Vincent J. Curtis
3 Apr 2019
[Answer Daud is a medical student who is interested in human rights. He argued that gun ownership represented a health issue, among other complaints and assertions. The piece was published today in the Hamilton Spectator.]
Daud is too young and too uneducated to offer an expert opinion on anything medical. That, however, seems no bar to his offering a fake expert opinion on psycho-social-political issues like gun control.
Daud claims to be concerned about human rights. Good, read the Second Amendment in the American Bill of Rights. Read the English Bill of Rights of 1689. Read the Heller decision written by Antonin Scalia to see the relationship between the two. It is customary English law that people have the right to arm themselves for personal protection and to keep arms as a defence against tyrannical government. Before a tyranny takes away any other right like free speech, they take away privately owned firearms. That was the lesson of 1688 and of 1773.
Canada had its mass shooting of defenseless women thirty years ago. For all the gun legislation and regulation since, the type of firearm used in the École Polytechnique shooting was never even made restricted. Oh, the AR-15 type was, but not the Mini-14. Such is the politics around gun control. Medical training is not directed to the solution of complex political questions.
Daud offers
a fake expertise to advance an ideological solution to a non-problem.
-30-
No comments:
Post a Comment