Results Please...

I have noticed several times recently that there seems to be a common disconnect among people between expectations and reality. While not evil to be naive, it starts to cross some lines when you attempt to pass judgement or render law based on said naivete. Here are a few cases recently where that became starkly apparent.

A couple is facing charges after their wolf-dog hybrid attacked and killed the woman's five year old disabled child. Wolves are top tier predators, and there is a limit to how much domesticated dogs even can control instinct. When a predator is faced with a juvenile, crippled prey animal, things will not go well for the prey, regardless of how thoroughly 'domesticated' the creature may seem. Placing ideal prey alongside a very dangerous animal is criminally negligent, as is affirmed by the judicial action.

There is a woman on the internet who wants to have a water birth. This in and of itself is not particularly odd, but the fact that she intends to have her koi assist in the process is. Any doctor, in fact anyone who has any biology background or even basic science background can tell you that this is a bad idea. Fish tanks are less than hygienic, shall we say. Add to this that Koi are omnivorous, and you end up with a really dangerous situation.

A woman walked into a pediatricians office wishing to discuss vaccine schedules for her child. Said doctor was fairly firm on the evidentially supported schedules, disregarding assorted alternative medicine ideas. This woman then gave a negative review to this doctor, complaining about a lack of compromise or dialogue. Vaccines are supported by science. They work, we know they work, and they prevent potentially lethal diseases. Yet this woman became upset that the doctor would not take the alternative theories over proven results.

I hope my readers agree that the people described above are not acting logically or reasonably. They have taken an emotional perspective not backed by any data and are attempting to apply it to points of reason and science. Apply that same idea to firearms law. Don't think about what it is supposed to do, don't think about how guns are scary, just think logically. Gun laws will not control criminal possession of firearms, as by definition criminals do not follow laws. Loosening of gun-control is nigh invariably followed by a decrease in violent crime. In the US places with the strictest gun control are frequently the most violent and dangerous. Waiting periods and mandatory classes don't have statistically significant impact on 'gun death.' Why then do people who would scoff at the first three examples do the same thing with guns? Be consistent, be logical, and be willing to think.