But we do know that race and poverty are correlated. And we know that
poverty and crime are correlated. And we know that race and political
affiliation are correlated. Therefore, my team (Clinton) is more likely to use guns to shoot innocent people, whereas the other team (Trump) is more likely to use guns for sporting and defense.
That’s a gross generalization. Obviously. Your town might be totally different.
So
it seems to me that gun control can’t be solved because Democrats are
using guns to kill each other – and want it to stop – whereas Republicans are using guns to defend against Democrats.
Psychologically, those are different risk profiles. And you can’t
reconcile those interests, except on the margins. For example, both
sides might agree that rocket launchers are a step too far. But
Democrats are unlikely to talk Republicans out of gun ownership because
it comes off as “Put down your gun so I can shoot you.”
1 comment:
Nicely said. but the implication that Liberals might be convinced (well, more like coerced) to take a more "middle ground" approach to Gun Control is sadly lacking.
Liberals/Gun Grabbers (but I repeat my self) will never yield an inch in their demands, any more that legitimate firearms owners can see any reason for "compromise" where the Other Side isn't conceding anything.
It's a lovely screed, and I so wish that there was a sunrise to which we could all look forward.
NOT going to happen, but it's still something that we can all look forwerd to as soon as the Liberals all die peacefully of old age and gloated satisfaction, and their children look around saying "WTF?"
Post a Comment