Debate about Gun Control

[Bob Butler 54]

(07-05-2016, 12:10 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: I do not propose prohibition. You use that word, but it does not compute.

We have agreed on some control measures.

Most gun control advocates want weapons of certain types out of circulation.  The same problems encountered in the war on drugs and in 1930s alcohol prohibition exist with the current and proposed gun prohibitions.  You don't like the word as it reminds everyone about how difficult the practical problems of prohibiting stuff is.  The one sure thing prohibitions do is provide opportunity for profits for criminals.  Actually keeping stuff out of circulation is hard.  There are very real trade offs involving the cost of attempting to enforce a prohibition, increased criminal profit and violence resulting from attempts to bypass the prohibition, and the very limited impact such laws actually have on availability.

I don't care if you like the word or not.  Do you want possession of certain things prohibited by the government?  If so, the word applies and the problems with the government attempting to enforce prohibitions should be remembered.  You can spend as much time as  you like describing how intense you feel about the issue, but some care about how difficult it is to actually implement your ideas.  Is it practical?  Does it work?

(07-05-2016, 12:10 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:

Quote:The country is very sincerely and deeply divided.  The values are profoundly deep and sincere on both sides.  If you can't acknowledge that, no doubt about the lack of connection with reality.

No doubt about the division of our country on values. The Red side is mainly authoritarian, but also paradoxically libertarian; which actually means allowing economic authority to dominate us. 

I don't trust the recent over use of the word 'authoritarian'.  It reminds me too much of the recent habit of calling all Democrats Communist and all Republicans Fascist.  These days it seems fashionable to use 'Authoritarian' to replace either 'Fascist' or 'Communist', but does the word really apply?

Both cultures have strong values and try to use the government to enforce their values.  Using government authority to enforce values is going to appear by the victim of such authority as an assault on freedom and as authoritarian policy.  Enforce a prohibition?  Authoritarianism!  Making sure the baker sells wedding cakes to homosexuals?  Authoritarianism!  I see most value systems as being justifiable, as having a solid basis in history and culture.  I understand the desire to use the government to enforce one's values on everyone.  On the other hand, the more one subculture attempts to use the government to enforce their values on all, the less free we are, the more tempting it gets to use words like 'authoritarian'.  There is something to be said for the government just leaving the People alone to make their own decisions.

Still, if someone likes the policy being enforced, it won't seem like authoritarianism, it would seem a well justified lawful measure intended to improve the community.

At least 'authoritarian' is an all purpose insult usable by both sides on lots of issues.  I personally think it is being over used.  It's a little better than 'Nazi' and 'Communist' though.  Slightly more true.  Negligibly more true.