SH wrote:
swimwithstones wrote:
PrinceMax wrote:
I hope that you're equally upset about Obama and other Democrats talking about gun control in the aftermath of a mass shooting. They would both be, using your terms, politicizing a tragedy.I'm not sure those two things are analogous.
The vast majority of mass killings in the US are done with guns. If the vast majority of mass killings in the US were done by illegal immigrants, it would probably be fair to ask if illegal immigration needs to be dealt with for the safety of citizens.
Is it politicizing a tragedy if a primary characteristic of a crime is almost identical to every other tragedy, and is known to play a very significant role? And the people look to the government and law enforcement to keep them safe, shouldn't a president address something that appears to be a systemic safety issue instead of pretending it doesn't exist?
Again, if most DWIs or most mass murders were carried out by immigrants, then it would be prudent to address them as a safety issue.
The situations are analogous. Analogies don't have to keep across all possible contexts.
The semantics of "analogy" aside, the fundamentals of the two situations are different. If 50 people are killed in a mass shooting, it's reasonable to raise the question of gun safety because guns are involved in nearly all mass killings in the US. If 50 people are killed by illegal immigrants in the last five years, but 500 were killed by non-immigrants, then it's not reasonable to zero in on the immigrants' legal status as a crucial indicator of the public's safety.
One is clearly a safety issue that we as a nation have to address somehow. The other is the cherry picking of a trait of a criminal to suggest all people with that trait are a safety risk because doing so supports your political point of view.