The Ivy League has long been associated with the best and brightest our nation has to offer.
Of course, they also accepted David Hogg to college after he got rejected pretty much everywhere else he applied, so that association is more than a bit misguided, but it persists in many minds. When people see the name of an Ivy League school on something, they generally figure it was concocted by some pretty smart people.
They’re wrong, of course, but it’s still true.
Worse than that, though, is the fact that the “minds” at places like Harvard have no problem “reimagining” your rights because they know better than you do.
A report released today by researchers at Harvard Kennedy School’s Carr Center for Human Rights offers 80 recommendations for reimagining Americans’ rights and responsibilities. This blueprint for protecting and expanding citizens’ rights proposes policy changes to strengthen democratic processes; safeguard equal protection, equal opportunity, and due process of law; and better protect freedoms of speech, media, religion and privacy.
The report, “Reimagining Rights and Responsibilities in the United States,” was released at a virtual event at the Kennedy School. The Reimagining Rights and Responsibilities Project is directed by John Shattuck, Carr Center senior fellow and former U.S. assistant secretary of state for democracy, human rights and labor. The report and the project are overseen by a faculty committee chaired by Carr Center Director Mathias Risse, the Lucius N. Littauer Professor of Philosophy and Public Administration.
To promote due process and the rule of law: secure due process and humanitarian protections in immigration proceedings; reduce incarceration and juvenile detention; reform sentencing laws; and enact laws that balance gun rights with public safety.
Now, on the surface, that might not look too bad…except for the fact that anytime anyone says anything about “balancing” gun rights with public safety, what they mean is continue to enact laws that do nothing to inhibit criminals buying guns off the black market but do a wonderful job of making life difficult for law-abiding gun owners.
See, practically no one at Harvard bothers to own a gun. Generally, they’re just too “above” that kind of nonsense. That’s what we plebes in flyover country do, after all. .
As a result, they probably don’t even blink at gun control laws. They also tend to argue that if you can still buy a gun, your gun rights aren’t being restricted, which isn’t really the case. Then again, they’re in anti-gun Massachusetts, so it may not even be a case of not wanting a gun so much as not wanting to deal with the hassle of getting one there. They might not even realize that there are Americans living in free states who don’t have to jump through all of those hoops.
At the end of the day, no one needs our rights reimagined or any such thing, especially from elitist snobs like Harvard. The only way I’d support “reimagining” them is more inline with what our Founding Fathers intended. For the record, since that included heavy artillery in private hands, I’m certain it wouldn’t involve the government telling me what I can and can’t have.
It damn sure doesn’t involve Harvard doing it.