Skip to main content
  1. News
  2. Politics
  3. Policy & Issues

Opinion pieces illustrate problem with ‘progressive’ gun philosophy

See also

An Oregon physician wants to “register all guns like we register all motor vehicles” and a left-leaning Florida blogger insists that citizens leave their firearms, and self-defense rights, at home in a nightstand; two opinion pieces published Tuesday at far ends of the country that demonstrate what gun rights activists see as a fundamental disconnect between anti-gunners and reality.

Writing in an Op-Ed for the online Portland Oregonian, Lake Oswego physician Perry Grossman argued against carrying firearms, and in support of revising the Second Amendment “to be consistent with the technologically complex society we have become.” Many in the gun rights community might consider that flawed thinking, since – technology or not – violent criminals can still hurt you and they don’t make appointments.

“We need to become a society whose individuals do not carry devices specifically made to kill other individuals,” Grossman wrote. “We need to become a society whose reverence for the value of each life does not permit the carrying of devices to extinguish human life.”

The counter to his observations is that armed citizens don’t carry firearms “to kill other individuals,” but to keep from being killed. The armed citizen reveres life, especially his or her own and those of their families. However, the lives of criminals who threaten them may not get the same consideration. Oregonian readers are reacting as one might expect; some agree, others definitely do not.

Orlando’s Bryan Driscoll wrote about a recent driving trip up the East Coast. He stopped somewhere in rural North Carolina for food and spotted a fellow packing a pistol. In Driscoll’s opinion, “If you want to carry your gun with you to McDonald’s because you need protection when ordering a Big Mac, that’s not okay.”

Odd that he should mention McDonalds, because July 18 was the 30th anniversary of the 1984 McDonald’s massacre in San Ysidro, Calif. A loon named James Oliver Huberty opened fire, killing 21 people and injuring 19 others. How might things have turned out differently if, say, some legally-armed citizens, perhaps even an open carry group, had been sitting there when Huberty walked in?

The opinions expressed by Grossman and Driscoll are instructive to Second Amendment advocates, as they typify the anti-gun mindset. They spell out the differences between Utopians and utilitarians; those who envision a perfect world (according to their standards) and those who understand they live in the real world.

Advertisement