Posted on 10/05/2015 6:45:20 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
"Doesn't it sound logical? Doesn't it sound safe?"
Based on his latest column, it seems like Washington Post editor Fred Hiatt could get behind a rewrite of John Lennon's Imagine and release an updated version to reflect today's call for gun control.
[Imagine] Prohibition… [Imagine] Mass buyback… [Imagine] A gun-free society...
He liked that last line so much, he asked his readers to repeat it with him: "Let's say that once again: A gun-free society." Bliss, he thinks.
Those words -- prohibition, mass buyback, gun-free society -- are what Hiatt says the NRA has rendered "unmentionable." And so he believes its time American citizens take them back and leave being armed to the professionals:
Doesn’t it sound logical? Doesn’t it sound safe? Wouldn’t it make sense to learn from other developed nations, which believe that only the military and law enforcers, when necessary, should be armed — and which as a result lose far, far fewer innocent people than die every year in the United States?
And Hiatt isn't even the least bit concerned that his suggestion could be used by the NRA to prove what it has always defined as a slippery slope with government regulation: "You see? Background checks today, confiscation tomorrow."
Bring it on, says Hiatt:
I understand how difficult it would be. This is a matter of changing the culture and norms of an entire society. It would take time.
Hiatt, undoubtedly, would be one of the first to volunteer to man the flame underneath all of the gun-owning frogs, in order to slowly boil away their ownership rights one by one before they realized what had happened. He exhibits a belief that begins with incremental gun-control before moving into complete confiscation. That will have to include a cultural movement to push the government along, he argues:
There has to be a cultural shift. Only then will Congress and the Supreme Court follow.
As we’ve seen over the past 15 years with same-sex marriage, such deep cultural change is difficult — and possible. Wyatt Earp, the frontier mentality, prying my cold dead fingers — I get all that. But Australia was a pioneer nation, too, and gave up its guns. Societies change, populations evolve.
And people are not immune, over time, to reason. Given how guns decimate poor black communities every day — not just when there are mass shootings, but every day — this is a civil rights issue. Given how many small children shoot themselves or their siblings accidentally, it is a family issue. Given the suicides that could be prevented, it is a mental health issue. On average 55 Americans shoot themselves to death every day. Every day!
The Supreme Court, which has misread the Second Amendment in its recent decisions, would have to revisit the issue. The court has corrected itself before, and if public opinion shifts it could correct itself again. If it did not, the Constitution would have to be amended.
It sounds hard, I know," Hiatt continues. "But it’s possible that if we started talking more honestly about the most logical, long-term goal, public opinion would begin to shift and the short-term gains would become more, not less likely, as the NRA had to play defense. We might end up with a safer country."
Hiatt's final argument is that "with only kitchen knives at hand," a lot less people die.
Echoing Hiatt's beliefs is fellow WaPo contributor and government professor at Georgetown University E.J. Dionne, who released a similar article on the very same day. In it, he applauded President Obama for stressing the need to politicize the latest mass shooting in Oregon in order to finally make a move on gun-control laws. Dionne stresses that the president was "forcing us to face reality." He says that it is high-time that politicians begin losing elections because of their opposition to gun control and alignment with "gun fanatics." He, like Hiatt, lauds government confiscation and buyback, as happened in Australia after a mass shooting in that country.
But Dionne's biggest gripe lies with conservatives whom he rhetorically pondered, "Is a dangerous and harebrained absolutism about weaponry really the issue on which American conservatives want to practice exceptionalism?"
Perhaps The Washington Post could lead by example and collect all guns owned by its employees, willingly of course, and then disarm its security personnel. Imagine a gun-free Washington Post. Say that with me: A gun-free Washington Post.
France is NOT gun free.
The muzzies there have no problem getting all the weapons they want, including fully automatic weapons.
The Charlie Hebdo attack in Paris is an example, as is the attempted mass murder on the Amsterdam to Paris train (apparently islamists in The Netherlands have no problem obtaining weapons either).
He might be on to something.
After Ted Kennedy murdered a young Girl using his Oldsmobile, GM discontinued the Line.
It only took them 40 Years to do it.
Guess what the WAPO editor can kiss.
Well, gun-free - except that Our Ruling Elite will have plenty of gunthugs and armed enforcement muscle to back up their imperious demands upon the peasantry.
"1% Hillary" will enjoy this power, no doubt...
Before firearms, I suppose society was more-or-less “gun free.” But it wasn’t exactly utopia.
In the 1960’s the liberals protested for
free speech on college campuses. They won
that battle and have spent the subsequent
decades taking away the free speech of those
who don’t agree with liberalism. Liberals
outside of academia had no problem with the
actions of their college fellow travelers.
In fact, they joined forces to create an
an evil concept known as political correctness.
Like the communists of old, to liberals truth
is whatever makes their side look good.
Unfairness is perfectly OK when it is visited
upon the political opponents of the left.
Witness the treatment of conservative action
groups by the Obama administration controlled
IRS. All fair minded liberals stand up and be
counted? I don’t recall liberals being ashamed
of the IRS.
Now, these liberals would have us all give up
our weapons in this polite society. No, thanks.
I have an idea what society is like in your
hands and I would rather fight you over it.
My guns stay put.
““buyback?” Mine aren’t for sale.”
How do they figure they are “buying back” something they never owned in the first place?
“Unfortunately, mine were lost in a tragic boating accident some years ago.”
Bummer. Then you won’t be able to help those who are engaged in a firefight against those who are attempting to confiscate legally owned firearms.
Just replace “gun” with “rape” and see how logical it sounds.
If Fred Hiatt wants to “change the culture”, the first thing he needs to do is raise the sucky circulation numbers of his lousy Washington Post!
Right now it’s read only by Beltway liberals.
I can’t believe Jeff Bezos paid $250 million for that rag.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.