Over-reach on gun control?

“Overextension is often the result of hubris, the delusion of invincibility as exemplified by Napoleon and Hitler. The enemies of the Bill of Rights have similarly assumed they could exploit the blood of the murder victims to revive an agenda that had been put down hard in 2000, but their resulting hubris yielded at least three irrevocably self-damning statements that should turn their opportunity into a catastrophe.”

William Levinson says it’s The Antigun Movement’s Bridge Too Far. His caveat is that the lessons will fade into the woodwork unless people act to highlight and communicate the lessons that can be learned. These lessons are from Governor Ed Rendell and “The Good Thing About Newton…”, Prime Minister John Howard who thinks Australia “Correctly” has no Bill of Rights, and Governor Andrew Cuomo who says “No One Needs 10 Bullets to Kill a Deer”.

That is, no crisis is too tragic to waste for these folks, they do not understand basic civil rights and why the Bill of Rights was added to the U.S. Constitution, and they do not understand that civilian arms is mostly about property and civil rights and matters of self defense (rather than recreation).

The problem is Joseph Goebbels’ advice that “Arguments must therefore be crude, clear and forcible, and appeal to emotions and instincts, not the intellect.” Just how do you turn crude, clear, and forcible appeals to feelings into a nuanced and strong argument based in intellectual integrity? Just how do you get people to stop and think?

Comments are closed.