Press "Enter" to skip to content

Legislature Hypocritical in Attention to Evidence

Last updated on 2014.09.08

In other hypocrisy news, the House Judiciary Committee Wednesday rejected Senator Mike Vehle's proposed ban on texting while driving. No one testified against the bill in either the Senate or House hearings, but naysayers on the committee contend that there isn't enough evidence that texting bans reduce the number of crashes.

Funny: lack of evidence of effectiveness hasn't stopped this Legislature from passing the ill-advised school gunslinger bill. As a matter of fact, the latest empirical evidence shows that putting more guns in school will result in more school staff getting shot.

Can you say selective commitment to evidence?

8 Comments

  1. owen reitzel 2013.03.01

    good point Cory. Hypocrisy runs amok in Pierre

  2. WayneB 2013.03.01

    We all can be guilty of selection bias... Doesn't make it right.

    Fortunately the fellow in Texas wasn't seriously injured. Mechanical failures are very scary things - whether it's a mitre saw, a Volkswagon Beetle, or a handgun. Unfortunately, even trained professionals make mistakes.

  3. owen reitzel 2013.03.01

    which is why Wayne guns shouldn't be in schools. Glad this person was not seriously hurt. Next time it could be a student and won't be as lucky

  4. Steve Sibson 2013.03.01

    Do you liberals know the difference between those things that are Constitutional Rights and those that are not? Or is your premise that the Constitution is void and rights are now dictated by the rule of the majority, as created by indoctrination in the name of education? Out with the Constitutional Republic and in with Democratic Communism.

  5. larry kurtz 2013.03.01

    Were the Alaska and Louisiana Purchases constitutional, Sibnoid?

  6. John 2013.03.01

    It's all part and parcel of the faux republicans suspension of STEM in their "belief" of what "feels" right as opposed to what right looks like.

  7. Douglas Wiken 2013.03.01

    Politicians without science knowledge are dangerous in a modern society. Judges and lawyers without such knowledge are even more dangerous. Most judges don't know diddly squat about science or scientific methods or philosophy, yet they pretend they are competent to admit or deny "scientific" evidence which may instead by unverified pseudo-science.

  8. caheidelberger Post author | 2013.03.02

    You're right, Wayne. Accidents happen. Machines fail. I have a hard time thinking of any machine in my classroom whose mechanical failure has such a high possibility of resulting in fatal injury and with as little countervailing daily practical utility as the machine that malfunctioned in that Texas training.

Comments are closed.