On the eve of the release of Vice President Biden's report of recommendations for curbing gun violence in the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary tragedy, it seemed like an appropriate time for me to do something I have considered doing for some time now namely, trying to describe what I believe to be faulty liberal thinking. I say Part 1 of n because there are so many examples that deserve comment that I can't honestly predict how many parts this line of commentary made end up comprising.
The gun control debate that has been re-ignited following the shootings in Newtown, Connecticut has provided a wealth of examples of liberals using one illogical argument to justify another illogical argument. In the interest of brevity, I will address three which I consider typical of liberal flawed thinking. The examples I will cite are: Bob Beckel's comments on the political talk show, The Five; Congressman Chris Van Hollen's (D-MD) comments during an interview with Fox News anchor Bret Baier, and the comments of Vice President Biden himself.
First, let me recount the discussion that took place on The Five in which Beckel tried to make the case for banning guns and more gun laws. Beckel claimed that banning guns and stiffer gun laws would reduce violence. When fellow panelist , conservative Greg Gutfeld pointed out that Chicago had over 500 hundred murders in 2012 despite some of the toughest gun laws in the country, Beckel said, Well that is because of the drug problem. Hey wait a minute Bob, aren't drugs banned too? So let me get this straight. The failure of gun control to curb violence in Chicago can be attributed to another failed effort to ban something - drugs. So the answer is more of the same? Brilliant!!! But the illogic doesn't end there.
Next, not to be outdone, Rep. Van Hollen advocated more similarly ineffective measures to combat gun violence in an interview with Bret Baier. Van Hollen argued that as a result of the Sandy Hook shootings we need to consider additional gun laws such as harsher penalties for bringing guns into school zones, gun registration, and more background checks for gun buyers. When Baier pointed out that none of these measures would have prevented the Newtown shooting, Van Hollen said that, Just because a measure won't prevent every situation, that doesn't mean that it isn't worth doing. So is Van Hollen's goal preventing another Sandy Hook style tragedy or just furthering a more general liberal gun control agenda? He went on to say that, Right now someone on the FBI's Terrorist No-Fly Watch list can't get on a plane but could go down the block and buy an assault rifle. Not exactly what I consider a ringing endorsement of the government's ability to effectively manage programs to protect the public or check someone's suitability to do certain activities. Why in the world wouldn't a program to identify potential terrorist be able to both prevent them from boarding a commercial airliner and buying weapons? Once again, illogic plus more illogic equals logic? No, I don't think so. That brings us to our esteemed Vice President.
Last, there is the genius that is Joseph R. Biden. When asked what types of measure his committee might consider, the Vice President suggested that nothing is off the table and, If a measure could save even one life, we should do it. Really? Without regard to cost, effectiveness, the rights of the vast majority of law abiding citizens? By that logic, we shouldn't stop with assault rifles when according to a report in the Washington Post, 100 children 14 and under die from chocking on hot dogs every year. Why does anyone need to eat hot dogs anyway. They are full of fat, high in sodium and worse yet, they are made of meat! It doesn't matter that it is a $1.7 billion market, it would save at least one life so according to Biden's logic, it is worth it.
These are just a few recent examples of how liberals justify ideas that logically don't make any sense by using equally illogical arguments. With liberals in charge, if they are allowed to argue for illogical laws, regulations and restrictions using other illogical ideas, then are any of our freedoms safe?
No comments:
Post a Comment