Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Gun Control & RKBA

Showing Original Post only (View all)

Nuclear Unicorn

(19,497 posts)
Thu Feb 4, 2016, 03:30 PM Feb 2016

Is the "well-regulated" argument for gun control inadvertently reinforcing RW talking points? [View all]

Many gun control advocates treat "regulation" to mean "restricted" whereas those without an prohibitionist agenda would see it as referring to "well-performing."

In fact, there is nothing restrictive in the nature of regulation. I believe it is an inherently RW argument to interpret regulations as restrictive, designed to deny otherwise well-meaning people with legitimate intentions access to the thing being "regulated." The RW constantly complains that regulations kill business whereas Progressives tend to see regulations as improving business environments and worker safety so as to make the economy more efficient/well-performing, not less.

So why reinforce RW talking points and validate their suspicions?

23 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
WHAT THE HELL??? Herman4747 Feb 2016 #1
1. It's not a "mere property" right. Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2016 #2
sure are a lot of gun toting pre-school dangerous criminals in the USa nt msongs Feb 2016 #3
What does that even mean? Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2016 #4
That poster seldom makes sense DonP Feb 2016 #7
It's like having someone angrily throw a fistful of feathers at you. Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2016 #8
A switchblade can be used in "self-defense"... Herman4747 Feb 2016 #9
If someone used a switchblade to fight of a violent criminal attacker that law would serve no Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2016 #11
Yes. beevul Feb 2016 #15
do you know why switchblades are banned? gejohnston Feb 2016 #17
I don't think that call is yours to make.... beevul Feb 2016 #5
If it were about "right to life", benEzra Feb 2016 #6
Interesting that you should mention "bicycle"... Herman4747 Feb 2016 #10
How about alcohol? No one ever stopped an attacker by getting drunk. Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2016 #12
I'm not in a place where I can commute, benEzra Feb 2016 #21
False dichotomy. Lizzie Poppet Feb 2016 #19
walk like an egyptian jimmy the one Feb 2016 #13
So you're adopting the RW interpretations. Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2016 #14
The following are taken from the Oxford English Dictionary... discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2016 #16
bracketing jimmy the one Feb 2016 #22
re: "Controlling citizen's arms was not much a concern in 1791, they weren't as dangerous..." discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2016 #23
Since the amendment doesn't restrict the RKBA to the militia... Lizzie Poppet Feb 2016 #18
You're correct but it's t fictions of others we're confronting. Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2016 #20
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»Is the "well-regulated" a...»Reply #0