Uncommon Sense

politics and society are, unfortunately, much the same thing

Common Core shows more political agenda – this time against guns

Common Core-aligned writing lesson on gun debate fuels claims of political agenda
October 15, 2015 by Perry Chiaramonte

Common Core backers are sneaking a social and political agenda into nationalized curriculum, say critics, who now have new ammo in a writing lesson plan for teachers that they say gives a slanted perspective of the gun debate.

A study guide dubbed, “The Battle Over Gun Control,” authored by KQED, a northern Californian affiliate of National Public Radio, and the nonprofit, taxpayer-subsidized National Writing Project, states that “moderate gun control” measures introduced following the Sandy Hook school massacre were deep-sixed by the “powerful political influence” of the NRA. Second Amendment advocates say the wording, in supplemental material designed to help teachers plan instruction, frames the debate in a one-sided fashion aimed at influencing young minds.

“The issue took center stage in December, when a lone gunman entered an elementary school in Newtown, Conn., killing 20 children and six adults in one of the deadliest mass shootings in U.S. history,” reads an intro from the guide. “Yet, months down the line, the issue remains highly controversial: An attempt to enact moderate new gun control measures this spring was voted down in the Senate, due in part to the powerful political influence of gun rights groups like the National Rifle Association.”

Concerned parents and longtime critics of Common Core say that this is just another example of flaws associated with the federally-imposed standards. While Common Core itself is not technically a curriculum, it drives classroom lessons by imposing a standard, nationalized test. Both private and nonprofit curriculum providers tout their material for its alignment with the standards tested in the Common Core examinations.

“This guide shows that the common core philosophy of education is coming to all schools.” Alice Linahan, founder of Voices Empower, a grassroots organization that opposes Common Core, told FoxNews.com. “It’s a shift from teaching fact to teaching attitudes, belief and behavior.”

Linahan says that she is not so much concerned with the gun-control views in the lesson but that such methods may leave students unprepared for the real world.

“Does a child get a job because they can read well, write well and have competent math skills, or do they get a job for supporting gay marriage and gun control?” she said.

“The Battle Over Gun Control” also lists eight relevant Common Core standards for English, Language Arts and Social Studies and how to use methods like information gathering from varied media and other formats, comprehension of informational texts and analytical writing with substantive arguments. The Department of Education funds the National Writing Project with grants that total more than $25 million annually.

Critics say the guide purports to give both sides of the hotly contested topic, but steers the debate to favor stricter gun control. In what the authors refer to as “key points on the gun control issue” from an NPR blog. The “Topic Background” contained in the guide explains that “interpreting the intent of the framers of the Constitution is at the heart of the gun-control debate.”

The materials offer “guiding questions” for students such as:

-“Are rules and guidelines that were created over 200 years ago still applicable today?”

-“When a greater number of people in our society own guns, are we safer or more at risk?”

-“How accurate is this statement: ‘The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.’”

Other resources provided are an infographic titled, “Armed to the teeth: Gun ownership in America,” and originally published by GOOD magazine, which calls itself “a magazine for the global citizen.”

It is not clear how widely the lesson has been distributed, although schools throughout the country have used lessons prepared by the National Writing Project.” Officials for KQED did not respond to requests for comment.

National Writing Project Executive Director Elyse Eidman-Aadahl said that both her organization and the NPR affiliate stand by the supplemental teaching materials.

“[T]he National Writing Project and KQED both feel it is important for students to engage in fact-based conversations about issues that matter to them, their families, and their communities,” she told FoxNews.com in a written statement.

Linahan says that materials such as “The Battle Over Gun Control” will be continued to be used in schools nationwide if the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, which provides funding for schools, is re-authorized.

“What will be mandated in the act, if it’s renewed, will continue a shift in our education system and makes it federal law,” she said, adding that her organization, Voices Empower, is looking to campaign against the upcoming re-authorization.

The Common Core State Standards Initiative was devised by an association of the nation’s governors and backed by the Obama administration in 2009 with the goal of setting a uniform standard for grades K-12 nationwide. Some 45 states, in many cases enticed by federal grants, have signed on and are testing students in grades 3-8 and once in high school.

