San Bernardino

FTFY

 

It's really a helpful idea to keep making more and more laws so that people that ignore laws can ignore them, too.

 

So you're anti-research? That explains a lot.

 

This is a very good question.

 

It's so good to know that our attorney general has cut straight to the chase and identified the real problem: People who say things about Islam.

http://www.dailywire.com/news/1593/loretta-lynch-vows-prosecute-those-who-use-anti-james-barrett

 

The New York Times talks about gun control in an editorial on its front page today; they say it's the first time an editorial has landed on Page 1 since 1920.

 

Being put on the "watch list" already triggers some less-than-full citizenship status, no? Your travel is restricted and you're being spied upon. Prohibiting gun ownership should be a no-brainer in the process if we all agree on such measures.

 

This editorial is pathetic. Right from the start, where it declares what all decent people feel, and tries to use that to dictate a response.

It employs the usual liberal tactic of declaring the debate over. There's no more time to talk. It's not necessary to debate. We need to act, and they're going to tell us what those actions will be:

It is past time to stop talking about halting the spread of firearms, and instead to reduce their number drastically — eliminating some large categories of weapons and ammunition.

It is not necessary to debate the peculiar wording of the Second Amendment. No right is unlimited and immune from reasonable regulation.

And, let's be clear -- to steal a phrase from the editorial -- they're not calling for gun control, or gun reform, they're calling for gun confiscation:

Certain kinds of weapons, like the slightly modified combat rifles used in California, and certain kinds of ammunition, must be outlawed for civilian ownership. It is possible to define those guns in a clear and effective way and, yes, it would require Americans who own those kinds of weapons to give them up for the good of their fellow citizens.

The close might be saddest of all. Only by following the Times directive that we surrender our Constitutional rights in response to a terror attack can we demonstrate that we have retained our sense of decency:

What better time than during a presidential election to show, at long last, that our nation has retained its sense of decency?

 

I'm also curious what reasonable First Amendment regulations the Times would be comfortable with to deal with gun violence.

Would they support, or would they fight, regulations that restricted the printing of the name of those who perpetrated mass murder? Would they resist regulations that limited how they could cover such incidents?

How would the Times feel about a ban on, and confiscation of, first person shooter video games?

 

There are restrictions on speech. Libel laws. Crowded theater. Fighting words. False advertising. True threats. Time and place. All akin, the NYT (and I) would argue, to some of the firepower restrictions being floated.

 

Almost all editorials, in all newspapers, uniformly suck. If you are looking for well-supported, tightly constructed arguments, go elsewhere.

 

You say you don't hate America, but if you can't see the difference between our values, and those of Islam, then I don't think you hold our nation in high esteem.

I don't think you have to hate Muslims either, but you should realize that Political Islam -- and, let's be clear, Islam is not just a religion, it's also a political system -- is on par with Naziism, Communism, and Apartheid.

And, since Muslims don't differentiate the religious aspect of Islam from the legal and political aspect of it, I'm not sure how we're supposed to.

We get way too wrapped up in the idea that Islam is just a religion. It's not. If the KKK wrapped their beliefs in religion -- and they do to some extent -- we wouldn't dismiss their hateful ideology because it was a religion. We wouldn't speak of the KKK as a beautiful, peaceful belief system, abused by some members.

And, I don't have a problem with Muslims living next to me either. A Muslim family that embraces Western values, and American society is a good thing.

But, increasingly, that is not what's happening.