This was a narrow compromise to begin with. I mean, you were exempting under this compromise any gun show that sold under 75 guns. What happened today it wasn’t just the background checks bill that failed, the ban on gun trafficking, illegal gun trafficking, somebody walks into a store, buys a mess load of guns legally and goes out on the streets and sells them illegally, that failed by a filibuster vote today. So you know, listen, I guess I appreciate the honesty of the Republican caucus. They’ve just made it clear they are just kind of “gun control Darwinists” at this point. They just think we should give a bunch of guns to the good guys and the bad guys and let them shoot it out and hope the good guys win. That’s their agenda and a lot of that was made plain today.
No. The "Darwinism" that Murphy refers to has nothing to do with good guys or bad guys winning. Darwin actually framed the issue as such: "In the struggle for survival, the fittest win out at the expense of their rivals because they succeed in adapting themselves best to their environment." It is adaptation to an environment, not offensive maneuvers, that firmly assures a species' survival. It's fact!
So Murphy's not actually referring to the real, science-based assertion of natural survival mechanics that Darwin posited; he's alluding to "social darwinism," a ridiculous late-nineteenth century sociological philosophy that has no place in polite society. Why even reference it?
Anyways, does Chris Murphy think we should disarm the police, as well? If not, then he's still up for giving "the good guys" guns. He just wants them to be "good guys" working for the government. We can't have a scary, Wild West-like, hate-filled marauding band of lunatics running around owning their own "assault weapons!" It'd be anarchy.
No comments:
Post a Comment