Critics of the initiative maintain that it is not the federal government’s job to impose educational standards.

bias, bureaucracy, children, culture, education, gun rights, ideology, indoctrination, left wing, liberalism, nanny state, pandering, philosophy, political correctness, progressive, propaganda, public policy, reform, scandal, second amendment

Filed under: bias, bureaucracy, children, culture, education, gun rights, ideology, indoctrination, left wing, liberalism, nanny state, pandering, philosophy, political correctness, progressive, propaganda, public policy, reform, scandal, second amendment

Cornell Professor Takes on “Gun-Free Zones”

original article: Cornell Professor Takes on “Gun-Free Zones”
October 5, 2015 by Shawn

The media always carries water for the Democrats, but they’ve been worse than usual following the shooting at Umpqua Community College in Roseburg, Oregon. Perhaps inspired by President Obama’s ignorant rant hours after the tragedy, the mainstream news organizations have decided this mass shooting is about one thing and one thing only: gun control.

It’s therefore a little surprising that USA Today gave William Jacobson, a professor at Cornell University, space in their op-ed section to promote the opposite point of view. Apparently you have to throw the gun-rights crowd a small bone now and then so you can have plausible deniability when people accuse your newspaper of advocacy journalism, aka, left-wing bias.

“In other mass shootings, the shooters’ motivations have varied, from racism to religion to anti-religion,” wrote Jacobson. “There has not been a single common theme, except for one.”

According to the professor, the one thing that ties these mass shootings together is the fact that almost all of them have taken place in so-called “gun-free zones.” In other words, Umpqua Community College – like the theater in Aurora, Sandy Hook Elementary, Columbine, and the black church in Charleston (to name just a few) – banned firearms on the premises. Strangely enough, that did not deter Christopher Mercer.

Gun-free zones presume the good intentions of those entering the zone. And the overwhelming majority have such good intentions. But for those who have bad intentions, gun-free zones turn schools and other locations into shooting galleries. The good people are unarmed, the evil person is armed.

Why is this so hard for gun control advocates to understand? A child could see the simple logic here. Yes, the college banned firearms. They also, presumably, had firm rules against murder. If someone is willing to put their life and freedom in jeopardy to kill others, they aren’t going to be stopped by a policy banning guns. This is kindergarten stuff, seriously. But we keep hearing the same tired refrain from the left, as though any argument can trump this obvious counter.

Some have claimed that these killers actually seek out gun-free zones, knowing they will be less likely to run up against armed resistance. That may be true, but there’s not much evidence to support this assertion. In most cases, the killer is either shooting up a place he has some connection to or is simply looking for a place where a lot of people will be gathered together. It just so happens that most of these places are also gun-free zones, making their murderous job a lot easier.

Liberals wave away the idea of a gun-toting hero as a conservative fantasy. They claim that it’s just going to lead to more violence. But no one’s talking about making it mandatory for everyone to carry. We’re merely saying that Americans should have the right and the ability to defend themselves. We should not be forced – by either the law or private policy – to become helpless victims, just relying on hope to keep us safe from people like the Oregon shooter. No government has the right to put its citizens in mortal danger, least of all this one.

bias, crisis, Democrats, extremism, gun rights, ideology, left wing, liberalism, news media, pandering, progressive, propaganda, public policy, second amendment, tragedy

Filed under: bias, crisis, Democrats, extremism, gun rights, ideology, left wing, liberalism, news media, pandering, progressive, propaganda, public policy, second amendment, tragedy

No free speech for gun rights?

original article: Lawsuit filed over NRA T-shirt at middle school
May 11, 2015 by Kate White

The mother of a teenager who wore a National Rifle Association T-shirt to school is suing the Logan County Board of Education alleging her son’s constitutional rights were violated.

Tanya Lardieri filed the lawsuit in federal court last month on behalf of her son, Jared Marcum. Marcum was charged in 2013 by police with disrupting an educational process and obstructing an officer after he was asked to turn the shirt inside out or face suspension by Logan Middle School staff. A judge later dismissed the charges.

The lawsuit seeks $200,000 in compensatory damages and $250,000 in punitive damages. Shana Thompson, attorney for the school board, couldn’t be reached Monday. Lardieri and Marcum are represented by Chapmanville attorney Ben White.

On April 18, 2013, the lawsuit states, Marcum, a member of the National Rifle Association, who was 14 at the time, wore a pro-Second Amendment T-shirt to the middle school.

“The shirt was an un-alarming olive green tee shirt bearing the NRA logo, which is the letters ‘NRA’ in black, the words ‘PROTECT YOUR RIGHT,’ an image of a hunting rifle and the Official NRA Logo which has an Eagle and two crossed firearms,” the complaint states.

