April 27, 2013
Two weeks ago, on Saturday, 4/13/2013, President Obama turned over his weekly address to the nation to Francine Wheeler, mother of Ben who was killed at Sandy Hook Elementary. Here's the link to the 4:28 video. As you might expect, it's a very emotional appeal for gun control. I made myself watch it and couldn't help but feel for her. But that's part of the problem. It's an emotional appeal, not a logical one.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2013/04/12/weekly-address-sandy-hook-victim-s-mother-calls-commonsense-gun-responsibility-refor?utm_source=email207&utm_medium=text1&utm_campaign=nowisthetime
It was suggested to me once that I look at pictures of gunshot wounds as I consider my arguments against gun control. I've seen pictures of various kinds of wounds - from torture, gunshots, knives and other weapons. Very recently we’ve gotten a brief glimpse at the carnage caused by homemade bombs in Boston. I've watched the videos of live Americans being beheaded with knives. They're all grotesque. Some will make some people sick just to look at them, and in the case of the beheadings the sound leaves a very strong impression. But when I looked at them, whether they turned my stomach or not, I didn't blame the weapons, the tools. I blamed the people who used them. In contrast, gun control advocating politicians are virtually ignoring the tools they’ve already provided to prosecutors and judges and instead demonizing the tools used by criminals with an intent of restricting their availability to millions of people who will never use them to inflict illegal harm. And they call it “common sense” and “reasonable” and then additionally demonize those who disagree. And Francine Wheeler is doing the same thing in her emotional plea. When she talks about her sons, the words are hers. When she talks about gun control, she’s saying the same things, using the exact same expressions fed to all Americans who consume media content supporting the decades-old gun control agenda.
A question I’d like to ask the gun control advocates is this: among the various well publicized gun control legislative proposals, which do they think are NOT “common sense” or NOT “reasonable”? Although I’d like for them to answer that question, I don’t think they ever will and I equally believe we can accurately predict their response if they ever did. They’d insist they’re all “common sense” and “reasonable”. It’s in their playbook that way and they don’t dare deviate from the plays drawn up by their coaches. “We must do something, now” even if we have to lie, mislead, misrepresent and abandon logic and data driven analysis and decision making in the process. Why? Because the powerful and influential gun control advocates say we have to and they have a tidal wave of emotional outpouring to ride upon.
It’s okay to debate the effectiveness or reason of “universal background checks” or “expanded background checks” or any of the other proposals. But do you really know what they mean? Have you read the bills yourself? Have you looked for the holes, consequences and implications of them – both the intended and perhaps unintended consequences? I’ve read several of them. I haven’t been able to keep up with all of them. One thing that is VERY clear from having done so is that the media and politicians are NOT telling the whole story in their sound bites. They brand them with simple phrases that sound so “common sense” and “reasonable” but, like the iceberg, the real danger lies beneath. Did you notice the subtle switch from “universal” to “expanded” background checks? Did you think it was irrelevant semantics? It wasn’t. They’re different. I think they realized their “common sense” and “reasonable” “universal background checks” had no possibility of passing so they retreated to “expanded background checks”. But the media didn’t explain the change, did they? They hardly acknowledged it.
Speaking of things hardly acknowledged, Francine Wheeler and other family members of Sandy Hook Elementary victims have been given a national spotlight, but have you heard of Mark Mattioli? Gun control advocating family members have been given Vice President Biden’s attention for his gun violence task force, invited to testify in legislative hearings, invited to the State of the Union, given a ride on Air Force One, literally escorted through the halls of Congress to make their personal appeals to US senators who were about to begin debating and voting on gun control measures, and given lots of media exposure from all the major media outlets. About this President Obama and others have gone out of their way to ensure that the ‘victims of Sandy Hook be heard’. Except that he hasn’t. Not all of them anyway. Not the ones who disagree with the gun control agenda. Mark Mattioli is one of those. Here’s a 6:39 interview he gave to Megyn Kelly of Fox News in which he opposes any new gun control laws and gives his reasons for doing so. For any of you who think it’s our responsibility to listen to the pain of the surviving family members of Sandy Hook victims, I’d say it’s equally our responsibility to listen to the opposing view – also expressed by one of those same people. One who hasn’t been in the background as President Obama makes his gun control speeches. Listen to his words. Even in his obvious grief, he recognizes the problems with what’s happening in our national and state capitals.
“I, given this situation, have a seat at the table. I’ve been in the room and they are approaching this in a very incremental way. They will take what they can get and take and take and take…this “group think” is taking place. They’re suspending reason and critical analysis when those are what we need for of these legislators to make reasoned decisions about the 2nd Amendment and other things that affect our liberties…it’s unbelievable.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C37R6za08V0
No comments:
Post a Comment