(courtesy maps.nyc.gov)

TTAG reader SM writes:

When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns. And when only outlaws have guns, all guns are bad, obviously. And when all guns are bad, guns must be outlawed. This snake-eating-its-tail logic is firmly entrenched in The Big Apple. “When somebody makes a decision to pick up a gun, that’s like a pre-murder case” says Richard M. Aborn, the president of the Citizen Crime Commission of New York City, celebrating the re-birth of New York City’s “gun courts” [via nytimes.com]. The New York press reinforces this notion by refusing to report on defensive gun uses. My liberal friends honestly believe that defensive gun use is a myth perpetrated by the evil NRA. The notion that gun possession leads . . .

directly to murder seems absurd. And yet it is the basis for public policy for a significant slice of the United States (by population). People are predictably irrational and the gun rights movement needs to be aware of the logical fallacies that people are prone to believe and we need to develop responses better than mocking their ignorance.

The civil rights movement focused on black voter registration in the south in the 1960s. We should be going door to door in crime-ridden inner city communities helping besieged civilians navigate the local laws that have made it next to impossible to defend themselves. Let’s start reaching out and get these folks armed and trained. I’m talking vans to take people to the gun store and the range. The best way to change the narrative is face to face, lead by example, and reach out a hand.

69 Responses to New York City Revives “Gun Courts”

  1. Good advice. I’m taking a coworker who lives in #Chiraq to a the range today to fire his first handgun. Did the same thing for two more last week.

  2. “…the gun rights movement needs to be aware of the logical fallacies that people are prone to believe and we need to develop responses better than mocking their ignorance.”

    Why does it have to be either-or? Can’t we develop better responses AND mock their ignorance?

      • One can be right and persuasive while being factually correct with ridicule.

        YOU may not like ridicule, but it is a form of rhetoric that works on some people. It cuts throw the mud, so to speak.

        Besides, respect is earned. Right now, the anti’s are well in ‘negative respect’ land. Too many lies, willfully told, and too much agitprop and far, far too much mischaracterization of who POTG are…

        I ain’t talking about leveling ridicule at non-gunners or even those that are somewhat anti but anti out of ignorance…I’m talking about ridiculing the hardcore and the rabid “True Believers.”

        • JR_in_NC,

          “It cuts throw the mud, so to speak.”

          Can I ridicule you for typing “throw” instead of “through”? : )

        • Yes, please do. I deserve it. Through me your best shot. {grin}

          In my defense, I DID catch it eventually, but my edit time expired.

    • Which one is about changing hearts and minds (serving the cause), and which is about defending your wounded pride (serving your self)?

      When someone goes full irrational name-calling, and you respond kindly and rationally with factual data, while not making the person feel like… it blows their MIND.

      …On the other hand, if you respond by calling them a ‘ignorant libtard’ who is out of touch with reality, you simply confirm and reinforce their prejudice.

      • I understand your point and don’t generally disagree.

        However…

        The Anti’s make the mistake in thinking we are a monolithic group – all the same political party, race, socio-economic class, gender, etc.

        We tend to do the same with them.

        So, I’d respond to your comment with: SOME (I’ll concede perhaps even most) don’t deserve ridicule at all. I firmly believe most people deserve at least the beginnings of respect, after all.

        But, there are some on the anti side that just simply are not reachable by reasoned discussion. Properly done, ridicule is a way to point out to OTHERS (those that might otherwise be swayed by them) the, dare I say it, ridiculousness of the anti claims.

        It’s been said that the Internet is a spectator sport. We reach the lurkers, those that read pages like this. When someone says something utterly stupid, for example, it is INSTRUCTIVE to point that out.

        Calling someone a “libtard” is not really helpful. I agree.

        Except perhaps even that helps shatters the smug “I’m right and everyone agrees with me” tone that the hard-core Progressive anti-gunners adopt. Perhaps that is enough for some lurkers to say, “Hey, maybe the anti-gun person is not as broadly welcomed at parties as I think he is” and question why that might be so.

        And further, the subset of those anti’s I’m describing above hate us. They hate us to the degree that they are willing to at least SAY they want us dead, and SAY they would call the cops and purposefully lie to have us killed. THOSE are the ones that merit all the ridicule we can heap on them. They are so disingenuous, so full of feces completely there simply is no other way except ridicule to communicate how totally stupid what they say is.

        So, my point is: let’s not paint them with an overly broad brush. Some anti’s are good people with wrong ideas about guns and gun owners. Some are something else entirely, and they deserve nothing less than to be exposed for what they are: stupid liars.

        • JR, no one you guys refer to as “libtards”, at least here, read any of this blog anyhow, and it really is not that insulting, nor is it obscene, if I were you I wouldn’t thrash myself too bad for that.

        • “JR, no one you guys refer to as “libtards””

          I have, to my knowledge, never called anyone “libtard.” That’s just not my shtick.

          And, you are wrong about the folks that term is aimed at not coming here. They most certainly do. They also sometimes post. It’s quite entertaining when they do, and even when trying to hide it or even ‘astroturf,’ they show themselves.

