what happens if someone comes out with statistics that say people with blue eyes are 87% more likely to use a gun to commit a crime, or some other ridiculous 'fact.'We already have facts like that. Black Americans are statistically 4 times more likely to commit a violent crime than any other segment of the population. That does not mean, however, that we pass laws restricting the activities of all blacks. We are a nation of individual rights, and it doesn't matter if everyone else committed a certain act yesterday, I didn't.
Thursday, May 16, 2013
Individual rights
In comments to this post, CJ wants to know:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
This bill is ruling out an entire group of people because some of the people in this group do bad things. I'm not saying I support or am against the bill, however it is restricting an entire group.
No, not neccessarily. Without reading the text of the bill, it sounds like it is restricting INDIVIDUALS of the population who have been adjudicated mentally ill by a court. They have had their DUE PROCESS and their day in court. Of course, a state law prohibiting the mentally ill from owning a firearm is pointless, because there is already a Federal Law against it.
A law that discriminates against a group, or even discriminates against an individual without affording him due process is not the same thing.
However, if you are referring to the part about a law for so-called "universal background checks" I think this is a wrong headed idea.
1: Do you really think that a law requiring people to do a background check when they sell a gun on the street corner will be followed? If so, why not pass a law requiring all sales of cocaine be reported to the state?
2: This is a way to register firearms. Once "universal background checks" are in place, the government will know where honest gun owners are, and can come get the guns at their leisure.
Post a Comment