledged by the 9th Amendment: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
The 10th Amendment completes the case: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.)
Of course, I have not addressed the enormity of our tragedy; I don’t have the answers; no one does! (Really, no one has the answers? In the next sentence, you will find the Reverend himself has the answer.)
However, together we all know the answer. (Aaaand, the answer is, "we" have the answer.)
You – get involved; speak up even if your voice trembles, if you are afraid, even if you don’t have all the correct words. This is what it means to be “civilized”, to be human. Humanity takes thought, involvement, and spirit. We are all diminished, indeed we all have died. (This inscrutable paragraph is apparently intended to appeal to our better natures. However, it comes off as contrived. Ultimately, it means nothing.
Now that you have read the letter, is there anything meaningful you take away from it? I didn't think so.)
No comments:
Post a Comment