Dr. Vino called me a lot yesterday. The charter member of TTAG’s Armed Intelligentsia wanted metaphorical ammo for his Twitter war against Mike “The Gun Guy” Weisser. I tried to convince Dr. V to cease fire by describing the arguments I used to have with my second wife.
Whenever I got cornered the former Mrs. Farago, when there was no way for her to escape the facts, she changed the subject. That’s exactly what happens when you “debate” a gun control advocate. The entire exercise is perfectly pointless; anti-gunners are divorced from reality.
Here’s an excellent example from one Jozef Figa, guest columnist at Iowa’s thegazette.com.
Mr. Figa was shocked and appalled by The Hawkeye State’s move towards gun rights restoration. Specifically, Senate File 25 (a “stand your ground bill”), Senate Joint Resolution 2 (permitless carry) and Senate File 108 (“which calls for eliminating federal prohibitions on machine guns and sawed-off shotguns”).
Wait. What? That last bill eliminates state prohibitions on machine guns and short-barreled rifles and shotguns. Federal regulations — as dictated by the National Firearms Act — would remain in place.
See what I mean about gun control advocates and facts? Upon this firm foundation of sand Mr. Figa builds his castle of consternation.
What if these bills become laws? With lots of people running around with different guns, it would be impossible to distinguish good people with guns from bad people with guns. The results could be drastic.
Predicting that firearms freedom will lead to a “drastic” surge in “gun violence” (a.k.a., blood running in the streets) is gun control advocates’ go-to strategy. And why not? It’s really all they’ve got.
Most of the time, proponents of civilian disarmament like Mr. Figa leave it at that: bad things will happen! This time it’s different. Mr. Figa actually illustrates this fantastic connection between gun rights and murderous mayhem.
Here is a scenario: I am a good person with a gun. I am in a shopping mall. All of the sudden shots are being fired. People are screaming and run around in panic. For me, the choice is obvious: I need to find the bad person with a gun.
My sawed-off shotgun is ready. So am I. And there I see him: A person with a machine gun. I yell, “Freeze!” He turns toward me; gun in hand. So, I stand my ground and shoot him. After all, I don’t know him, and I did not have time to ask him whether he is a bad person or a good person.
What if I do know him and I know that he is a good person? But good people have been known to turn bad. People who used to be good have done most mass killings in the U.S. So, I stand my ground and shoot him.
But what if I actually know that he is a good person? He doesn’t know me. What he sees is a person with a gun. I could yell that it’s OK, that I am a good person. But why should he believe me? So he will try to stand his ground and shoot me. Therefore, I have no choice. I have to stand my ground and shoot him.
Chances are there will be more than two people with guns in that place. So, we can safely multiply the number of people in this scenario by, say, twenty. Which means that many good people will shoot other good people. And the bad person can sit back and enjoy the show.
Mr. Figa’s nightmare of “everyone shooting everyone because no one knows who’s the bad person” is patently ridiculous. Do I really have to point out that common sense dictates that the person shooting innocent people is the bad person?
How many defensive gun uses — of which there are thousands each year — have ended-up in a free-for-all firefight (regardless of the types of weapons involved)? For that matter how many police shoot a good guy with a gun in an active shooter situation? Precisely none.
To those who think that this scenario is improbable and otherwise crazy, I have a question: Why?
With lots of people carrying guns distinguishing a good person from a bad person would be impossible. Therefore, the aforementioned bills threaten to transform public places in Iowa into free fire zones.
Mr. Figa’s logic uses the same “logic” the former Mrs. Farago deployed: this is true because it’s true. While I will not speak [further] ill of Ex II, Mr. Figa shows himself to be a paranoid fantasist, someone who knows nothing about the subject of which he speaks.
Is this kind of ignorance bliss, for a Sociology professor no less? Yes. For anyone who values their life, for any American who cherishes their natural, civil and constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms, no.