Florida Senator Rick Scott recently penned a piece at The Washington Post in favor of red flag gun confiscation legislation for The Washington Post.
Scott gained notoriety as Florida Governor by making Florida one of the first red states to pass a red flag law in the wake of the 2018 Parkland shootings.
He rationalized his decision to take gun control action in the following passage:
Let me be clear: I am a gun owner, a member of the National Rifle Association and a strong supporter of the Second Amendment. But the horror of Parkland demanded a swift, practical legislative response to try to prevent future such nightmares.
After the El Paso and Dayton shootings, Scott declared that “Washington should stop the partisan bickering and get to work on solutions.”
The solution Scott wants is a “red flag” provision to gun policy, just like he enacted in Florida last year. He describes it as a “common-sense public safety measure.”
Scott went on to say that “our culture has produced an underclass of predominantly white young men who place no value on human life, who live purposeless lives of anonymity and digital dependency, and who increasingly act on their most evil desires, sometimes with racial hatred.”
He concluded, “Progress can be made in the legislative and judicial arenas, but no amount of new laws can completely stop criminals or cure the root causes of violence. The problems go deeper than guns or any inanimate pieces of hardware.”
Despite D.C.’s urgency to pass red flag gun laws, there is reason to believe that they are not a cure-all for gun violence. Gun advocate John Lott argues that “Red Flag laws appear to have had no significant effect on murder, suicide, the number of people killed in mass public shootings, robbery, aggravated assault or burglary. There is some evidence that rape rates rise. These laws apparently do not save lives.” This is based off research he conducted from 1970 through 2017.
Just looking at Connecticut also shows that red flag laws might not be worth the hype they’re receiving. The state enacted a red flag law in 1999, which made it one of the first states to have such legislation on the books. However, this law could not prevent a madman from carrying out a massacre at Sandy Hook in 2012.
Elitist Harvard Professor Believes Anti-Lockdown Protests are the Consequence of Christian “Malignant Delusion”
Harvard professor Steven Pinker criticized Evangelical Christianity for its alleged role in sparking anti-lockdown protests.
Pinker originally posted a tweet supporting a theory that came from an opinion piece in the Washington Post which attacked Evangelical Christians.
“Belief in an afterlife is a malignant delusion, since it devalues actual lives and discourages action that would make them longer, safer, and happier. Exhibit A: What’s really behind Republicans wanting a swift reopening? Evangelicals,” he originally tweeted.
Pinker’s subsequently deleted the post after considerable backlash. The article that Pinker shared was originally authored by Gary Abernathy. In it, Abernathy claimed that the anti-lockdown protests were spurred not just by support for President Donald Trump, but also a strong focus on the afterlife which allegedly made Christians not care much about the virus.
The article highlighted the following:
Christian fundamentalism is often fatalistic. As far as many evangelicals are concerned, life passes quickly, suffering is temporary, and worrying solves nothing. That’s not a view that comports well with long stretches of earthly time spent waiting out business closures or stay-at-home orders. It should be no surprise that a person’s deepest beliefs about the world influence how they measure the risks they’re willing to take.
Abernathy reached the following conclusion:
When ruminating over why there are millions of people who don’t seem to panic over a global pandemic or other life-threatening event, critics should remember that right or wrong, it often involves a belief in something even bigger than people named Trump, Hannity or Limbaugh.
Pinker’s tweeted received tremendous backlash from conservative commentators such as Dinesh D’Souza.
Christopher Hitchens once described this pompous Harvard pedant as ‘educated beyond his intelligence.’ Pinker here proves Hitchens right. People want to get back to their jobs, their friends, their life, but Pinker insists their real motive is ‘belief in an afterlife.’
Pinker is a detached elite who has the luxury of having a cushy position at one of the country’s most prestigious institutions.
For him, the struggle of the middle class is foreign.
And like most elites, he can’t handle push back.
So it’s only natural that he delete his post after so much criticism.
Trending on BLP
Big League Wellness4 days ago
Half a Million Sign Petition Refusing Mandatory Coronavirus Vaccine
States4 days ago
Gretchen Whitmer’s Regime Sued to Keep Water Levels High in Months Leading Up to Michigan Dam Break
Big League Wellness2 days ago
Indian Scientists Discover Hydroxychloroquine Treatment Prevents COVID-19, Vindicating President Trump
Tech3 days ago
Facebook Mass Censoring Any MENTION of the Word ‘Coronavirus’
States4 days ago
Virginia’s Ralph Northam Caught At Beach Without Facemask, Social Distancing
Deep State3 days ago
President Trump Says He “Has a Chance to Break the Deep State” In Sunday Interview
Big League Wellness3 days ago
MSNBC Medical Contributor: “We Should Make Masks Mandatory in Public”
Fake News Media3 days ago
VILE: New York Times Claims U.S. Military ‘Celebrates White Supremacy’ on Memorial Day