Mother Jones magazine’s Dave Gilson reckons the NRA’s whitewashing history at their National Firearms Museum. Specifically, he attacks the NRA’s recent tweet trumpeting the fact that their fabulous collection contains Henry Morton Stanley’s elephant gun while neglecting to mention that the African explorer was a homicidal maniac. Setting aside Twitter’s character limits. “As Stanley related in his own accounts, he repeatedly used his big guns to intimidate and kill people he encountered on his African travels. Here’s how he dealt with some of the “savages” who got in the way of his trans-continental journey in 1875 . . .
I discharged my elephant rifle, with its two large conical balls, into their midst…My double-barreled shotgun, loaded with buckshot, was next discharged with terrible effect, for, without drawing a single bow or launching a single spear, they retreated up the slope of the hill…
Twice in succession I succeed in dropping men determined on launching the canoes, and seeing the sub-chief who had commanded the party that took the drum, I took deliberate aim with my elephant rifle at him. That bullet, as I have since been told, killed the chief and his wife and infant, who happened to be standing a few paces behind him, and the extraordinary result had more effect on the superstitious minds of the natives than all previous or subsequent shots.
On getting out of the cove we saw two canoes loaded with men coming out in pursuit from another small cove. I permitted them to come within one hundred yards of us, and this time I used the elephant rifle with explosive balls. Four shots killed five men and sank the canoes.
Sounds like a grand day out to me. No, seriously, is Gilson implying that Stanley shouldn’t have been exploring Africa in the first place or that he should have allowed the natives to kill him and his party (if I may use that term)? Something like that, I presume. Anyway, Gilson twists the knife on Stanley’s rep.
The final body count of this incident, Stanley claimed, was 14 dead and 8 wounded, presumably including the baby and its mother. Due to tales such as this, Stanley gained a reputation for indiscriminate slaughter. George Bernard Shaw described him as a “wild-beast man, with his elephant gun, and his atmosphere of dread and murder.” Fellow expeditionist Richard Burton observed, “Stanley shoots negroes [sic] as if they were monkeys.”
And then, the money shot.
Though the elephant gun in the NRA’s collection is likely not the one fired in the [baby killing] passage above, it’s not surprising that the gun lobby isn’t volunteering the larger story behind the trigger-happy owner of this “special treasure.”
Ha! That said, point taken?
While I’d like to read the caption underneath the elephant gun exhibit at the NRA museum, it’s true that the lionization (so to speak) of Stanley’s exploits ignores the profoundly racist context of the exploration/exploitation of the Dark Continent. The same applies to the perpetuation of Teddy Roosevelt’s carefully manufactured manliness—illustrated by his iconic firearms—which ignores the President’s detestable, racist imperialism.
Great, important guns can trigger important debates about history. Or not.
I think you can shout “the gun is just a tool!” all you want……but it dosen’t matter. They will just shout back “the gun killed children.”
I will make it personal and emotional if they want………
my GUN saved my LIFE Many times. my GUN safeguards my family and my freedom.
Why do we insist that every great man of history be a saint? Here’s an idea, why not look at the whole man rather than demanding they these people be good according to OUR standard. Shocking idea really
Kind of like Nelson Mandela, canonized saint of the left. The man was neither devil nor angel. He had a great deal of blood on his hands from terrorist acts (including deaths of children). The narrative that he was in prison for peaceful protest alone is hogwash. On the other hand, when he was in a position to loot, murder, and oppress as the leader of South Africa, he chose not to. He was a communist, and often sided with the bad guy, true. But as communist leaders go, he was peaceful and respectful of all his people (black and white alike), and he didn’t loot his nation’s wealth like most of them do.
Either we’re judging him, or we aren’t. If we aren’t, then who are we to say he’s great? If we ARE, then let’s judge him not only by his great acts, but by the ones that make us shudder?
The question here is not whether he is being inappropriately judged to be an evil man, but whether his legacy shouldn’t be colored by all his acts- even the bad ones.
Telling the truth about guns or history can be messy because… well, it’s the truth. The literal whitewashing of what men like Stanley did isn’t helpful. Just because it’s uncomfortable doesn’t mean it should be ignored.
The liberal whitewashing of what men like Stanley did isn’t helpful.
FIFY.
CNN propaganda
Maybe Mother Jones can run an inconvenient expose of Mandela. He was certainly responsible for the death of more “innocent” people than Stanley. But then again, they were just Afrikaners. Mostly.
That would be an interesting read. Ghandi, he ain’t. It’s still commendable how he prevented what could have been a terrible civil war, that doesn’t mean he was non-violent. He just used non-violence as a tool when he saw it as effective (in his own words!)
