“I hope you enjoy preaching to the choir,” TTAG reader JLR wrote underneath our post on Maryland’s new gun laws, “because this constant ‘slave state’ nonsense convinces absolutely no one.” Although we’ve touched on this issue before I’ve gotta weigh in again. And here’s the thing: I agree with JLR. Well almost. Given the way the world wide web works there’s bound to be a few souls for whom the term “slave state” was an overhead lightbulb moment. It was for me . . .
When I first encountered the term applied to gun control-heavy states the words crystalized my thoughts about civilian disarmament. They signalled that some state governments (e.g., New York, New Jersey, Maryland, Massachusetts, California, Rhode Island and maybe even Colorado) had reached an important and reprehensible waypoint in the arc between personal freedom and government control.
“Slave states” may seem like needless hyperbole to some, but it was political Mennen Skin Bracer to me. But hey, that’s me. And this is the website that I founded. When I started TTAG I thought I’d invite all sides of the “gun debate” into an online exploration of gun rights X 3. Only it turns out it’s not a debate. It’s a fight for the survival of individual liberty.
No matter how we “soften” the language deployed on these pages, TTAG is unlikely to “convince” a large number of people that they’re up against it. But TTAG can provide an hourly updates for gun owners who already have this view, and those who are gradually coming to it. So they can examine the current state of play and their options going forward and feel a sense of solidarity. Hangin’ with their homies.
Bottom line: TTAG is preaching to the choir. Our editorial is skewed heavily towards readers who want operational knowledge of gun control advocates’ strategy and tactics, successes and failures. Readers who realize that gun control “progressives” want to make citizens completely subservient to the government. That there are slave masters who hold sway in some [mostly northern] states. Slave states.