4 ms·

I don't think a story like this belongs on HN. Another story on this topic might generate interesting discussion and debate, but this one is written in an infl

I don't think a story like this belongs on HN. Another story on this topic might generate interesting discussion and debate, but this one is written in an inflammatory manner and does not demonstrate deep thinking or clear analysis. To summarize my problem with the article: it claims that the second amendment should not be used as a reason to allow 9 year olds to do dangerous activities like shooting automatic weapons. And yet nowhere does the article cite (or even describe) someone citing the 2nd amendment in this debate. The article doesn't say that the police used the 2nd amendment as a reason not to charge the girl's parents. It doesn't show the the 2nd amendment prevented laws against 9 year olds shooting guns in firing ranges. It doesn't cite people using the 2n amendment as a reason to defend the girl's parents.

anigbrowl 12y ago
It's obviously an editorial. I don't post them often but every now and again I make an exception. I think the subject matter speaks to a dichotomy that crops up frequently here between liberty and the supervisory role of the state. Perhaps you might try focusing less on the second amendment and more on the question of why letting your child unsupervised int he park is treated as a serious felony.
- QuantumChaos 12y ago
  It is the article that has an excessive focus on the 2nd amendment. This is the final paragraph: If you’re a parent, you should be absolutely terrified that a 9-year-old’s constitutional right to fire an Uzi trumps your right to decide at what age your kids can play at the park unsupervised. Something has to change. Now.
  - anigbrowl 12y ago
    notwithstanding the hyperbole, I'm not seeing the excessive aspect you mention. By international standards, Americans' maximalization of second amendment rights is bizarre to the point of being self-destructive (as exemplified in this shooting incident). I don't need to hear an entire articulation of the water cycle every time someone observes that heavy rain makes things wet. Clearly we're not going to agree about this.

anigbrowl 12y ago

It's obviously an editorial. I don't post them often but every now and again I make an exception. I think the subject matter speaks to a dichotomy that crops up frequently here between liberty and the supervisory role of the state. Perhaps you might try focusing less on the second amendment and more on the question of why letting your child unsupervised int he park is treated as a serious felony.

QuantumChaos 12y ago
It is the article that has an excessive focus on the 2nd amendment. This is the final paragraph: If you’re a parent, you should be absolutely terrified that a 9-year-old’s constitutional right to fire an Uzi trumps your right to decide at what age your kids can play at the park unsupervised. Something has to change. Now.
- anigbrowl 12y ago
  notwithstanding the hyperbole, I'm not seeing the excessive aspect you mention. By international standards, Americans' maximalization of second amendment rights is bizarre to the point of being self-destructive (as exemplified in this shooting incident). I don't need to hear an entire articulation of the water cycle every time someone observes that heavy rain makes things wet. Clearly we're not going to agree about this.