Friday, June 26, 2015
Previous Posts
- The University of California's Insane Speech Police
- Antonin Scalia Sick Burn Generator
- Common Dreams: From Jenner to Dolezal: One Trans G...
- Slate: It Isn't Crazy To Compare Rachel Dolezal Wi...
- Oxford's New Feminist Hit Squad
- Cathy Young: The Pecking Disorder: Social Justice ...
- Some More Jenner / Dolezal Links
- Dolezal, Jenner, Dishonesty and Thought-Experiment...
- Sean Davis: No, The Difference Between Dolezal And...
- RIP Reality-Based Community?
Subscribe to
Posts [Atom]
3 Comments:
The article is specious in its attachment of this argument to violence *in a church.* Churches have been official "weapons free zones" for over a millennium. They are the original sanctuary against many kinds of violence. The article suggests throwing this in the garbage and replacing holy sanctuary with one made by mankind--that is, via guns. I suggest leaving violation of millennium-old taboos to the bad guys.
The article itself is weak. It quotes one, and only one, source to back up a conclusion the author apparently believed before even writing the article.
Gun rights may have, in fact, helped in the civil rights movement. However, this requires some actual evidence and not just anecdotes about who had, or may have had, guns. Did the guns offer protection? Did they deter violence against civil rights activists?
Did anyone read the books cited by the article? The guy wasn't utterly without evidence, I'm just unfamiliar with his sources.
That guns aided black Americans in stemming racist violence against them would be far less surprising than finding out that they didn't help at all, no? I mean, the things were invented 'cause they're kinda good at that.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home