The idea that a large number of people agreeing to limits on fundamental freedoms must, of necessity, mean it's a good idea doesn't hold up. We've had people think that about many things. People thought it was a good idea to put American citizens of Japanese descent into camps. People thought it was a good idea to mistreat the indigenous people in the Americas. People thought slavery was a good idea. At different times, people have thought freedom of speech and the press should be more rigidly controlled. Yet none of these are consistent with the fundamental freedoms protected by the Constitution.
California today is the equivalent of Mississippi during segregation. It will take a smackdown from the Supreme Court to correct this situation.
ReplyDeleteThat reporter needs to learn what neutrality means. She's an advocate, a poor position for a journalist to take.
Your condition is called grandiose victimism, likening gun owners of today to the Mississippi blacks of yesteryear.
DeleteThose who seek to violate rights always sneer at the people whose rights are to be violated.
DeleteWhites in the old south would have used terms like that to dismiss the claims of blacks too, Mike.
DeleteThe idea that a large number of people agreeing to limits on fundamental freedoms must, of necessity, mean it's a good idea doesn't hold up. We've had people think that about many things. People thought it was a good idea to put American citizens of Japanese descent into camps. People thought it was a good idea to mistreat the indigenous people in the Americas. People thought slavery was a good idea. At different times, people have thought freedom of speech and the press should be more rigidly controlled. Yet none of these are consistent with the fundamental freedoms protected by the Constitution.
ReplyDelete