South African journalists are having a terrible time trying to report on Mandela’s life and death. It isn’t (only) because of the complexity of his life, but much more because lauding Mandela’s leadership implies a need to point out the great new world being achieved by the nation, reporting on the current state of South Africa. Given that the nation is today a world leader in murder, rape, and robbery rates, the spectacle is considered mildly disappointing to many. I suppose Mother Jones’ editors fall into this camp gone quiet about the legacy.
There’s good history and bad history, if we kept only the good and disregarded all the bad there wouldn’t be much to learn about.
The guy was obviously racist, he should have let the cannibals eat him, just like victims of the Knockout Game should take their beatings without complaint to atone for the sins of slavery.
In the Mother Jones article there is a reference to a CNN production to be aired this evening, titled Global Lessons: On Guns. Based on the synopsis on the CNN website, I would not advise watching it unless you send your family away for the night (unless the wife and kiddies have a preternatural level of tolerance for you screaming, blaspheming, cussing, and hurling breakable objects about the house) and keep your Nitro pills, blood pressure medicine, and a phone to call 911 handy.
Obviously, I haven’t seen the segment, but the description leads me to believe it’s going to be a real horror show, featuring every technique CNN has developed over the years to tar and feather those on their “enemies list”.
I don’t even read Mother Jones articles, except the portions excerpted… don’t want to give them the clickthroughs. Bunch of psuedo-science and lefty claptrap.
I wonder what Gilson says when the people-of-the-gun have to
remind him exactly who actively propped up the civil rights
movement “cough NRA cough”.
Here’s what I wrote to him, he included his email address in the article. I emailed my Congressman and Senators, this man should be brought up on charges. It’s sedition, really.
Dear Lt. Col. Bateman,
After reading your op-ed piece in Esquire, I have to wonder where you acquired your law degree. Where did you practice? Did you do a clerkship somewhere? You make no mention of this in your article, yet you presume to know more about Constitutional Law than the entire United States Supreme Court. Perhaps you took some online or correspondence courses.
That aside, as a commissioned officer in the U.S. Army, you are sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United Stated of America – not some of it, not just the parts you agree with, but ALL of it, as it is written into law. Again, I feel compelled here to remind you that you are a commissioned officer in the Army, and not a politician: you are leading soldiers, and you are subject to follow the U.S. Code. This includes 18 USC 2385, 2387 and 2388. Your op-ed piece certainly seems, to me, to be in direct violation of these sections of the U.S. Code. Perhaps your intensive study of the law failed to include this.
Adolf Hitler had men like you among his ranks. They disarmed the populace “for their own good” prior to exterminating millions. In the end, however, it did not work out well for those with evil intentions for there are always more patriots and heroes than can possibly be imagined. The disdain that you harbor for the citizenry you feign to defend is as subtle in your writing as your lust for blood. I fear you, sir, may be a lunatic about whom we read in the headlines soon. Is this op-ed piece a cry for help, a warning sign not to be missed? It seems extremist to me.
You concern yourself most with the first 13 words of the Second Amendment, but the final 14 words are always to be remembered “…the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed,” as upheld by SCOTUS, D.C. v. Heller (7-290), and McDonald v. City of Chicago (08-1521). It is your SWORN DUTY to defend that, like it or not. If you disagree, perhaps it is time to retire your commission, sir.
Sincerely,
A. W.
So should we destroy or ignore history because it wasn’t pretty or the man wielding the rifle wasn’t a nice guy? I would be fascinated to see Hitlers personal Walther or Stalin’s Mosin doesn’t mean I have to like the old owner.
Did you notice how motherjones just call “negro’s” Monkeys? They could have used any other animal but purposely chose monkeys. Major League Freudian slip there. Mother jones writers and editors are a bunch of racists pretending to be concerned about blacks. Can’t help but wonder how many of them illegally conceal carry.
Fellow expeditionist Richard Burton observed, “Stanley shoots negroes [sic] as if they were monkeys.”
Sadly, I know this. What makes matters worse, is in my little city, if you are not close with the leo chief, he will not sign off on sbr’s, apparently no law-abiding citizen needs a suppressor, etc. If I did not know about trusts, I would be screwed. I already lost most hearing thanks to an i.e.d., I am not losing the rest. I just wish pro 2 A people near me, would try to help educate and point out the falsities and flat-out lies to people on the fence about firearms.
