03Lightningrocks wrote:So... are you folks in favor of allowing children access to porn , strip clubs and rated R movies?
In one word, yes. The onus should be on parents to restrict access for their children. We may not agree with it, but we have to accept certain things that may churn our stomachs to ensure the things/behaviors we hold dear are not limited. As with the examples provided and with guns, access is already age restricted, too.
03Lightningrocks wrote:Maybe this is a good example of why we can't get anything done in America.
Arguably, this lack of getting things done is what limits extreme actions by our government and is the way policy decisions were envisioned. This way, transient, emotional swells of the general public don't dictate legislation; only overwhelming consensus does. Doesn't work this way in reality, but think of how different a country (and how little liberty would be left) if our political machines were efficient in getting things done.
ETA: I'm not so old as to have missed growing up and playing video games, which have progressively become more graphic. None of the friends with whom I played have any trouble discerning reality from the simulacra. They are all upstanding, law abiding citizens. The effects are indicative of other, broken aspects of our society -- the breakdown of the family, the inadequacy of state provided education, etc. Do I agree with all the violent content of video games or misogynistic lyrics of certain rap songs? No. But where is the line drawn? Why do we compromise here, but not on 2A/RKBA? We shouldn't compromise on either and, as we do in the gun debate, demand real solutions to the underlying problems -- not going after the symptoms. There are reasons this content sells.
"We have four boxes with which to defend our freedom: the soap box, the ballot box, the jury box, and the cartridge box." - L. McDonald