If there are any regular readers of this blog they may have occasion for confusion. We frequently assert positions in different blog articles that are contradictory. As an answer to that confusion, I direct your attention to the list of contributors to this blog. There are a few of us and we don't all hold precicesly the same viewpoint and that leads to different coverage.
For example, my collegue has a good point about the sponsorship of womens tazer parties could easily be construed as mysoganism.
Personally I wholeheartedly support this kind of thing as long as this is the kind of thing that happens organicly and is not some crass attempt to profit off of fearmongering.
You may also be confused to read that I am not against tazers. After all they are simply tools and have no moral value apart from how they are used. When a cop zaps the fuck out of a guy having a diabetic seisure, that is evil. When a law abiding person tazers a violent criminal, that would be a good use of the weapon. Under these circumstances the average person would be more likely to use a tazer in the way Taser International describes their purpose; they save lives by giving people an alternative to using lethal force. The average person is just walking around out there minding their own business, while the cops are roaming the streets looking for trouble.
This argument holds true for firearms as well. Take a gander at this article from Detroit of all places, describing the effect of increasing access to firearms to law abiding citizens over the last six years. Big suprise? Gun crime went down.
No comments:
Post a Comment