Marcum was approached by faculty during his lunch period and asked to remove the shirt or turn it inside out. He was taken to the principal’s office when he refused. He was suspended for one day, according to previous Gazette reports.

The lawsuit claims the shirt complied with the county and school’s dress code policies at the time and didn’t display a violent or threatening image.

Marcum now attends Logan County High School. The lawsuit identifies him only by his initials, but the incident has previously been reported by the Gazette, as Marcum and his parents have spoken publicly about it. The case is assigned to U.S. District Court Judge Thomas Johnston in Charleston.

Also named in the lawsuit as defendants are: Phyllis Adkins, who was president of the school board at the time of the incident; William Davis, vice president of the board; Mark McGrew, the board’s current president; Pat White and James Frye, both board members; Wilma Zigmond, superintendent of Logan County schools; Ernestine Sutherland, principal of Logan Middle School; David Burroway, Howard Rockhold and Christopher Marcus, all teachers at Logan Middle; and the school’s secretary Anita Gore.

children, civil rights, culture, education, free speech, gun rights, hypocrisy, ideology, left wing, liberalism, litigation, nanny state, oppression, political correctness, progressive, relativism, scandal, second amendment

Filed under: children, civil rights, culture, education, free speech, gun rights, hypocrisy, ideology, left wing, liberalism, litigation, nanny state, oppression, political correctness, progressive, relativism, scandal, second amendment

You know there’s no such thing as a perfect political candidate, right?

A story from Epic Times relates a poll on the viability of a Ben Carson candidacy for president:

ONLY 31% SAY BEN CARSON IS THE RIGHT CHOICE FOR PRESIDENT
May 5, 2015 by EpicTimes

The biggest grievance I’ve heard about Dr. Carson is his comments on the 2nd Amendment. In asking whether Carson is the right man for the job, one comment exemplified many others I’ve seen elsewhere:

carson_guns

Now, it’s worth noting a few things here. This person “Julie” seems to think she knows exactly what Carson believes about guns (possible, but I have my doubts) and that this issue alone is enough for her to consider him unworthy of being president. Hmm. Are there single issues that should make or break a candidate? Sure, I think so.

There are some pass/fail issues on my list. By pass/fail, I don’t mean I’ll gladly vote for a candidate simply if that person espouses what I think are the correct beliefs on such and such issues. I mean there are several hoops for a candidate to pass before I’ll even consider voting for them. Abortion would be one such issue: if you’re willing to play semantic games with personhood, denying children in the womb all civil rights (sometimes even children outside the womb) merely for the convenience of someone else, I don’t believe I can trust you with anyone’s rights. Do you remember who else from human history used the “they’re not really people” argument? If you’re willing to take that road, you’re not getting my vote. Other issues are heavy like this one; acknowledging that the most innocent of humanity have the right to life just like the rest of us is merely the first such hoop for me.

The second amendment is a pretty big issue too, I think. Now, most of the criticism of Carson on the issue of gun rights seem to mindlessly treat him as though Carson approves of any and all gun control legislation. He doesn’t. From what I’ve heard him say, Dr. Carson’s concerns about gun violence are hardly the same as the rabidly anti-gun control freak progressives. We conservatives like to say we’re far more open minded and intellectually honest that the political left. That’s often true, but it’s something that has to be proven every day. Conservatives are the last people who should be proving this statement by Dr. Carson:

Sometimes people just hear one little thing and they don’t hear anything else.

So you heard Carson say something about guns that you don’t like. I’m with you. But have you actually paid attention to the other things he’s said on that same issue?

DR. BEN CARSON AGAINST GUN REGISTRATION: WE ‘SHOULD BE REALLY CONCERNED’ ABOUT MARTIAL LAW

Ben Carson On Gun Rights: 2nd Amendment Doesn’t Cover Tanks, Rocket Launchers

Now, I’m not sure I agree with Carson about that tanks and rocket launchers, but I’m not sure I disagree with him either. But he’s totally right about gun registration. If you’ve not taken the time to actually research Dr. Carson on the gun rights issue you should show some of that open mindedness you believe you posses: Attacking Ben Carson Over Gun Conrol.

When people condemn Carson for his supposed stance on gun control (either because they aren’t paying attention or because he needs to clarify a few things) it sure sounds like they are demanding perfection, especially when they don’t seem to care about anything else he has to offer.

