Liberals and guns
Liberals love the Constitution. They especially love the Bill of Rights. They love all the Amendments.
Except for one: the Second Amendment.
When it comes to discussing the Second Amendment, liberals check at the door their ability to think rationally. In discussing the importance of any other portion of the Bill of Rights, liberals can quote legal precedent, news reports, and exhaustive studies. They can talk about the intentions of the Founding Fathers.
And they will, almost without exception, conclude the necessity of respecting, and not restricting, civil liberties.
So why do liberals have such a problem with the Second Amendment? Why do they lump all gun owners in the category of “gun nuts”? Why do they complain about the “radical extremist agenda of the NRA”? Why do they argue for greater restrictions?
Why do they start performing mental gymnastics worthy of a position in Bush’s Department of Justice to rationalize what they consider “reasonable” infringement of one of our most basic, fundamental, and revolutionary — that’s right, revolutionary — civil liberties?
Why do they pursue these policies at the risk of alienating voters who might otherwise vote Democrat? Why are they so dismissive of approximately 40% of American households that own one or more guns?
And why is their approach to the Second Amendment so different from their approach to all the others?
Well, if conversations on this blog about the issue of guns are in any way indicative of the way other liberals feel, maybe this stems from a basic misunderstanding.
So, allow me to attempt to explain the Second Amendment in a way that liberals should be able to endorse.
He’s getting a ribbing in comments there from the Tolerant Left. The Tolerant Left: Turning liberals into libertarians one gun owner at a time! Ask this guy.
Via Jay.
April 22nd, 2008 at 3:06 pm
Of course there is confusion: liberalism is the mental state of perpetual cognitive dissonance. You can believe in the supremacy of personal liberty — a libertarian — with internally consistent logic. Contrariwise, you can believe in the supremacy of social justice — a socialist — and still make sense of the world as you see it. But placing supreme importance on social justice AND personal liberty at the same time is impossible.
April 22nd, 2008 at 9:28 pm
liberalism is the mental state of perpetual cognitive dissonance
Word.
April 23rd, 2008 at 2:37 am
I read the whole thing. Pretty awesome. Some of the comments are pretty lame though. The 2nd is fer keeping teh slaves down? Who did we just fight to win our independence again? Barrack (Joyce Foundation) Obama thinks that it’s an individual right, and that makes it all okay? Say what?
April 23rd, 2008 at 7:02 am
Wow, that was a great read. I’m having trouble viewing the comments though. Something on the dailykos site seems not to be working.
April 23rd, 2008 at 10:33 am
Liberal: Logic’s retarded cousin
–or–
Liberals: making life equally miserable for everyone.
April 23rd, 2008 at 3:45 pm
Well, I have to admit – that was a surprisingly well-thought-out, well-researched, and well-reasoned read. Of course, for all those reasons, I am having a hard time believing it was actually posted at DK, but that is neither here nor there.
Now, most of the comments… that is the kind of material I expect from that webpage…