Yeah, and it makes me really uncomfortable, because I usually come down quite predictably on the FAR LEFT side of any political disagreement, and the pit bull thing--at least here in Massachusetts--has me siding with the Republicans and against the Dems.
It seems that Democrats, who believe government has a role in protecting the public by creating regulation, are quite susceptible to the monster dog myth.
As for guns, I've moved over to a libertarian position there, of late. I believe in the first amendment with fervor, and if I feel that strongly about one item on the bill of rights, why don't I feel that way about item number two?
I do think that as a practical matter, banning the public's use of certain guns has had a positive public safety effect, such as in Britain. But the bill of rights doesn't say 'do what keeps everyone safest,' it lists a bunch of freedoms that government isn't allowed to restrict. Then there are those pesky first four words--what exactly is a 'well-regulated militia?'
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2008-04-27 08:22 pm (UTC)It seems that Democrats, who believe government has a role in protecting the public by creating regulation, are quite susceptible to the monster dog myth.
As for guns, I've moved over to a libertarian position there, of late. I believe in the first amendment with fervor, and if I feel that strongly about one item on the bill of rights, why don't I feel that way about item number two?
I do think that as a practical matter, banning the public's use of certain guns has had a positive public safety effect, such as in Britain. But the bill of rights doesn't say 'do what keeps everyone safest,' it lists a bunch of freedoms that government isn't allowed to restrict. Then there are those pesky first four words--what exactly is a 'well-regulated militia?'