Obama’s Appeal to Emotion Versus Reason

Jonathan S. Tobin  "Gun control advocates lament this change and say, as the president did today, that it is a function of forgetfulness. That’s why, as Seth wrote earlier, the Michael Bloomberg-funded campaign to promote the issue is seeking to rekindle outrage over Sandy Hook with emotion-laden commercials depicting the parents of the victims. But the problem here is not a lack of concern for the memory of the slain or callousness on the part of growing numbers of Americans. It is the fact that the case for the president’s proposals relies primarily on just this sort of emotion rather than reason. The longer we have to think about it, the less sense these restrictions make to people."

I discussed my problem with guns in this previous post: Seeking an effective argument FOR gun control
 Here, two respected writers discuss the case against taking away individual firearms from Americans. Yes, it is true that if guns did not exist everywhere in this nation those little children in Sandy Hook would be living right now and I only wish that were the case. But it is not and there are violent people out there in their thousands and they are armed; willing and lusting to watch innocent people die in bunches by their hands. How, exactly do you gun-control advocates plan to remove those weapons from their blood-thirsty hands?
I will honestly look for a reasoned argument FOR gun control that contains effective means for keeping us safe from those who carry weapons illegally and are willing to do us harm. Cartoons showing crazed, wild-eyed gun owners don't wash.
As yet, I have seen only politically correct, emotional responses to the issue that have no value other than simply making a politician look as if they are doing something. TD