Yesterday, I blogged an article by H. A. Goodman. After recapping the usual anti-gun tripe, Mr. Goodman argued that law-abiding black Americans should open carry firearms to prove to the police that they’re not criminals. Great landing, wrong airport. Law-abiding black Americans should open carry because they have a natural, civil and Constitutional right to keep and bear arms. Just like all Americans, regardless of their race, color, creed or sexual orientation. Here’s another gun control article by a [gay] black American that doesn’t quite make it to the landing strip. Still, it’s worth a read . . .
Why it’s so difficult to solve America’s gun problem can somewhat be explained within 20 seconds of the 17th episode of “The Family Guy’s” eighth season. Brian and Stewie are trapped in a bank vault and after some silly banter, which leads to a ridiculous scuffle, Stewie ends up grabbing a gun and pointing it at Brian:
Brian: Look, Stewie, c’mon you don’t know how to use that thing.
Stewie: Oh really? What if I hold it sideways like a black guy . . .
Since the mid-1990s pantomiming holding a gun sideways has been the default pose struck by the misinformed who want to appear intimidating and/or cool. Each time a gun rights advocate talks about the Second Amendment and hunting, I think about the sheep holding their guns to the side.
In the gun rights world, the word “sheep” refers to unarmed civilians who refuse to take responsibility for their own safety. Here, no. Here, Granderson uses the word “sheep” to refer to gang bangers. Or wannabe gang bangers. In his cnn.com dietribe [sic], LZ Granderson‘s labels people who defend the Second Amendment (and hunting!) as poseurs.
When it comes to the conversation on guns, we must remember one size does not fit all. There are at least two Americas, and one of them is likely populated with folks imitating fictional characters in gangster movies — unaware that, reportedly, film directors instructed actors to hold the prop that way so they could capture the face and the gun in the same frame.
It’s all Hollywood.
The idea that gun rights advocates are all Walter Mitty types dreaming of doing the Dirty Harry on some bad guy is hardly original. You see it all the time in the comments section underneath posts by organizations lobbying for civilian disarmament. *cough* projection *cough* Gun owners refuse to wear the label because it doesn’t fit. Their guns are for defense against criminality and tyranny. And hunting! And fun!
Anyone who believes that gun rights advocates advocate Hollywood-style vigilante justice has spent little to no time researching the subject or, indeed, talking to people on the pro-gun side – patriotic Americans with an excellent grasp of why various types of “gun violence” occur and how to reduce their incidence. Granderson doesn’t want that conversation; it would ruin his “two Americas” (a.k.a., us vs. them) theory of “gun violence.”
Pretending the weekly gun violence that grips places such as Chicago and Baltimore doesn’t run along racial lines is counterproductive. Just as grouping mass school shootings perpetrated by the mentally ill with gang violence is counterproductive . . .
Each time we link an Adam Lanza with FBI statistics about Detroit, we move further from addressing either problem. Those who are truly concerned about the regularly underreported bloodshed in urban America must resist piggybacking the media coverage that swirls around the camera-ready anomalies like Columbine.
True story: “gun violence” does run along racial lines. Whites tend to kill whites, blacks tend to kill blacks. Also true: mass shootings are not the same as gang violence. They are anomalies. But even as Granderson tries to separate “gun violence” into its constituent parts, he just can’t get it together, solution-wise,
Stewie making a joke about holding a handgun sideways has very little if anything to do with background checks or mental health care. But it does highlight the shortfalls of public education and the war on drugs.
It shines a light on whom the National Rifle Association is not advocating for, as no licensed instructor would tell a student to hold the weapon that way.
It sounds like Granderson’s calling for the National Rifle Association to teach gang bangers proper grip, stance and technique. In reality, he’s indulging in a small digression to shore up his progressive credentials, by calling the NRA racist (in his own roundabout sort of way). Again, not an original thought. That said . . .
Granderson’s this close to stating that the gang bangers of Stewie’s imagination (and reality) are the result of a broken public education system and an un-winnable war on drugs. At the same time, psychos need treatment/incarceration. As the Dixie Chicks sang, there’s your trouble. Granderson. Just. Can’t. Get there.
Instead of constantly searching for sweeping laws that approach all gun violence as one in the same, we need to recognize that the comedic bit in episode 17 of the eighth season of “The Family Guy” has nothing to do with Newtown. Until we get there in our talks, all we will ever have is talk.
