Have you ever heard something and thought, "That's about the dumbest thing I've heard this year!"?
Something along those lines shot through my head Tuesday evening as I watched about 15 minutes of the Democratic debate that was held in my home state of Ohio (15 minutes was about all I could take before I had to turn on Blackish). About halfway through the debate Anderson Cooper directed an unusually poignant question towards Beto O'Rourke (the transcript is here), addressing O'Rourke's recent statements regarding a mandatory buyback of assault weapons. After quoting the Congressman's own words, Cooper asked, "...You said police wouldn't be going door to door. So how exactly are you going to force people to give up their weapons? You don't even know who has those weapons."
Cooper challenged O'Rourke to add some substance to the rhetoric he's been employing on the campaign trail, and, let's just say, O'Rourke failed miserably. He sounded like an idealist who has never interacted with reality in any meaningful way. The question, of course, led to other candidates sounding off on the issue. The progressives were all trying to sound more totalitarian than each other, while the moderates were trying to make excuses for why they weren't as totalitarian as the progressives. It was all very depressing. All the while the group of politicians and entrepreneurs was using generic terms like "machine guns" and "assault-style weapons," demonstrating conclusively that they have no idea what kind of guns they're even trying ban.
I'd like to focus on Beto for a moment because I think his response to Cooper's question was particularly revealing. Beto is the idealist of the group. He's the dreamer. He's the guy who wants to be in power so badly, which is always dangerous, because he really, truly wants to change the world. Not only does he want to change the world, but he genuinely believes that he is the one person qualified to change the world. He's going to make this world a better place, the Bill of Rights be damned! True believers like Beto are the most dangerous kind of all!
Lost amidst the chaos of a debate featuring a dozen candidates was Beto's perspective on humanity. When faced with the reality of how he would force people to give up their assault weapons without the use of force, he again spewed inspirational rhetoric. He said, "So I expect my fellow Americans to follow the law, the same way that we enforce any provision, any law that we have right now." Moments later he added, "But the expectation is that Americans will follow the law. I believe in this country. I believe in my fellow Americans. I believe that they will do the right thing."
Let that sink in for a moment. Go back and reread that once or twice. Really think about that. Okay, here we go.
Congressman, you believe in your fellow Americans, but you don't think you can trust them with assault weapons? If you really believed in the people of this nation, you wouldn't try to micromanage their lives. If you really believed that the people of this great nation had a proclivity to do the right thing, you would not be Progressive Democrat who sees legislation and regulation as the panacea for all that ails mankind.
Congressman, you don't really believe in the American people. You believe that the American public cannot and should not be trusted with a specific type of weapon. You believe that those weapons will be used for evil and must be confiscated.
Congressman, isn't murder illegal? Do murderers obey laws? Of course not! People who choose to take the lives of their fellow citizens have already abandoned the rule of law and, therefore, have no apprehension about sourcing weapons illegally. When you make laws, only law-abiding citizens follow them, which is precisely why gun-control laws are consistently ineffective. Taking weapons out of the hands of those who use them lawfully is hardly the answer to stopping crime. History has repeatedly shown that making an item illegal will not keep it out of the hands of criminals. Even if you ban the manufacture of assault weapons, human ingenuity will find a way!
Beto illustrates perfectly the self-contradictory folly of liberalism. It simultaneously insists that man is essentially good, but also attempts to over-regulate him. Elitist pride is the linchpin to this convoluted ideology. Mankind will have peace and harmony, they tell us, if everyone simply follows our rules!
Laws are only as good as the people you expect to follow them, but if you expect people to do the right thing, then oppressive laws are not necessary. Congressman O'Rourke dreams of a Utopia where cake is both edible and retainable, but he is nonetheless left with an either/or proposition. Either you believe in the American people and support their right to own firearms free of regulation, or you believe that they are untrustworthy and need to be controlled. If you really believe that the populace cannot be trusted with assault weapons, then you should have no faith that they would relinquish those weapons voluntarily.
Beto, you're left going door to door to confiscate those weapons. If you want to eradicate them from the hands of criminals, that is the only way. So begins the descent into totalitarianism.
P.S. I, for one, believe that he would have no problem going door to door, once he came into power. Totalitarians always start out making promises that are impossible to keep and then enforce them by more realistic, lethal means. Hence the need for the general population to be armed with so-called assault weapons.