There could be some merit to the issue of Carson’s lack of political experience. Then again, political experience (like handing out forms) hasn’t been such a valuable asset to people who’ve been running the country has it? However, political incompetence is not sufficient to explain the current troubles the United States is experiencing. In fact, with what President Obama is doing it seems like he is succeeding in precisely what he set out to do, things like “fundamentally transforming America”. The harm we’re suffering as a nation is the natural result of Obama’s philosophy. That’s the embedded progressive, “government knows best” philosophy that’s been employed for decades. Obama is merely the latest player in that long tradition of concentrating power. Dr. Carson has the opposite philosophy, something that hasn’t been tried in a generation. That’s worth something to me.

And because Carson isn’t a professional politician he’s not trained in the fundamental flaws of politics: peddling influence and spending other people’s money. I don’t want a professional liar in the oval office. I’ve had enough of that. I don’t want a political insider running things whose time is largely occupied by paying back political favors gathered over a lengthy career in politics. I don’t want a president beholden to innumerable special interests. I want someone running the show who knows how to make a living outside the public sector, whose made a name for him/her self doing some grand things of his/her own initiative.

Republicans have a reputation for eating each other’s candidates alive long before the primary elections. Republicans also have a reputation for being very logical and driven by common sense while simultaneously being politically stupid. Some of those descriptions are good and should remain, but the other things need to change. Attacking each other’s preferred candidate has worked great in the past, right? Why don’t we save that sort of thing for the general election in 2016 instead?

american, bias, campaign, conservative, culture, elections, government, gun rights, ideology, politics, Republicans, right wing, second amendment, video

Filed under: american, bias, campaign, conservative, culture, elections, government, gun rights, ideology, politics, Republicans, right wing, second amendment,

Common Core: You have rights ‘in certain situations’

November 17, 2014 by Dave Jolly

Brad McQueen is a public school teacher in Tucson, Arizona. He was also a Common Core insider who became aware of the dangers of curriculum. Those dangers so alarmed McQueen that he wrote the anti-Common Core book The Cult of Common Core: Obama’s Final Solution for Your Child’s Mind and Our Country’s Exceptionalism.

One day recently, he discovered that a US Constitution/Bill of Rights poster that hung in his classroom was not teaching the truth. The poster, created by the Arizona Foundation for Legal Services and Education had paraphrased the Second Amendment in such a way as to teach a lie. The poster read:

“You have the constitutional right to, in certain situations, ‘keep and bear arms’ without government interference.”

Note that whoever wrote the poster stated ‘in certain situations’ which is nowhere stated in the Second Amendment or Constitution. McQueen goes on to explain that there is a purposeful effort to teach specific liberal concepts in today’s public education instead of the truth.

McQueen wrote:

“When I was working on the Common Core test last year, the PARCC exam, I was told that the new Common Core way of writing and thinking demands that kids cite the ‘experts’ in the texts that are presented to them on the exam when writing their essays and not rely on their own thinking or opinions.”
“I was told that if they wrote about their own opinions or their own thinking that they would fail the Common Core test.”

“I was also told that they expected that teachers would mimic this new Common Core way of writing and thinking in their classroom instruction. The true goal of Common Core is to have kids parrot back talking points, determined by the administration in power no doubt, rather than to truly think for themselves.”

“What if a teacher used the ‘expert’ opinion put forth on the erroneous U.S. Constitution poster I have in my classroom? With a few small changes in wording to our founding documents kids would be presented with quite a different view of their rights guaranteed in those same documents.”

“Kids instructed in the Common Core method of thinking and writing would know that they had better parrot back the ‘experts’ on that poster, or the experts in their Common Core aligned textbooks as their grades, their test scores, and their teachers’ paychecks may depend on their mastery of this skill.”

“Luckily, I caught the bogus wording of the Second Amendment on the class poster and my class and I compared the poster’s wording to the original document, the U.S. Constitution.”

“The kids in my class were furious and I liked that they were furious. It shows that our kids are still independent thinkers. However, as Common Core takes hold that will all be changing soon and perhaps in just one generation.”

