(Let me say before I go any further that Clint McCance is a reprehensible creature and if there was any justice in the world he’d be wandering the countryside in sackcloth and ashes for the rest of his days. I’d like for that to go without saying, but I don’t want there to be any misconceptions about what I think. Now, with that said…)
“How about a nice game of word substitution?”
It had previously been possible for gun control proponents to wrap their cause in dry euphemism. They framed themselves as defenders of constitutional principle — “states’ rights.” They argued that requiring businesses to serve Americans exercising their right to bear arms violated private property rights.
Why WOULD Leonard Pitts think that was so much different from this?
It had previously been possible for segregationists to wrap their cause in dry euphemism. They framed themselves as defenders of constitutional principle — “states’ rights.” They argued that requiring businesses to serve African-Americans violated private property rights.
Is there anything really different? I know that being black isn’t a choice, but one could say the same about wanting the best self-defense tools at one’s disposal. One could very well say that not wanting to carry a gun is choosing to suppress your human instinct, no?