Not Ben Stein. He’s not just an actor and pitch man, he’s also an economist and an attorney. But we won’t hold those last two against him. Much. Despite those handicaps, though, he’s got a pretty good bead on the whole gun control thing. “I have never understood the flaw in the argument that when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns. And, of course, there are already laws against murder.” Elegant in it’s simplicity, no? Ben compares gun violence where he summers in Idaho – where guns are everywhere – to the crime rates in places it’s most difficult to get your hands on a heater; namely L.A., Chicago and D.C. “Obviously, Sandpoint, Idaho, is a very much calmer place than Chicago, and I’m not saying that people in Chicago should be allowed to just tote guns in their cars the way many can, and do, in North Idaho.” Oops! Well, no one’s perfect.
Bravo!
Replace “no guns” signs with “no murder” signs.
Very nice. I have no idea Ben was on board. Already posted on my FB. Bueller?…Bueller?
Look at his resume. He was a speech writer for Nixon and Ford in a prior life. He is a conservative Republican from WAAAY back.
Ben Stein is alright, and it’s hearteningly to see another intellectual in the pro-freedom / 2A ring.. His piece on Expelled – the unwillingness of the public education to even consider intelligent design – was also a good thought provoking piece.
One might think that the anti-gunners, who tend to promote tolerance, are in fact the most intolerant SOB’s in the whole discussion.
Damn. Meant to say “heartening.”
My grammar-Nazi-trigger-finger got itchy (no pun intended) until I saw your correction.
I saw this piece when it aired yesterday morning. I was pleasantly surprised.
Bravo Mr. Stein, bravo.
His comment on someone attempting to shoot up an Idaho theater is priceless.
“Laws that forbid the carrying of arms…disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes…Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage, than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man .. “
Ben Stein just goes to disprove the myth that most Jews are for Gun Control.
Some of the staunchest people on the 2nd Amendment are Jewish. Most of the Jews I know are gun nuttier than many gentiles. Perhaps if you go to NYC you will find many Jewish folks with no exposure to firearms, and who don’t think highly of them, but I’d suggest that’s more a product of being a New Yorkers than being Jewish.
The Jewish guy who made criminals in deadly New York think twice was Bernie Goetz. Crime in NY plunged after that happened.
After realizing what Herr Hitler did to them after disarming them, I should think they would never neglect nor give up their right to keep and bear arms again!
By the way I myself am not Jewish but I became a member of Jews for the preservation of Firearms because of all the gun organizations and lobbies I know they are the staunchest at maintaining our rights. http://jpfo.org
The JPFO is a great organization.
I joined the JPFO after reading about it here on TTAG.
I am Jewish raised in CA, and served in the IDF. I am pretty gun nutty if you want to call me that.
No I don’t have an arsenal at home, but I do believe that if law abiding citizens were armed, and took it seriously, i.e. trained, and that means mental training too, then we would be much safer.
I have never heard that Jews are against guns.
Most of what he says I agree with. However, he made two points that I have some problem with:
1. The idea that “people in Chicago should not be able to tote a gun in their car the way people in North Idaho do”. Why not, Ben? The 2A applies to all or none. Do people who live in Idaho need guns more than people who live in Los Angeles do or have some inherent right that people in LA do not?
2. The idea that if someone starts a killing spree in Sandpoint, Idaho, and several people return fire, killing him, that is vigilante law enforcement. Really, Ben? Should they sit on their hands and wait for the police to arrive 20 minutes later?
While I give Ben points for recognizing the fact that more gun control will do nothing to stop crime, he still has a ways to go.
IMO, Ben wasn’t calling a hypothetical self-defense movie shooting vigilante. I think he was following up to his comment to let people know (especially the Left) that he believes in drawing a line between self-defense and too excessive vigilante justice by private citizens which is something the gun-grabbers often fret about when discussing more gun ownership and and less gun control. Just my take on it.
Wow. I thought this guy was an anti-liberty anti-gun mass media talking head lacking objectivity. I was wrong.
he sounds smart enough to be reasoned with and maybe his mind could be changed on the carrying guns in cars. which is better than the grabber types in the media. their minds are made up, don’t try to confuse them with facts.
The anti keeps howling “reasonable” gun control. However I AM an advocate for PROPER gun control. The difference? Reasonable requires turning in your guns. Proper means good aim, both hands, properly holstered guns in law abiding peoples hands at all times!
I’m pro concealed carry. It’s my belief that a very different underlying factor is at play in Chicago, NY, and Washington, D.C. That is the underlying drug trade, gangs, and poverty. Illegal guns are used by individuals in these groups to get what they want. Illegal guns and these underlying groups will not go away. However, I do believe that allowing concealed carry will reduce crime slightly in these areas when someone tries to commit a violent crime on a law abiding concealed carry citizen.
There’s nothing wrong with gun control. Ben says he is all for keeping guns out of the hands of “crazy people.” Well then if, as studies suggest, one in three people has a mental disorer, then should guns be readily available?
I live in Canada, where we have gun control and gun violence have only started to be a serious problem over the last few years. When a homicied is committed and a gangster or other criminal is caught with an illegal hand gun, it ALWAYS turns out to be an illegal weapon smuggled into Canada from the United States.
If you people love your damn guns so much that you fail to consider the threat they pose to your own citizens, then can you at least keep your damn guns on your own side of the border?
Lets start small. How about you start by keeping your geese on your side of the border rather than letting them crap all over the place down here. Once that’s taken care of, we’ll talk about Celine Dion.
“I live in Canada, where we have gun control and gun violence have only started to be a serious problem over the last few years. When a homicied is committed and a gangster or other criminal is caught with an illegal hand gun, it ALWAYS turns out to be an illegal weapon smuggled into Canada from the United States.”
——
Do you see the flaw, there? You have gun control, and still have gun violence. The reason for this is quite simple: CDNOL (criminals do no obey laws).
what happens in canada stays in canada,sparky. close the border if you don’t want american guns there. i promise i’ll never smuggle a gun into canada. until you catch me breaking that promise, shut your pie hole.