I’ve always been a bit of an anarchist at heart. Every now and then, something will come up that just brings out severe anti-establishment notions. Previously, my finest moment was when Manchester, NH was considering doing random drug tests on high-school athletes. I’m a big believer in the “no unreasonable searches” covering things like random drug tests, so that rankled me. I called in a local talk show and asked them just what they thought would happen if I (or someone else) were to assemble a list of innocent substances that would yield “false positive” readings on drug tests — such as poppy seeds are alleged to show a positive test for opiates.
Earlier today, I had another of those moments.
They were arguing about the current insane notion in Massachusetts, the one involving givign in-state tuition rates to illegal aliens. The current champion of this idiocy is Tom Riley, the state’s attorney general and candidate for governor.
He was using every argument in the book to rationalize giving breaks to illegal aliens. But then he said the magic one:
(parphrasing from memory) “After all, we’re all immigrants, or descendants of immigrants. Alll of us came here from somewhere else, and we ought to be more compassionate to those who just want to do what we all went through.”
That got me thinking. If we’re going to go by that sort of standard, and go back to the earliest days of our settling this continent on the issue of immigration, why shouldn’t we apply the same sort of logic to other issues? Say, guns?
“Our ancestors all owned guns, for the simple right of self-defense against hostile Indians and wild animals. Later, they needed them to protect themselves against a brutally oppressive government. They would be appalled to see how far we’ve gone from their original ideals, as enshrined in the 2nd Amendment.”
I dunno if it’ll fly as an argument, but it certainly seems at least as plausible as some I’ve heard…