Emotions of the antis vs logic at U of Wisconsin

Discussion of Firearm Politics & Legislation. This forum is now strictly limited to discussions directly related to firearms.

Moderators: Coordinators, Moderators

Emotions of the antis vs logic at U of Wisconsin

Postby bignflnut » Mon Oct 16, 2017 8:51 am

On 10 October, 2017, freedom advocate Katie Pavlich, who values the Second Amendment was allowed to speak on the University of Wisconsin, Madison, campus. The speech followed a change in University policy that threatened punishment for people who refuse to allow others to speak.

SNIP

Pavlich asked the common questions ignored by anti-Second Amendment activists. From madison.com:

“Why do the rights of adult college students end at the campus border?” Pavlich asked. Because gun rights opponents want to control others and prevent them from exercising their Second Amendment rights, she said.

“But just because you don’t like a constitutional right doesn’t mean you get to strip others’ constitutional rights,” Pavlich said in a talk that was anti-Hillary Clinton, anti-Hollywood and anti-“elite.”


There's a quick exchange where the anti-gun ladies shrilly shout at the lady, who presents a case for campus carry, using the story of a friend (victim of rape). The antis attempt to ramp up the emotion, the only weapon they have in the political fight, and fail to make any sense. Emotion makes bad law (solid article)

There are good gun laws that should be passed. Several have been introduced in the Congress this session. Two stand out: a national reciprocity law, which would defend the exercise of Second Amendment rights across the United States, and a reform of the antiquated and unreasonable restrictions on the sale of gun silencers or gun mufflers. Logic, reason, and facts support both of those laws. There is considerable support for both laws in the legislature and among the population. Most opposition comes from the establishment media.

These laws will be passed by steady pressure brought over time. The approach has been used in most states to reform gun laws into a closer alignment with the Second Amendment.

Progressives found a way to bypass many of the checks and balance protections of the Constitution. They took over the mass media. How it happened is detailed nicely in Partisan Journalism, by Jim A. Kuypers.

The media became a way for leftists (progressives) to bypass the protections of the Constitution with emotional crises. Rahm Emanual quoted the radical Saul Alynsky when he said "Never let a crisis go to waste." Proponents of good government need to fight that effect. Government by crises only "works" on the assumption that elites cynically use crises for the improvement of everyone.

History has shown the assumption to be false.

Slow down the process. Call for reasoned discourse. Decry emotional responses.

Passing laws during a time of crises is bad political theory. It makes for bad law.
“A free people claim their rights, as derived from the laws of nature, and not as the gift of their chief magistrate.”
-Thomas Jefferson, 1774

Tweed Ring: "...we should have all done more to elected Republicans..." Agreed
User avatar
bignflnut
 
Posts: 5689
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 12:14 pm

Return to National Firearm Politics & Legislation

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 1 guest