Via Alphecca and Say Uncle this Washington Post editorial
repeats a lie from a previous editorial. I sometimes wonder if
they repeat these lies on purpose or if they are just
ignorant/careless/stupid:
As writer Jenny Price noted in a Dec. 25 op-ed in The Post, only 160 of
the 12,000 guns used to kill people every year are employed in
legitimate self-defense; guns in the home are used seven times more
often for homicide than for self-defense.
I corrected Ms. Price in my previous post. No need to do it again. This editorial goes on to the expected conclusion.
Political long shot that it may be, a national ban
on the general manufacture, sale and ownership of handguns ought be
enacted. It would not pacify kids or adults with violent tendencies,
and it might not curb general criminal activity markedly. But it might
well save thousands of lives. Handgun exceptions could be made for
federal, state and local law enforcement and military agencies;
collectors of antique firearms; federally licensed handgun sporting
clubs with certain safety procedures; security guard services; and
licensed dealers, importers or manufacturers that are determined to be
meeting those needs.
Such a bill was proposed more than a decade ago by Sen. John Chafee
(R-R.I.), who has since died. “I hear people say it’s a radical
proposal,” he said then. “Well, I think to have the current situation
is radical. No other country has anything like it.” He described
slaughter by handguns as killing in record numbers, threatening
education and pushing the high costs of education even higher. So
what’s new today?
I’ll answer that question. The data is even more
overwhelming than it was a decade ago–weapon restrictions do not save lives. They
divert resources that would be better spent elsewhere.
Now, editors at the Washington Post, answer Just One Question.
Notice too, how, when one socialist institution is failing (they mention education in this case, but it could just well have been subsidized health care or anything else) they do not blame the failing institutions or the failed reasoning that created them. Instead they blame whatever freedoms we have remaining.
Canada’s crime problem is the fault of the U.S., Brittian’s crime is our fault too no doubt, New York’s crime problem is the fault of states that have more freedom, and yet have far less crime, etc. Cuba is poor, not because socialists have been terrorizing the population for decades, oh no. Cuba is poor because of the mean old, capitalist U.S..
They all seem to be saying, “If only we had absolute, total power, THEN things would be super great.”
Just as predicted in “The Road to Serfdom”: http://tinyurl.com/am7u6
Ordered the book – you’ve referenced it so often, it’s obviously made an impression.
This reminds me of the rationalization of the Magic Cure. My Shaman gives me a Magic Rabbit’s Foot to cure my ailment. Now, one of three things is going to happen for sure;
1. I get better, in which case the shaman will take credit.
2. I stay the same, in which case the shaman will advise a bigger rabbit’s foot, or perhaps he’ll dance around and shake his rattle for a bit.
3. I’ll get worse, in which case the shaman will claim that I did not consult him soon enough.
The shaman’s (read “charlatan’s) “powers” are thoroughly and intricately connected with anything that happens. So it is with politicians.
Probably written by Colbert King. He is someone on the editorial board at the Post who I generally admire but whose eyes seem to cross when the subject of guns comes up. Quoting an inaccurate fact from someone else’s op-ed piece just seems to be par for the course with WaPo.
Shortly after the House passed the gun ban repeal last year, the Post published an editorial that was so incoherent and fallacious that it surprised even me, so I think that the biggest part of the mix is that they are such zealous true believers in the panaceas of gun control that they are convinced that no fact can possibly be true that does not support a ban on guns. It’s not so much a lie as an all-encompassing, psychologically iron-clad delusion.