Landing is a bitch. Granderson can’t get his wheels down on this one because he’s a liberal. If he told the truth about “gun violence” – that it’s not rooted in firearms accessibility or cured by gun control – he’d be out faster than a sumo wrestler trying to beat the throw to first base. Shame. It would be nice to read another Road to Damascus moment in the fight for gun rights. Still, as this article indicates, there is hope.
Man, that article confused me. I thought I was racscissssttttt for having gunnnnsss while white.
Apparently I have been guilty of teaching inner-city gang kids how to hold their guns incorrectly, because the NRA said so. And deliberately misleading people on the root cause of SandyHook because…gangs.
I genuinely feel bad for the progtards trying to keep up with the Kewl Kos Kids Klub, for I can see them now frantically going back to their crib notes and flash cards, before going out clubbing, to be sure they are on top of the latest in the narrative…
Or more likely, LZ musta just finished a Mike Brown Stogie, and phoned this in, and the intern for the editor doesnt know how to use spell check, or logical sentence structure.
Is it just me, or does LZ and Teabagger Anderson represent the saddest possible role models for the LGBT community? I’d be embarrased to have them speak for me…much less give them awards, but hey, the corn rows are cool. Diversity. Whatever. Pretty ironic that LZ is down talking Hollyweird. Face, meet mirror, LZ.
Anyway, its a feature, not a bug. Another good example of how weirdly disconnected from the real world that CNN has gotten…another milestone on the drop off the cliff of viewers and revenue, and evidence of how hard they have to reach since they abandoned the news, to speak to “entertainment” is this latest example of ” the meat for the dogs” in the shrinking demo segment they are fighting it out for with MSNBC.
Point of grammar: when did the phrase “one and the same”, which has been around longer than the gold old U S of A, deteriorate into “one in the same”? and when did journalists get so illiterate as to use it?
When “Journalism” became a college major.
Aha!! I think you’re on to something…
I expect it was about the same time ‘tongue in cheek” became “tongue and cheek” or “tongue ‘n’ cheek”.
Could it be that the TRUTH is starting to get through to people on a grand scale?
To be fair, it is next to impossible for anyone to instantly change their mindset on something 180 degrees. It takes time and starts with small steps. I have to wonder if these sort of posts from the gun grabbers are their first small steps toward accepting and internalizing the truth.
We really need a national level powwow to organize, determine a strategy, and implement it. The current groups such as Gun Owners of America, Second Amendment Foundation, and the National Rifle Association are important and should continue to exist. However, no one is taking on the most important task of all — informing the masses of the TRUTH.
We know that we cannot count on legacy/mainstream media to do the job since they oppose us. Fortunately, absolutely nothing stops us from engaging the public via rallies/demonstrations and Internet enabled methods such as blogs and videos. Well, there is one thing stopping us from doing that — ourselves.
He works for an entertainment organization masquerading as a news organization.
Admit that 90% of the junk on CNN is mendacious puffery and the other 10% is canted “news”.
This goes for every other “mainstream” news organization as well in my opinion.
Well said, except that you really don’t believe what you write. Despite you wanting to give the image of believing that mainstream news is all Bs, your posts say otherwise. You buy the mainstream view hook, line, and sinker on every major story line that actually means anything.
The Return of Snowflake: No True Scotsman Edition!
You’re predictably entertaining. Dodge, weave and scurry is your MO. Oh, and I left out embarrassingly lame attempts at ad hominem.
Aaaaand back to your projection defense mechanism.
“Granderson can’t get his wheels down on this one because he’s a liberal.”
I think you misspelled moron.
Liberals can get to the truth — they can, even though they usually don’t — but it must be very disturbing for them to do so. After all, once somebody realizes the fallacy inherent in one element of the Democrat catechism, it must cast doubt on the others. But morons will never get there, because, well, they’re morons.
It’s the same reason that, after 5,000 pages of evidence to the contrary, some people are stuck on Hands Up, Don’t Shoot.
The thing is: while the vast majority are too stupid or lazy to think for themselves, there are some – such as the authors of the two articles referenced here – who can think, but who willfully choose not to take their thoughts to their logical conclusions, lest those conclusions challenge their progressive worldview.
His firearms expertise, he brags, is derived from a cartoon show? Is there another definition of “stupid”?
