"Reason" a raison

Little French lingo for a Monday afternoon, since the President is badmouthing us in Paris at the climate change conference. On his other favorite topic, Reason magazine has the sense of it: "Obama Insists 'We Have to Do Something' About Mass Shootings but Can't Say What or Why It Would Work."
The Times describes Obama as increasingly exasperated by Congress's refusal to enact the gun controls he supports. Some of us are increasingly exasperated by Obama's failure to elucidate any logical connection between those measures and the crimes they supposedly would prevent.
It's a faith-based approach, which, actually, is another tie between his two favorite subjects.

UPDATE: It sounds as if the President's spokesman does have a specific plan:
The Obama administration is pressing for gun control, repeating a demand that Congress pass a ban on gun ownership for Americans on the no-fly list.

“If the U.S. Government has determined that it is too dangerous for you to board a plane then you shouldn’t be able to buy a gun,” White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said during a press conference in Paris today.... “Congress should pass this law before leaving for the Holidays,” Earnest said.
So, your proposal is that Congress should immediately give the executive branch unilateral authority to rescind any individual's Constitutional 2nd Amendment rights based on whatever criteria it likes, without any due process at all? That's a modest proposal.


MikeD said...

As I've commented before, the idea that we should forbid "terrorists" from purchasing guns is a "no-brainer". And that's a terrible, terrible thing. If something takes no thought, then it clearly is a bad idea. Because restricting anyone's liberty without deliberation is tyranny. And I also understand why this position is unpopular.

Terrorists should find it harder to get weapons. I'm fine with that. But if you don't even have enough evidence to arrest that person for a crime, then by the Fifth Amendment, the government is forbidden from depriving them of their rights or property. Because due process of the law is required to do so, not some unelected official's say so. Not some star chamber deciding that this individual might be a threat. And if someone is clearly a terrorist, then they should be arrested, not allowed to wander free and shop at gun stores (much less anywhere else).

Ymar Sakar said...

Death cults always have a "plan". That's kind of the problem.