[Vision2020] A Liberal

[Joe Campbell]

This is a slippery-slope argument, a fallacy. You can use the argument
to undermine any exception -- indeed it can be used whenever there is
vagueness -- since (one might argue) everything is like something
else, which is like something else, and eventually everything is like
everything else (if one is not tracking the logic well enough, if one
is not being precise).

A better solution is to make the definition of "armor piercing"
precise. No vagueness, no slippery-slope. And if there's an expression
that could be made precise, I would think "armor piercing" would be
it. Not everything is armor; not everything counts as piercing armor.
I'm not afraid of fallacious arguments. Study logic long enough and
you can find ways to defeat those arguments.

Not all liberals are out to take away all guns. Some of us just want a
safer world which doesn't allow for an "exceptionless" understanding
of the 2nd amendment. Look, if we can find reasonable exceptions to
the use of words and restrictions to the 1st amendment, we should be
able to do the same with regard to the 2nd amendment.

Do you really think that ANY word has the potential to harm you -- and
take away your right to life -- more than an armor piercing bullet? I
don't. And if we have reasonable exceptions to the 1st amendment -- of
which there are many already in place -- it follows that we should be
able to construct reasonable exceptions to the 2nd amendment. That is
one purpose of the law. To add precision and logic to discussions that
are driven by fear and emotion.

On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 5:22 PM, Scott Dredge <scooterd408 at hotmail.com> wrote:
> The trouble with making exceptions like banning 'armor piercing bullets' is
> then that those against guns and ammo use that to tag 90+ percent of bullets
> as 'armor piercing'.  I'd be more apt to listen to armor wearers who most at
> risk of being in the line of fire (police, swat teams) what they think about
> such a ban and using what metrics to determine what is allowed / not
> allowed.  After that it's up to the courts to decide if such a ban can pass
> Constitutional muster.  The only armor I have is flesh and bone so I might
> be able to stop a paint ball on my own.
>
>> CC: scooterd408 at hotmail.com; vision2020 at moscow.com
>> From: thansen at moscow.com
>
>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] A Liberal
>> Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 15:02:18 -0700
>> To: philosopher.joe at gmail.com
>
>>
>> As I have stated in the past in words to the affect . . .
>>
>> I totally support the letter and spirit of the second amendment. However,
>> I draw the line somewhere after skeet shooting and looooooonnnnng before
>> somebody drives a fully loaded M2 Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicle down
>> Main Street.
>>
>> Seeya round town, Moscow.
>>
>> Tom Hansen
>> Moscow, Idaho
>>
>> "If not us, who?
>> If not now, when?"
>>
>> - Unknown
>>
>>
>>
>> On Jul 16, 2012, at 14:53, Joe Campbell <philosopher.joe at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > There is also Amendment IX: "The enumeration in the Constitution, of
>> > certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others
>> > retained by the people." Thus, we can restrict rights precisely when
>> > they "deny or disparage" other rights. Or in other words: no one has
>> > the right to do wrong. I think the idea that the 2nd amendment
>> > "protects" the "right" to purchase, say, armor piercing bullets is
>> > wrong headed. Joe
>> >
>> > On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 11:41 AM, Scott Dredge <scooterd408 at hotmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >> Sure...there are some extreme cases where restrictions make sense (e.g.
>> >> falsely shouting fire in a crowded theater). I suppose there may even
>> >> be
>> >> some extreme case limiting access to abortion (e.g. doctors recommend
>> >> terminating a pregnancy to save the life of an incapacitated woman
>> >> who's
>> >> husband, parents, children, and close friends all truthfully testify in
>> >> legal depositions that the woman would not want such a pregnancy
>> >> terminated).
>> >>
>> >> There are always extreme corner case scenarios that you can dream up
>> >> and
>> >> even harder to believe ones that occur in real life that necessitate
>> >> some
>> >> safeguarding limitations.
>> >>
>> >> -Scott
>> >>
>> >>> CC: scooterd408 at hotmail.com; vision2020 at moscow.com
>> >>> From: philosopher.joe at gmail.com
>> >>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] A Liberal
>> >>> Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 11:21:50 -0700
>> >>> To: thansen at moscow.com
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>> Me too. I think the view that gun rights can NEVER be restricted is
>> >>> false.
>> >>> All rights can be restricted. If free speech can be restricted than
>> >>> gun
>> >>> rights can be restricted. Joe
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On Jul 16, 2012, at 10:51 AM, Tom Hansen <thansen at moscow.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> I own a shotgun myself. I believe in, and support, the second
>> >>>> amendment.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Seeya round town, Moscow.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Tom Hansen
>> >>>> Moscow, Idaho
>> >>>>
>> >>>> "If not us, who?
>> >>>> If not now, when?"
>> >>>>
>> >>>> - Unknown
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Jul 16, 2012, at 10:44, Scott Dredge <scooterd408 at hotmail.com>
>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> I'd say it's not inconsistent then that a Liberal can also support
>> >>>>> 2nd
>> >>>>> Amendment gun ownership rights to - among other things - protect
>> >>>>> property
>> >>>>> and person. :-)
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> From: thansen at moscow.com
>> >>>>> Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 10:39:41 -0700
>> >>>>> To: vision2020 at moscow.com
>> >>>>> Subject: [Vision2020] A Liberal
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Seeya round town, Moscow.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Tom Hansen
>> >>>>> Moscow, Idaho
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> "If not us, who?
>> >>>>> If not now, when?"
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> - Unknown
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> ======================================================= List
>> >>>>> services
>> >>>>> made available by First Step Internet, serving the communities of
>> >>>>> the
>> >>>>> Palouse since 1994. http://www.fsr.net mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>> >>>>> =======================================================
>> >>>>> =======================================================
>> >>>>> List services made available by First Step Internet,
>> >>>>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>> >>>>> http://www.fsr.net
>> >>>>> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>> >>>>> =======================================================
>> >>>>
>> >>>> =======================================================
>> >>>> List services made available by First Step Internet,
>> >>>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>> >>>> http://www.fsr.net
>> >>>> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>> >>>> =======================================================