  3. When all guns are gone. You can still come to Oklahoma and shoot buy guns and ammo, and the people suggesting a gun ban here will only do so from a different hemisphere, and that’s only until deportation to another planet.

    • Now if only Oklahoma would get on the Constitutional carry band-wagon. I doubt that will happen though because of their love of licencing and regulations…

      • Doesn’t OK already allow Constitutional carry, in a sense?

        I think I recall reading that OK allows citizens from Constitutional carry states, with which they have reciprocity, to carry in OK as they do in their own state; which is without a license.

        OK allows open carry for licensed carriers from reciprocity states. In my case, that meant that prior to Jan. 1st 2016, I had more firearm freedom in OK as a Texas resident than I didbin Texas itself.

        It would seem to me that OK is pretty receptive to expansion of 2A freedom in general. I would expect them to go Constitutional carry sooner rather than later.

        • OK does let people from constitutional carry states carry in OK without a carry permit however they must have ID on them from there state to carry. OK might do constitutional carry but they like there licensing and regulations in general to much at this point to adopt anything like that.

          OK now needs to remove the US citizen requirement for a carry license. My wife could then carry without trying to get a VA or some other out of state license.

        • eremeya,

          Do some research. I believe there are court cases which hold that legal resident aliens have all rights available to them as citizens — at least with respect to firearm rights. Your ability to get a concealed carry license for your wife could be well within your (her) grasp.

        • I have done a lot research into this and the court cases only apply to the states that were sued. Unfortunately OK has not yet been sued and when trying to contact different groups about possibly sueing I have not received any responses.

  4. If it gets out that you are a “gun guy,” someone will eventually take you aside and ask you about it. It’s on a lot of people’s minds right now, and women in particular are wanting to tool up. Seems guns are selling themselves nowadays.

    And if gun courts are like drug courts, sign me up; that would mean I could get arrested 70 times for felony straw purchases and still be free to terrorize my neighborhood, like freddie gray.

    • If it gets out that you are a “gun guy,” someone will eventually take you aside and ask you about it.

      It happens to me constantly, even with my friends from New York City who, while not actually hoplophobic, are intimidated by guns. So when we go to Las Vegas to gamble and carouse, I take them shooting and they love it.

      Then they get back to NYC and tell their friends about their shooting experiences, and sometimes their friends confess, very quietly, that they have NYC target and premises gun licenses. 🙂

    • So true. I get people coming to me every week asking about it. People see what is happening in the world and in our country. They are afraid of crime, of a world on the fast track toward war, and they are afraid of our government. I never thought I would see a time when so many people suddenly became interested in my favorite pastime.

    • “It’s on a lot of people’s minds right now, and women in particular are wanting to tool up. “

      This is so true.

      My wife attended a Christmas party back in December, and a large-ish table of women were talking about taking CCW class together. Some of them were a complete surprise to me that they’d purposefully step within 10 ft of a firearm with intent to shoot one.

      The anti’s constant harping on guns is having the opposite effect in the “mass consciousness.” You put it perfectly: guns are on people’s minds, and fortunately, most people are smart enough to see readily observable facts such as:

      (1) There ain’t blood in the streets from law abiding gun owners carrying

      (2) It ain’t the law abiding gun owners they have to fear

      (3) Good guys with guns ARE stopping some real baddies

      (4) No other tool available provides what they want…protection. Not words about ‘safety,’ but a real tool for the job.

  5. The “tipping point” [kinda hate that term, not a plug] in NY could be pretty exquisite. At which time you can bet your a_ _ I am going to prevent the rest of you from helping those S.O.B.’s until the cries die way down.

  6. That pretty much describes what life was growing up in NYC in the 80’s & 90’s. Every news broadcast started off with at least 2 – 3 shootings (some police involved). It is a powerful narrative that only police and bad guys have guns. I have friends that I used to run around with (playing cops and robbers, or soldier, or whatever with realistic toy guns) that are convinced that even letting their kids touch a toy gun is going to lead to a life of crime. They think I’m crazy for owning guns and that I’m some statistical outlier because I haven’t killed anyone. They doubt my dgu experience and openly question my morals. I don’t know how we had basically the same experiences growing up, and how they turned out so different in their views on guns.

    • Perhaps there’s a hint in your handle. I presume they stayed and you left? Different environmental influences. Say something at people long enough and even the strongest of wills can start to be influenced.

      • You are correct to a point, but some of my old friends have left too. Without going through each and every person, let’s just say it’s a bit more than just growing up there. Although the ones that are still there (even some of my very “conservative” relatives) are FUDs at best. Even some of the guys I shot small bore rifles with in the Boy Scouts are against their kids learning to shoot.

        • I don’t know NYC at all, but in lots of places including here in Austin, kids are affected by constant anti-gun propaganda in school at every grade, and at UT if they go there. I think that’s the case in most places, regardless of the state, because it is the case in every teaching college, all teachers arrive with a strong dislike of guns, and think all efforts to eliminate guns are wonderful.