Like McQueen, others have been warning that Common Core is more interested in training students to believe and think the way liberals want them to think and believe than they are in teaching the truths. It is nothing more than a socialist propaganda brainwashing tool designed to raise a generation of good socialist comrades. That’s why it is so important to repeal and replace Common Core in every state as soon as possible before it’s too late. As McQueen said, it could happen in just one generation and your kids and grandkids are that generation being targeted.

original article: Common Core Insider Teacher Warns of Common Core Brainwashing

bias, children, constitution, education, freedom, government, gun rights, ideology, indoctrination, left wing, liberalism, nanny state, political correctness, progressive, propaganda, reform, second amendment

Filed under: bias, children, constitution, education, freedom, government, gun rights, ideology, indoctrination, left wing, liberalism, nanny state, political correctness, progressive, propaganda, reform, second amendment

Concealed Carry Up 130%, Violent Crime & Murder Down 22% Since 2007

July 9, 2014 by Bob Owens

A report released  by the Crime Prevention Research Center (CPRC) today reveals that at least 11.1 million Americans have valid concealed carry permits (PDF), and that the number of Americans who can lawfully concealed carry is actually much higher due to the fact that not all states have up-date-data, and the fact that four states (and most of Montana) does not require permits to carry concealed.

The last comprehensive report on the number of concealed carry permit holders was completed three years ago by the U.S. Government Accountability Office and showed that 8 million Americans held a concealed carry permit.

CPRC collected the most recent data available for each state and the results showed that there are total of 11,113,013 Americans who currently hold concealed carry permits representing 4.8 percent of the total population.

The number of concealed carry permit holders is likely much higher than 11.1 million because numbers are not available for all states that issue permits, such as New York. Additionally, four states and the majority of Montana do not require
that residents have a concealed handgun permit to carry within the state so the number of residents who carry a concealed weapon is not recorded.

The percent of the adult population with concealed handgun permits is determined by how difficult it is to get the permits, how long the permits have been available, and whether the government has discretion over who gets the
permit.

The report also examines the violent crime rate in relation to the rising percentage of the adult population with concealed carry permits. Between 2007 and the preliminary estimates for 2013, murder rates have fallen from 5.6 to 4.4 per 100,000 – a 22 percent drop in the murder rate at the same time that the percentage of the adult population with permits soared by 130 percent. Overall violent crime also fell by 22 percent over that period of time.

The report shows a dramatic rise in the number of permits during the Obama Presidency.

During the eight years from 1999 to 2007, the number of permits increased by about 240,000 per year. From 2008 to 2011,  they increased almost fourfold  to 844,000 net new permits per year, and from the end of 2011 to 2014 the yearly increase in permits issued has skyrocketed to 1,390,000 net new permits per year.

read full article: Concealed Carry Up 130%, Violent Crime & Murder Down 22% Since 2007

culture, gun rights, second amendment, study

Filed under: culture, gun rights, second amendment, study

School Principals Use Police Against Parents with Gun Permits

June 25, 2014 by Dean Weingarten

Gun Permit

Gun Permit

Two principals in widely separated states tried to use police against parents with gun permits. The good news: both principals ended up on the losing side when the parents refused to fold and took them to court. In the most recent case, the principal at Stratton Elementary School in Arlington, Massachusetts contacted police after the father showed the principal his gun permit. Not his gun…his permit. The father had come to talk to the principal about a drawing the son had made . . .

read full article: School Principals Use Police Against Parents with Gun Permits

discrimination, education, government, gun rights, ideology, intolerance, litigation, nanny state, oppression, philosophy, political correctness, public policy, second amendment

Filed under: discrimination, education, government, gun rights, ideology, intolerance, litigation, nanny state, oppression, philosophy, political correctness, public policy, second amendment

Child Disciplined for Thinking about a Gun

May 23, 2014 by Bobby Eberle

The thought police are at it again, and this time the victim is an 8-year-old boy. As part of a school “imagination” project, the boy drew a picture of a gun. Of course, the school freaked out and claimed the boy’s action demonstrated “bad behavior.” What is going on in this country?

As reported KKTV.com in Colorado Springs, second grade student Cody Smith was at school and was told to go outside with his class, “look at the clouds, and then use his imagination to draw what he saw.” Cody looked up and drew a picture of a gun.

Because it was a gun, the teacher at Talbott Elementary in Widefield, Colorado called him into the office, and then filed a behavior report. His parents say that’s too much.

The report says Kody showed behavior that is disruptive to the entire learning community. The parents were worried that this would be on his permanent school record. The Widefield School District says it will not be.

read full article

children, culture, education, ideology, indoctrination, intolerance, left wing, liberalism, nanny state, oppression, pandering, political correctness, second amendment

Filed under: children, culture, education, ideology, indoctrination, intolerance, left wing, liberalism, nanny state, oppression, pandering, political correctness, second amendment

Suddenly we care about the law of the land?