Taking what I can get here–at least he was factually based, and honest, enough to call Columbine (and Newtown, and such) “anomalies”. I think that’s a pretty big step forward for a liberal/gun-grabber (which I realize are pretty much “one in the same [sic]”).
Robert… Your headline might be closer to the truth than you originally though. LZ wrote, what I though was at least, and pretty good opinion piece on Gun Viloence late last year after the Navy Yard shooting.
I bookmarked the link http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/17/opinion/granderson-gun-control-fail/index.html?hpt=hp_t4 because I think it is a reasonable step in the right direction (especially considering where it was posted) and I like to whip it out when debating with liberal/anti friends of mine. Specifically this line quoted from the article I linked “And it will keep continue to happen until the advocates accept that ridding the country of guns is a hopeless — and unconstitutional mission — and that the real goal should be addressing the factors that lead to the various forms of gun violence: factors such as poverty, mental health and failing schools.”
It almost seams like he walked his position back a little bit in the one you linked above… most likely because he got a royal dressing down by his handlers over at CNN for not sticking to the party line.
The public school system isn’t broken. It was never intended to educate, and is in fact doing exactly what its Progressive overlords want it to do: deliver Progressive votes.
I’m having a hard time teasing out a point to his article.
Between this and the other “pro-ish” article featured the other day, I think I know what’s going on; I think reality is finally trickling down to these folks that their previously held views/solutions on guns & violence simply don’t work. It’s taken years, but I think that we’ve at least gotten through to these folks that they are wrong, even if they are of course not ready to admit we might be right. And thus, we get these weird, confused, rambling articles frantically searching for a rhetorical path connecting their prior biases with their newfound realizations. The write with the same arrogant self-assuredness as is typical of op-eds, but the shear amount of conflict in the article strongly suggests this is more introspective than promotional; I think LZ realizes something is wrong with his world view in this area, and is trying to remedy the situation by applying his learned principles…and finding them lacking. Though I’m sure he’d hate to hear it from her, Rand was right when she said “there are no contradictions; if you find one, check your premises”
Thus, we get folks claiming that if only black men were seen to be armed (as opposed to merely being assumed to be armed/dangerous by police) they would therefore have no fear from authorities, and that the high rate of gang violence among black youth is due to their emulating movie stars. Not that there is wildly unjustified paranoia fanned by decades of anti-gun propaganda, nor the lack of compelling alternatives to gang-life in the inner cities.
A few more probing essays of this type by the likes of LZ might get him the rest of the way (or at least as far as the ’60’s Panthers got) to the realization of exactly what guns are necessary for and why.
As much as I love this website and have endless respect for what you do, I must disagree with this article. I believe you have entirely missed LZ’s (typically poor-worded) point. His point when it comes to “gun violence” has always been that there are two kind:
1) Mass shootings largely perpetrated by mentally disturbed, middle class whites and
2) Run-of-the-mill gangland shootings that you find in Detroit, Baltimore, or Chicago.
The point of this article, as in all his gun-related articles, is that one-size-fits-all solutions CANNOT POSSIBLY solve both of these problems. That is why he says things like “link Lanza with Detroit,” etc. etc.
To be honest, the rest of his article is pure fluff. The whole deal about holding a handgun sideways and Family Guy is his bumbling attempts at an into. Regarding this fluff, I can only remind you of Hanlon’s Razor:
Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
I contrinue to find open carry to be a tactical blunder, serving little purpose other than to let the bad guys know that you own some ordnance that they might, with a little bit of planning and the element of surprise, be able to take from you. In addition, open carry has always put me in mind of those pretentious martial arts students who wear jackets or t-shirts advertising bearing logs like “Whie Crane Kung-Fu,” or “GracieJiu-Jitsu,” thereby advertising what they believe to be their proficiency in these disciplines. Not for me, thanks.
But it’s exactly what’s necessary when a mob of looters/rioters are descending upon your home/place of business with intent to steal and firebomb what’s yours, as evidenced in Ferguson and in LA years back. You never *need* overt display of the ability to take life in your own defense.. until the protections of society break down and you suddenly do.
Name one instance of an open-carrier having his gun taken from him. That’s right you can’t because it doesn’t happen. No one is that crazy to attempt to do it since people who do carry in that state are responsible and aware of their surroundings.
You CCW-only folks who put down open carriers are no better than anti’s coming up with lies that never happen like “blood in the streets”. I don’t open carry but if it were legal in Florida I would considering how hot it gets and I don’t like tiny handguns.