Ironically, Stanley may not have been all that bad, at least in relative terms. There’s a lot of evidence that he exaggerated his brutality and violence, out of a desire to make himself seem more authoritative and masterful.
http://www.amazon.com/Stanley-Impossible-Africas-Greatest-Explorer/dp/0300142234
Not that I condone what he did, but Mother Jones clearly hasn’t read the latest scholarship on the subject…
Mother Jones and scholarship? Mother Jones and intellectual honesty? These are guys that hired Mike Moore to be their chief editor when he was just a few years out of high school. These are also the same people who pay their interns less than Wal Mart and tell them to apply for food stamps when they ask for a living wage.
You’re funny…
It takes some serious brass balls for an outfit like Mother Jones to condemn a man for killing a baby. I’d think that would make him one of them.
Submitted one… as if it matters.
What they can’t do with lawmaking they will try to do with interpretation as much as possible.
This comic strip sums it up…
http://danieljmitchell.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/career-advice.jpg
Completely out of context…..we can easily sit here and accuse any number of people in our past, including heroes, that committed acts like this that today we see as being barbaric. Consider what we Americans did to the Native American population in this country.
…and what those Native Americans did to the tribes who’d established themselves in the same land previously. If you need some beach reading next year, I recommend “Empire of the Summer Moon,” covering just a bit about the Commanches. Indians warred and murdered for hunting ground just, you know, like European white folks did. Not all of them, surely, but not all Europeans bought slaves from Tipu Tip or slaughtered Native Americans.
PVC pipes metal washers and steel wool must be banned for the children!
I am surprised they did not mention that Stanley served in the Confederate Army in the Civil War. And in the Union Army. And in the Union Navy. And deserted the last!
He had an interesting life.
In anycase, the whole thing with Dr. Livingstone is extremely famous history. Without ever hearing of the story, the phrase “Dr. Livingstone, I presume” is in our cultural vocabulary. A good man or a bad man, that makes this very important historically.
Oh, and you shouldn’t dis Teddy Roosevelt. He may have been a jingoist, but he was actually pretty badass.
I don’t know anymore. So many people are ignorant about buying guns (“What do you mean, they call the FBI?”) and what a background check is(Hint: It ain’t a crystal ball). I had someone actually use the scene in the Halloween remake of Malcolm McDowell buying a gun as PROOF! of how easy it is to buy a gun. I pointed out Illinois has a 72 hour waiting period and the whole FOID thing but then it’s on to “the internet! You can buy a gun without a background check on the internet!” Where? I ask. “On the internet!” I can also buy drugs, whores and real live human slaves on the internet too. So pass another law.
…the hell is my point?
So, gun-rights supporters are the minority, but some how progun politicians keep getting elected in our first past the post elections and anti gun politicians are getting booted.
Because that makes sense.
I guess our democratic system is failing.
Also, I thought the whole schitck of the left was that minority communities are under represented and that they are in need of special protections…
That’s why I think the POTG need to start singing “We Shall Overcome” at gun rallies and pro-(and ESPECIALLY anti-) gun demonstrations!
Think about it. Eventually, the TV stations will pick up on it.
http://www.vlrc.org/articles/110.html
Submitted with fingers crossed…
1jx-896p-s1gb
“Hunting is valid”? Well, that YOU very much, Col. Bob. How generous.
Except that the Second Amendment has about as much to do with hunting as the First has to do with playing Scrabble. Which is to say, nothing.
I think it’s about time for you to find some honest work in the private sector. But thanks for playing.
Alan Gottlieb’s Second Amendment Foundation ALSO worked behind the scenes draft the universal gun registry in Manchin-Toomey:
http://www.mediaite.com/online/watch-gun-rights-advocate-reveals-key-role-in-writing-manchin-toomey-background-checks-amendment/
And:
http://www.examiner.com/article/gun-group-had-hand-writing-manchin-toomey-background-check-amendment
It’s nice that they’re back on our side for the time being. They may have done some nice things, but they tried very very hard to sell us down the river, and for what? So the antis could keep coming back for more, until there’s nothing left? Registration leads to confiscation (as New Yorkers are finding out at this very moment, btw).
My question is whether this gun has any real value outside of the competition world. Nick makes a good case for it if you compete, but for the rest of us, do we really need a $1,500 9mm with a 16″ barrel? There are other guns out there in that caliber that are a good deal cheaper.
FAIL = WIN ?
I’m so confused. Actually, I’m disappointed my state only got a D. Although, considering a mere 3 years ago I lived in one of those asinine states who ranked an A-, I couldn’t be happier. Still work to be done.
So 82% didn’t say they recommended it