Skip to main content

View Diary: It's just a toy (116 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Not questioning his ethics at all (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    FrankRose, theatre goon

    He wants to reduce gun violence. So do I. What I am questioning is his ethical consistency. Items of equal risk ought to deserve equal treatment under the law, I would think. And something several times more risky or harmful ought to be subject to more scrutiny, not less. My approach to reducing preventable risk is proportionate to the risk. Is that such an awful thing to ask for? Apparently so.

    The victims of any of these causes of death are no less dead than those from any other cause. To focus on one particular set is no lapse of ethics, we each have things we consider important. Someone out there is dedicated to making swimming pools safer. Someone else is designing better childproof caps for household chemicals. Good for them.

    But to insist that your particular set is deserving of extra-special extra-severe regulation because it extra-special important to you is bias. In extreme cases of irrationality, one might even say they are "consumed by fanaticism".

    As far as "making it personal" goes, when you propose a law or regulation or change of status that directly affects me or my family, that is personal, and it does not matter if it is about guns, sexual orientation, faith (or lack thereof) or whatever. Your "right" to be free of fear of blacks gays muslims immigrants secular humanists guns is something that comes from within, from a rational assessment of risk, not by demanding the government restrict everyone else.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site