Interesting how "gun rights" proponents claim that any amendment to gun laws would constitute an infringement upon their--and all Americans'-- constitutional right to bear arms. Apparently, to even propose any changes to gun laws is tantamount to restricting the freedoms that all Americans are entitled to--a travesty, of course. But where was this concern for the common good before?
When it comes to other people's children/family members/friends being shot and killed, does that affect all Americans? Or is it just that arguments of collectivism are calculatedly employed in order to maintain one's personal privilege? And what about refusing to even examine your privilege in the consideration of the common good--is that considered an "entitlement," too? ( I guess, maybe, it depends on who's doing the talking...)
Maybe it's time that, as a society, we ask the ethical questions underlying gun control debates. For one, when talking about matters such as these, can we clarify what would be considered "beneficial"--and to whom? Are we willing to entertain the idea of compromise or sacrifice in consideration of not just personal benefit, but the common good?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment