Dear Liberal,
It’s time we talk. The debate over gun control is not about guns, it’s about culture, and here is how it works: You point to school shootings and other violence and say that it’s my fault because I support the right to keep and bear arms. I point to violent video games and sociopathic teenagers, and I say the problem is your fault, thanks to inadequately internalized values and morals.
But here’s the thing: Between guns and culture, only one thing has changed. Weapons have been in the hands of man since time immemorial. There is nothing special about semi-automatic “assault weapons.” In fact, until 1934 people could go out and buy fully automatic Thompson submachine guns, hand grenades or just about any other implement of destruction they could afford.
Admittedly, there were a limited number of mafia “hits” in which those weapons were used by unsavory characters to snuff out other unsavory characters. But I defy you to find a single instance in which a child of the 1930s took Daddy’s “Tommy Gun” to school and shot up his classroom.
We can debate merits of the 1960s another time (with pleasure), but I think we can both agree that, as a cultural standard, the innocence of “Leave It to Beaver” pretty much went the way of the dinosaur by the time of the 1968 Democratic National Convention.
Now that the flower children are all grown up (sort of) and produced self-esteem-dependent, atheistic children of their own, we are shocked to discover them to be inadequately socialized. Then, inevitably, they encounter a setback. It could be a romance gone wrong, perhaps rejection by an attractive social group. Whatever the catalyst, equipped with “my” weapons and “your” values, they cut loose on some campus somewhere.
Now, we could go the way of the Brits who, after the Dunblane massacre, banned everything in sight. Unfortunately, in this most perfect of gun control laboratories – an island nation with strict laws and tight borders – the result has been an explosion in crime…and yes, that especially includes gun crime.
It has also led their inadequately socialized post-60s kiddies to stab each other with such alarming regularity that the British have now begun to ban knives, leading us to the sad but inescapable conclusion that Brits can no longer be trusted with sharp objects.
On their present path, the nation of Winston Churchill and the “stiff upper lip” will soon ban running with scissors (if they are allowed scissors at all), and kitchen matches will be the stuff of museums, quite probably under surveillance cameras and armed guard.
Unfortunately, because you are liberal, and because liberalism seems to manifest itself as a pathological obsession to run my life, I can’t reason with you. Therefore, my only choice is to beat you. (Stop cowering: I mean metaphorically, not literally.)
My sole recourse is to marginalize you and reclaim my culture, and that is what I have set about doing. If not me, then my children. If not them, their children. We will make the Thirty Years’ War look like a trifle.
There. We’ve cleared the air. Don’t we all feel just a little better?
Sincerely,
A Conservative
| Dear Readers: Please accept my apologies for the delay in publishing a new piece. For the next three weeks, unusual demands on my work schedule will prevent me from publishing more than about once per week, after which I will resume a normal publication schedule of three times per week. For notification when new articles are published, please feel free to subscribe to examiner.com's "subscribe by e-mail." Please accept my thanks for your patience. |
www.GunsPoliticsandFreedom.com
For legislative information, go to:
www.GRNC.org
Check out other Gun Rights Examiners:
- Atlanta: Georgia has more places off limits to bearing arms than California
- Austin: Justifying deadly force (Part 3)
- Boston: The enslavement of a nation; on our way toward bondage
- Cleveland: Public interest in gun rights continues to rise
- DC: Virginia gun owners should crash the party on June 9th
- Denver: A post from 2038
- