Plenty of research, plenty of information, zero mention of the second amendment or the core principles behind it;
In other words, he didn’t make the case. Instead he argued purely within The Enemy’s framework, proving who had all the control over the conversation. Human rights, and the power relations between citizens and government, were apparently not even worth mentioning, yet those are THE points to be made. Listen to their words very carefully. Lott and Kelly both took the bait, hook, line and sinker, and ran with it. It’s sad. The term, “too clever by half” comes to mind.
In fact, a fundamental human right is being impugned and attacked without being mentioned– as though it didn’t exist– as though infringements on that right aren’t specifically prohibited. “Machineguns are already highly regulated, and aren’t used in crimes” as if that would matter– as if your rights depend on statistics– as if a certain set of infrigements to your rights is all we’re going to talk about. It would be like discussing how to cook your mother for dinner, with no mention of the mother’s moral right to life or the legal prohibition against killing her and eating her. Cannibals are arguing over the cannibal pot, and the audience is to see one chef as the more clever culinary tactician than the other. No doubt many of us on both sides are cheering along like mindless sports fans at a game. We are better than this. It’s not a goddamned game.