Respect the Constitution

Respect the Constitution

For years progressives (of both major parties) have pushed ever greater restrictions on free speech, freedom of religion, right to bear arms, the freedom of association, etc. Ironically, some rights not even mentioned in the constitution are lauded as sacrosanct.

Take for example abortion. While health care undergoes an overhaul with Obamacare, including ever more regulation of the health care industry, the invented right of abortion somehow escapes certain health care regulations that should pertain to it, especially since this “right” is sold to the American people as a “health care issue.”

But at this moment the big talking point in defense of the Affordable Care Act is “law of the land.” Please. If progressives gave a damn about the law of the land why all the push for gun control, hate speech codes, etc.? Progressives can pretend the law of the land actually means something when it is expedient to do so. Don’t let them forget it. If this talking point is good enough for Obamacare it’s good enough for rights that are actually in the constitution. Stop giving up when new laws are put in place to restrict constitutional rights. Speak up and make the point heard. But since “law of the land” is used ad nauseam for Obamacare it is now legitimate parlance for real constitutional rights. If they ignore this point when you bring it up they are giving you the right to ignore the “law of the land” when you disagree with it too. It’s one thing when Joe schmo progressives do that, but entirely different when a legislator or other officer of the government does this.

abortion, bias, constitution, Democrats, first amendment, free speech, government, gun rights, hypocrisy, ideology, indoctrination, left wing, liberalism, political correctness, propaganda, public policy, second amendment, socialism

Filed under: abortion, bias, constitution, Democrats, first amendment, free speech, government, gun rights, hypocrisy, ideology, indoctrination, left wing, liberalism, political correctness, propaganda, public policy, second amendment, socialism

Education or abstinence, freedom or regulation – make up your mind

What’s the preferred solution for dealing with teenage pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases? The notion of abstinence is frequently ridiculed as pointless. Education about safety is touted as the best solution.

What’s the preferred solution for dealing with guns? Abstinence is touted as the best solution, and education about safety is ridiculed as pointless. The argument “they’re going to do it anyway” is conspicuously absent from the same people who say kids are going to engage in sex anyway.

Surprisingly, the gun control crowd seems to find evidence that abstinence works with guns, and that education doesn’t. Never you mind the logical contortion and intellectual dishonesty required to “find” such evidence. Funny how people find evidence of what they like, and conveniently can’t find evidence supporting what they don’t like.

With women’s rights (code for abortion) the political left tells us even a 13 year old girl should have an unregulated right to abortion. No parental permission or knowledge required. But when Planned Parenthood holds a poster contest to commemorate an anniversary of Roe v Wade, we find that any participant in said contest younger than 18 is required to prove parental consent. Hmm. With abortion, we are not supposed to ask questions. We are supposed to simply conform to the argument that the issue at stake is constitutional rights, and that is enough to squelch debate, because said right is sacrosanct. No challenge should be taken seriously. Because, if any regulation of abortion is permitted, that proves a slippery slope, inviting further regulation. And regulation, in itself, threatens the rights being regulated.

The right to speech is treated similarly. With some notable exceptions, the political left generally prefers to keep speech free from regulation (unless you happen to have an opinion different from theirs). If we make communism illegal, that is a violation of the first amendment. If we regulate violence on television or in movies, that violates the first amendment. If pornography is treated as exploitation or harmful, this mentality somehow threatens all speech. The issue is not about the harm these things cause to society, the issue is that a constitutional right is at stake. And that is enough to squelch debate, because said right is sacrosanct. Any regulation proves a threat to the right, and that is unacceptable.

But the right to own guns is met with precisely the opposite attitude. On this issue regulation is touted as vital to the survival of civilization. The more regulation the better. Never mind that pesky old document, it’s out of date anyway. We are to ignore examples of how regulation failed, while individual action succeeded. Textbook example of how to deal with a school shooter.

How can one support constitutional rights, especially with the ferocity the left has for abortion and speech, and yet utterly disregard the right to keep and bear arms – the right to defend oneself, especially against government? Selective reasoning at its best. What is this blind faith and adoration the left has for government based on?

Filed under: abstinence, bias, culture, education, first amendment, free speech, government, gun rights, hypocrisy, ideology, indoctrination, left wing, liberalism, nanny state, philosophy, political correctness, politics, propaganda, public policy, regulation, second amendment, tragedy

Pages

Categories

May 2017
M T W T F S S
« Apr    
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031