The "progressives" are out in force today, as could easily be predicted, pushing for more gun control in the wake of the incredibly tragic massacre in Connecticut yesterday. Here are some links which will hopefully quell some of the hyperbole:
Jeffrey Goldberg: What can we do stop massacres?
Glenn Reynolds: Gun-free zones provide false sense of security.
Britain: Gun crime goes up by 89% in a decade. And the UK has very strict gun control laws.
Roger Kimball: Already one is hearing the predictable homilies about gun control, as if depriving people of their liberties would somehow contravene evil.
Donald Sensing: Maybe the Left oughta look at Hollywood and its glorification of guns.
I've also seen a lot of talk in the last 24 hours about the need for more mental health services. While this is certainly a decent sentiment, consider: If there is an obviously mentally disturbed person, how does one -- or the state -- force an individual to get needed assistance? And if you do attempt to mandate mental health treatment, groups like the ACLU will step in to "inform you of your rights." They did it with mental hospitals, and they do it with [mentally ill] homeless, telling them that they do not have to get off the streets to get necessary treatment, or in the case of, say, nasty weather.
So again, tell me "progressives": How do we get people that need treatment the reatment they need ... if they don't want it?
The ACLU is so "vigilant" about a person's rights that even mentally disturbed people have 'em. After all, that is the essence of a free society, is it not? However, ironically (and astonishingly), the civil rights group has always believed that the 2nd Amendment is a collective right. Thus, the ACLU's "free society" means the mentally ill can refuse necessary treatment and assistance, but a completely sane, law-abiding individual is not permitted to defend him/herself with a handgun.
Makes "sense."Posted by Hube at December 15, 2012 11:16 AM | TrackBack