Gun control and the worst argument ever...

FactCheck Blasts NRA Mailer on Guns

It seems that not many people in America these days are fond of having an honest discussion of the issues. Rather than lay everything out in the table in an honest way, the partisans on both sides twist words, misstate figures and bend the truth to fit their agenda. Although a rational person would tell you that this kind of discussion does nothing to help the country (in fact it probably harms the country), the folks on the far-left and far-right don't seem to care.

A great example is the issue of gun control. It seems to tough to get factual information from either side on this issue. They are so blinded by their agenda that they will sacrifice the truth in order to get what they want. The anti-gunners throw out figures with out sources (90% of the guns used by drug cartels in Mexico come from the US), and some of the pro-gunners resort to outright lies that are easily refuted (as seen in the link above).

My favorite so far has to be Mr. Geraghty's found here refuting FactCheck's outlining of the NRA's blatant lies.

"For starters, FactCheck.org takes Obama at his word that he "believes the Second Amendment creates an individual right, and he respects the constitutional rights of Americans to bear arms." Many gun owners are not so willing to give the benefit of the doubt, as Obama spent most of his adult life in a city with some of the most restrictive gun laws in the country, and, according to every record of the past 20 years, never uttered a word of objection. If a candidate claimed that he strongly opposed legal gambling, and yet lived in Las Vegas for 20 years, voters would be understandably skeptical. "

So because Obama lived in a city that had stricter gun laws, we should all believe that he is lying to us when he says he supports the second amendment? What kind of argument is this? Did they not teach critical thinking in any of the schools Mr. Geraghty attended?

I hate to break it to Mr. Geraghty, but there is a reason we have local government, and that is so local governments can govern as they see fit for their situation. I thought this was a huge conservative rallying point? Maybe people in the city don't object to stricter gun laws (I live in Baltimore, and if I want a gun I can have one) because they see the chaos that can sometimes take place when there is no control over who does and doesn't have a gun. The situation in the city is different than that of a rural town in Iowa. But this is besides the point. The point is that just because Obama lived in Chicago or NYC doesn't mean that makes him a liar. You can't go arguing against points or views of his that he never even stated. This is a dangerous precedent.

People need to get real. By lying to benefit your side of an "issue", you are doing the country no benefit. America faces real problems, so instead of trying to stir up vitriol over a non-issue such as "Obama's getting rid of the second amendment", try helping. If you really feel your rights are under attack, tell us why, and give us some evidence. Don't just tell us your rights are under attack because you think that Obama secretly wants to attack them but just hasn't told us yet. You sound like a damn crazy person, and your friends should point that out, otherwise they are bad friends.

If you think you need a fully automatic machine gun with a 150 round clip, please tell us why (i.e. hunting T-Rex or fighting the invasion of Mongols that have surrounded your house). Then we can balance that need versus the need of all the people who don't want crazy folks walking around with tools that will allow them to massacre people. The economy is getting tough and clearly some people are taking out their angst in the wrong way (i.e. murdering innocent people). An honest discussion of gun control is the least we could do.