Alright, I’m going to try really hard to keep this short, but that’ll probably be a lost cause 🙂
I’ve been following Elizabeth Mandelman’s blog for a couple of weeks now, and I’m really disappointed. For those who don’t know, Ms Mandelman is just the newest kid on the block in a long line of anti-gun advocates in Canada. There are two things that particularly annoy me about Ms Mandelman’s blog:
#1 – She’s American and has only been in Canada for a few weeks. If she was planning on staying in this country permanently, I wouldn’t hold that against her. But she’s just passing through for grad school. Now I don’t know about you, but when a guest in my country starts meddling in affairs that they don’t fully understand, it tends to irk me a little bit.
#2 – This one here is the kicker, and where my disappointment comes in. As a grad student, I had hoped that Ms Mandelman would be a bit more open to debate. But unfortunately, it seems she’s just like all the other antis that have come before her: she’s only open to debate so long as you don’t disagree with her too much.
Now don’t get me wrong here, it’s her blog and she’s free to do whatever she wants with it. It’s all fine and dandy to disallow a comment or two, but to actively go back and erase every single comment made by a poster on every single blog entry….well, now that’s just censorship, pure and simple.
I’ll admit that I have a rather dry and sardonic wit, that doesn’t always come through that well in text. But seriously. Come on! If I was being disrespectful, that’s one thing, but the only crime that I committed was to post cold, hard facts that contradicted Ms Mandelman’s platform.
It’s pretty typical though. Pro-gun advocates rely on statistics and facts to back up their arguments, while anti-gun advocates rely on emotional pleas to compensate for their lack of hard evidence. I don’t know why I expected anything different really…