“Getting suspended from your job. Having cold eggs at breakfast. Getting cut off while driving. Arguing with a neighbor. How do you handle these situations?” The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence asks in a way that symbolizes their openness to genuine debate about firearms (i.e. rhetorically). “However you might deal with life’s problems, big and small, adding guns does not help.” Oh I don’t know about that . . .
It’s like that bumper sticker “War is not the answer.” Doesn’t that depend on the question? See, I can understand why having a gun’s not going to do you much good when you’ve just been fired (unless you’re a psychopath). Cold eggs at breakfast? Definitely not a firearms soluble situation. Getting cut off while driving? Depends whether or not the guy who cut you off is trying to kill you.
And what of that other bit: “However you might deal with life’s problems, big and small, adding guns does not help”? The way I figure it, the bigger the problem, the more likely it is that a gun would help. I mean, what’s the biggest problem you could possibly face in your whole life? Someone trying to kill you. Now there’s a problem that practically cries out for a gun.
Is a rattlesnake rattling its fanny at you from a few feet away a big problem or a small one? Either way, gun. Stuck in the wilderness without food? Big problem. Hunting rifle. Problem solved. Sailor on a merchant vessel being attacked by Somali pirates? Big problem. Big gun, please. Algebra assignment requiring the quadratic formula and no internet access? Big problem. No gun required.
I may be more flip than my pocket video camera, but it’s not an entirely facetious (fatuous?) point. The Brady Bunch view guns as evil. (Evil I tell you!) Despite the fact that their name specifically restricts them to gun violence, they cut American gun owners zero slack.
Every gun crime is evidence that guns suck. As I predicted, the Brady Bunch are all over the story of the trailer-dwelling loony who killed his wife and four others after [allegedly] getting all amped-up over a bad breakfast. So . . . what? Keep guns out of the hands of nut cases? Just as soon as you tell us how to do that while still being able to defend ourselves against crazy violent people.
The really interesting this about this Brady Campaign “News Watch” is that it doesn’t even attempt to make an argument after sharing four stories of gun owners gone wild. It simply presents the incidents as proof positive that their cause is righteous. They don’t even bother to tell you what their cause is.
Gun control advocates deserve better. As do gun rights writers, who need higher quality grist for their mill. IMHO.
The problem with the Brady folk is that every one of them believe without a doubt in their heads that firearms are evil objectified, the work of the devil incarnate. They will always refuse to accept any good or reasonable use of a gun as a worthy argument for some access to weapons. As a popular saying goes: to a rabid gun control advocate a woman raped and strangled with her own panty hose is somehow morally superior to a different woman holding a defensive firearm while standing over the cooling body of her attacker.
Excellent post Robert (and comment by Uncle Lar).
There is also a related type of statement made by both the Brady Bunch type and some other fairly decent (perhaps passive) gun control advocates: “We just all need to realize violence is not the answer.” (It might be guns or war or any number of things in this case also.)
The key here is that they are projecting some wish they have on the entire human population. Even were they to make this change/choice for themselves, or even to convince you/me or whatever audience is listening or reading such dreams.
The problem is that we have NO control over the vast, overwhelming majority of other people in this world, and only limit influence over the very few with whom we communicate directly.
Sure, let’s all wish for world peace, but good people must NEVER disarm as long as there is even a remote possibility of another Hitler, Stalin, Mao, or even of the perhaps bit more benign Ghengis Khan, Julius Caesar, Napoleon, Alexander the Great etc.
As long as some human beings — even a very few — are willing to use violence and force to compel other human beings then thet good people much remain prepared to defend, protect, and resist such compulsion.
Stanley Neace was the shooter’s name. He was no stranger to the local sheriff’s office, and he was being evicted from his trailer.
May God have mercy on all of the dead and wounded, and give Grace and Peace to those who remain to mourn.
Some feel that every gun is evil and will someday cause a death or tragedy. It is only a matter of time. They believe gun manufacturers are to blame and anything bad that happens to gun makers is good karma. They also believe that it is just common sense that all guns that come into the possession of the police should be destroyed. This is to prevent the death/tragedy mentioned above. They have no concept that some states (such as Tennessee) require most police confiscated guns to be sold if they are serviceable and they are offended at this notion. These people use terms like "gun buy back" as if the government is the only rightful gun owner. They see the use of a gun for self defense to be an unlikely event. They believe your self defense gun should be sacrificed to the greater good of NO PRIVATE GUNS. These people include a surprising number of police officers and many, many political office holders and almost all of academia. They do not understand that the United States of America is the world's oldest constitutional government because of citizen owned firearms.
A hat tip to Uncle Lar and to Robert for this good article. I ran too long to get it into the comment above. Keep up the good work. E. Zach Lee-Wright
Gun control advocates believe that a raped and bleeding or dead woman is morally superior to one standing over the body of her attacker.