Thursday, January 31, 2013

- Deciding The Rights Of Others (With Polling)

Is there anyone out there who would like to bet against me being able to craft a poll that shows a majority of Americans in favor of a return to slavery for black Americans? It would be much easier than you think. Polls don't tell us what the truth is, they don't even really tell us what the feelings of the majority are. All they do is provide (wafer thin) support for the views they were designed to. This is hardly a secret, yet we keep seeing poll results quoted as if they were carried down from the mountaintop by Moses.

Charles Blow in the New York Times think the polling results are the end of the debate with regard to the second amendment. But as I said, it's easy to get polls to show the results you like. It's even easier when all the poll is designed to do is to limit other people's right. Black people have a right to vote, to live in freedom, and to participate in American life in every way that any other citizen does. But if we followed Charles Blow's line of "logic" then the only thing standing between him and a life of slavery is a few polls.

In America, (thankfully) we don't decide people's rights based on the polls. We don't consign Charles Blow or any other person, to a life of slavery just because we found a bunch of people who wanted to see that happen. We don't ask 2 wolves and a sheep to decided what to have for dinner.

Charles Blow (I'm willing to wager) doesn't know any legal firearm owners. That may seem improbably to some of you but in New York City, it's actually quite likely. But maybe if he did, he'd be less enthusiastic about seeing their rights stripped from them by the wolves in congress. He's welcome to come on out to my gun club anytime he likes. I'll teach him to shoot skeet, or pistols or whatever he likes. A law abiding black man in New York would certainly do well to know how to defend himself anyway. I've always been a proponent of the NRA doing more outreach in minority communities. And in the future at least he'll know whose rights he wants to take away.

The bottom line on the current gun control debate is that the laws that Obama and his team are proposing will not change violence at all because they will not effect the behavior of criminals. The only people those laws will punish will be the law abiding, and they don't warrant punishment. The two groups may have gun ownership in common, but law abiding gun owners are not criminals. It's exactly like rooting out the nunneries in order to prevent prostitution. Better to focus on the brothels and leave the harmless nuns alone.

3 comments:

ikaika said...

FRP!
There was a filipino gentleman that testified before the senate at the hearings. He presented a fact based testimaony and sited SCOTUS and Fed Court opinions.
There is audio / video out there. I suggest someone find it and post it.
Maybe in Charles Blow's strange little world, the Seccond amendment is not intended for minorities.

Anonymous said...

You said yourself that gun ownership means political power. Charles Blow will never want to go skeet shooting with you, he is interested in destroying the political power of 2nd Amendment defenders, i.e. White Christian men. The Left correctly sees that demographic as their greatest political enemy, and our current ruling class electing a new people is not moving fast enough for them.

Tom said...

Maybe. The left does have people who think that way about politics and everything else is subordinate to that. But you never know.

And Charles Blow as a black man, is something like 7 times more likely to be the victim of violent crime than I am so teaching him how to shoot would only be to his advantage. Even if he were horrified by it in principle.