Chris
12-12-2012, 05:40 PM
Liberals complain there's not enough discussion about gun control, but there is, plenty, just that they are losing the arguments.
Gun control, according to a recent blog post by Timothy Egan of The New York Times, is “the issue that dare not speak its name.” Egan is upset that people who do not like gun control recently said mean things about sportscaster Bob Costas, who does. This proved to Egan that “you cannot talk” about guns in America.
...What’s wrong with the old debate? Search The Washington Post’s website, and you’ll find the term “gun control” show up more than 3,700 times in just the past seven years. The New York Times’ site, whose archives go back considerably further, turns up nearly 30,000 mentions.
Every year, hundreds of gun-control measures are introduced in Congress and state legislatures. Some of them pass; a lot don’t. In recent years, lawmakers also have passed—after much furious debate—measures allowing concealed-carry, guns in bars, and so forth. The Supreme Court has handed down a brace of landmark decisions upholding an individual right to own firearms. There was more than a little debate about those cases too, if memory serves.
As should be laughably obvious by this point, gun control is something Americans almost never stop talking about. The trouble—from the liberal perspective—is that the discussion keeps going the wrong way....
...When Egan and Williams gripe that you can’t talk about gun control, what they really mean is you can’t talk about it without other people talking back. And when other gun-control advocates say they want a “candid” debate about guns—or an “honest,” “sane,” “serious,” “fresh,” “mature,” or “new” debate—what they really mean is: a debate we actually win.
Saying what they really mean would be the candid and honest thing to do. Wouldn’t it?
@ Gun Control, Ad Infinitum (http://reason.com/archives/2012/12/12/gun-control-ad-infinitum)
Gun control, according to a recent blog post by Timothy Egan of The New York Times, is “the issue that dare not speak its name.” Egan is upset that people who do not like gun control recently said mean things about sportscaster Bob Costas, who does. This proved to Egan that “you cannot talk” about guns in America.
...What’s wrong with the old debate? Search The Washington Post’s website, and you’ll find the term “gun control” show up more than 3,700 times in just the past seven years. The New York Times’ site, whose archives go back considerably further, turns up nearly 30,000 mentions.
Every year, hundreds of gun-control measures are introduced in Congress and state legislatures. Some of them pass; a lot don’t. In recent years, lawmakers also have passed—after much furious debate—measures allowing concealed-carry, guns in bars, and so forth. The Supreme Court has handed down a brace of landmark decisions upholding an individual right to own firearms. There was more than a little debate about those cases too, if memory serves.
As should be laughably obvious by this point, gun control is something Americans almost never stop talking about. The trouble—from the liberal perspective—is that the discussion keeps going the wrong way....
...When Egan and Williams gripe that you can’t talk about gun control, what they really mean is you can’t talk about it without other people talking back. And when other gun-control advocates say they want a “candid” debate about guns—or an “honest,” “sane,” “serious,” “fresh,” “mature,” or “new” debate—what they really mean is: a debate we actually win.
Saying what they really mean would be the candid and honest thing to do. Wouldn’t it?
@ Gun Control, Ad Infinitum (http://reason.com/archives/2012/12/12/gun-control-ad-infinitum)