Common Sense
Common Sense
Common sense gun control is common, but seldom ever sensible. Common sense gun control tends to be a euphemism for the “Somebody, needs to do something!" approach to legislation.
“Is that something Constitutional?” That might be a reasonable question.
It doesn’t matter. Because it’s about common sense.
But, of course, it does matter. If a proposed law is unconstitutional, it will likely get struck down in a higher court, making the legislation a costly charade.
This will really piss-off Progressives, who could care less about such things. After all, why should laws be based on anything more complex than common sense? Who needs that musty old document, the Constitution? This does not apply to Conservatives, however. Conservatives must be judged by a strict Constitutional standard—as interpreted by Liberals, of course—which is only common sense.
Here’s an example of this theory at work: get rid of guns, and you get rid of all gun crime. Just like getting rid of drugs, got rid of drugs. Just like prohibition got rid of booze. Just like welfare, got rid of poverty. Fifty trillion dollars later, we have the same amount of poverty as fifty years ago. But, let's be clear, it wasn’t the same fifty million people, give or take. So, that’s something.
This, “Common sense” business, is so common, everybody believes it, therefore it must be true. The only thing lacking is the evidence to support the claim. But, no evidence is needed—because of common sense.
A journalist for USA Today recently took on the issue of gun control. It appears that USA Today thought that hiring someone with no knowledge of the subject would be a real advantage. That way, they’d be like newborn babies; honest, and filled with common sense. Instead, this “Journalist” believed whatever nonsense was offered, by other, ill-informed people, who were also relying heavily on common sense. Meaning, that it must be true, as each reinforced the others dogma.
Dogma, in such cases, is like the biblical shield of faith, protecting their dogma from scrutiny, just in case, anyone should disagree. They then put on the helmet of righteousness, which keeps out malicious thought’s that might run contrary to their dogma. Millions of views later, and “Voila!” the public at large is significantly dumber than before.
I guess that was the intent. If so, USA Today was wildly successful.
Mark Magula
Common sense gun control is common, but seldom ever sensible. Common sense gun control tends to be a euphemism for the “Somebody, needs to do something!" approach to legislation.
“Is that something Constitutional?” That might be a reasonable question.
It doesn’t matter. Because it’s about common sense.
But, of course, it does matter. If a proposed law is unconstitutional, it will likely get struck down in a higher court, making the legislation a costly charade.
This will really piss-off Progressives, who could care less about such things. After all, why should laws be based on anything more complex than common sense? Who needs that musty old document, the Constitution? This does not apply to Conservatives, however. Conservatives must be judged by a strict Constitutional standard—as interpreted by Liberals, of course—which is only common sense.
Here’s an example of this theory at work: get rid of guns, and you get rid of all gun crime. Just like getting rid of drugs, got rid of drugs. Just like prohibition got rid of booze. Just like welfare, got rid of poverty. Fifty trillion dollars later, we have the same amount of poverty as fifty years ago. But, let's be clear, it wasn’t the same fifty million people, give or take. So, that’s something.
This, “Common sense” business, is so common, everybody believes it, therefore it must be true. The only thing lacking is the evidence to support the claim. But, no evidence is needed—because of common sense.
A journalist for USA Today recently took on the issue of gun control. It appears that USA Today thought that hiring someone with no knowledge of the subject would be a real advantage. That way, they’d be like newborn babies; honest, and filled with common sense. Instead, this “Journalist” believed whatever nonsense was offered, by other, ill-informed people, who were also relying heavily on common sense. Meaning, that it must be true, as each reinforced the others dogma.
Dogma, in such cases, is like the biblical shield of faith, protecting their dogma from scrutiny, just in case, anyone should disagree. They then put on the helmet of righteousness, which keeps out malicious thought’s that might run contrary to their dogma. Millions of views later, and “Voila!” the public at large is significantly dumber than before.
I guess that was the intent. If so, USA Today was wildly successful.
Mark Magula