Something along those lines shot through my head Tuesday evening as I watched about 15 minutes of the Democratic debate that was held in my home state of Ohio (15 minutes was about all I could take before I had to turn on Blackish). About halfway through the debate Anderson Cooper directed an unusually poignant question towards Beto O'Rourke (the transcript is here), addressing O'Rourke's recent statements regarding a mandatory buyback of assault weapons. After quoting the Congressman's own words, Cooper asked, "...You said police wouldn't be going door to door. So how exactly are you going to force people to give up their weapons? You don't even know who has those weapons."
Cooper challenged O'Rourke to add some substance to the rhetoric he's been employing on the campaign trail, and, let's just say, O'Rourke failed miserably. He sounded like an idealist who has never interacted with reality in any meaningful way. The question, of course, led to other candidates sounding off on the issue. The progressives were all trying to sound more totalitarian than each other, while the moderates were trying to make excuses for why they weren't as totalitarian as the progressives. It was all very depressing. All the while the group of politicians and entrepreneurs was using generic terms like "machine guns" and "assault-style weapons," demonstrating conclusively that they have no idea what kind of guns they're even trying ban.
I'd like to focus on Beto for a moment because I think his response to Cooper's question was particularly revealing. Beto is the idealist of the group. He's the dreamer. He's the guy who wants to be in power so badly, which is always dangerous, because he really, truly wants to change the world. Not only does he want to change the world, but he genuinely believes that he is the one person qualified to change the world. He's going to make this world a better place, the Bill of Rights be damned! True believers like Beto are the most dangerous kind of all!
Lost amidst the chaos of a debate featuring a dozen candidates was Beto's perspective on humanity. When faced with the reality of how he would force people to give up their assault weapons without the use of force, he again spewed inspirational rhetoric. He said, "So I expect my fellow Americans to follow the law, the same way that we enforce any provision, any law that we have right now." Moments later he added, "But the expectation is that Americans will follow the law. I believe in this country. I believe in my fellow Americans. I believe that they will do the right thing."
Let that sink in for a moment. Go back and reread that once or twice. Really think about that. Okay, here we go.
Congressman, you believe in your fellow Americans, but you don't think you can trust them with assault weapons? If you really believed in the people of this nation, you wouldn't try to micromanage their lives. If you really believed that the people of this great nation had a proclivity to do the right thing, you would not be Progressive Democrat who sees legislation and regulation as the panacea for all that ails mankind.
Congressman, you don't really believe in the American people. You believe that the American public cannot and should not be trusted with a specific type of weapon. You believe that those weapons will be used for evil and must be confiscated.
Congressman, isn't murder illegal? Do murderers obey laws? Of course not! People who choose to take the lives of their fellow citizens have already abandoned the rule of law and, therefore, have no apprehension about sourcing weapons illegally. When you make laws, only law-abiding citizens follow them, which is precisely why gun-control laws are consistently ineffective. Taking weapons out of the hands of those who use them lawfully is hardly the answer to stopping crime. History has repeatedly shown that making an item illegal will not keep it out of the hands of criminals. Even if you ban the manufacture of assault weapons, human ingenuity will find a way!
Beto illustrates perfectly the self-contradictory folly of liberalism. It simultaneously insists that man is essentially good, but also attempts to over-regulate him. Elitist pride is the linchpin to this convoluted ideology. Mankind will have peace and harmony, they tell us, if everyone simply follows our rules!
Laws are only as good as the people you expect to follow them, but if you expect people to do the right thing, then oppressive laws are not necessary. Congressman O'Rourke dreams of a Utopia where cake is both edible and retainable, but he is nonetheless left with an either/or proposition. Either you believe in the American people and support their right to own firearms free of regulation, or you believe that they are untrustworthy and need to be controlled. If you really believe that the populace cannot be trusted with assault weapons, then you should have no faith that they would relinquish those weapons voluntarily.
Beto, you're left going door to door to confiscate those weapons. If you want to eradicate them from the hands of criminals, that is the only way. So begins the descent into totalitarianism.
P.S. I, for one, believe that he would have no problem going door to door, once he came into power. Totalitarians always start out making promises that are impossible to keep and then enforce them by more realistic, lethal means. Hence the need for the general population to be armed with so-called assault weapons.
Comments
Post a Comment