          The concept that Newtown could happen, and the following week teachers all over the country returned, unarmed, to class leaves me just as dumfounded as Barry is. If there has ever been a clear demonstration that teachers need to be armed, that was it.

    • I still live on Long Island and all of my friends either own guns or are OK with them.
      If I am around people that are anti (ie. social gatherings) I won’t bother to associate with them.
      I have learned that those with a fierce anti belief will not listen to reason, so I won’t waste my time.

      • I don’t talk to them much anymore. More their choice than mine, but every now and then a get to plant a seed on something they post that is so counter to their world view that occasionally a point is conceded. That’s the only reason I even keep in contact with them anymore. I’m the only one running counter to their echo chamber.

      • I recently considered taking a job on Long Island.

        While it wasn’t the deciding factor, the firearms restrictions looked pretty bad vis-a-vis what is in our safe. Plus, we weren’t able to identify a range local to where we would be, that sounded friendly to anything with a magazine feed.

        Granted we didn’t look very hard. But still.

        • A have a Suffolk County “Sportsman” License which lists ALL handguns registered with Suffolk County police
          (I only registered one, the rest are in my Florida home).
          I can only carry to and from the range. I have a friend who belongs to shooting club that allows you to use several ranges which are open 24/7. So theoretically one could be going to the range at any time.
          I also have a Utah and Florida permit which does not list any firearms. (useless in NY but helpful in many other states.

    • same here. know plenty of people from my childhood who are completely anti-2A.

      and like other responses have noted: those people stayed in NJ. i left for AZ.

    • Honestly, I am reluctant to let my kids have toy guns for the following reasons:

      1) Don’t want them to get shot by a cop – unlikely in my neighborhood.

      2) God forbid one of them takes a toy gun to school – he’d be better off taking Ebola samples.

      3) I want them to learn good, safe gun handling habits on real guns.

  7. Fantastic comments. Exactly the type of outreach the NRA doesn’t seem to want to do.

    Also when they lead with OFWGs and bible thumpers it does not help.

    • The NRA is much, much more than OWFG just sitting around.

      Check out the NRA Foundation. You’ll see more and varied outreach programs, some going back decades, than you ever thought the NRA was even capable of conducting.

    • The better question is when are you going to have something of substance to contribute to this site’s comment section, rather than the habit of blanket insults toward gun owners?

  8. I would donate enough to get an inner city family a serviceable self defense shotgun (couple hundred bucks), but would that be legal? If a legal xfer is done to the head of the family, and they are the legit end user, could city, state, or Federal officials find some excuse to prosecute?

    I suppose, even if they couldn’t prosecute, one could expect a prompt and thorough IRS audit.

  9. If the “criminal courts” actually dealt with criminals, and put them away instead of engaging in the revolving-door, catch-and-release, plea-bargain-violent-criminals system, the “gun courts” would have empty dockets.

    • The criminal justice system is as interested in reducing crime as Big Tobacco is in smoking cessation.

      One man’s catch-and-release criminal is another man’s loyalty program customer.

  10. Well, if ya can’t be part of the solution, DeBelasio certainly has the “be part of the problem” down to a fine art.

  11. NYC needs a wall to protect them from the rest of the world. Add spot lights on the inside and towers on the outside then they will be safe. Then have a fashion show showing off the new louie-vittan jumpsuit ready for work or play with a personlized number on them. (one of a kind!!)…………. I’ve been to NYC several times, once during a garbage strike I could not tell the differance.

  12. NYC is a lost cause. This progressive dystopia functions outside the bounds of the U.S. Constitution and seems eager to push even further and further away. I’m sure there are a smattering of good Americans left living there who are outraged about the drastic infringements upon their rights, and I feel for them. It’s bad enough having their toxic influence poison upstate NY(which is 3/4 rural), but living in the lion’s den is something else entirely.

  13. By and large, the denizens of NYC are hoplophobic in the extreme and actually believe their own bullsh!t. Many also are very arrogant and have nothing but contempt for “flyover country” — defined as anywhere that is not NYC — and anyone who lives outside of NYC.

    In this regard, NYC Republicans and Democrats are united in their parochialism.

    • Living in upstate NY, it’s both amusing and irritating dealing with “NYC people”. Many of them regard upstate as a sort of private nature preserve for themselves and other elites living in “the city”, and those of us who live here are political and cultural oddities who are irrelevant. Seriously, ask someone from NYC. The prevailing attitude is “if you ain’t from New Yawk, you ain’t from nowhere”, as if the rest of us should be envious of the overflowing cesspool at the foot of the state. I understand that if a miracle occurred and those of us in upstate were to be able to separate ourselves from them and become our own state that we’d lose out on a great deal of tax money. I understand it would make upstate, economically, more like West Virginia. I’m willing to live with that.

      • Frankly it would be best if every city with a population greater than say 1.5m was its own state.

        We need the old city/state concept, would solve lots of problems politically.

        Thought?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *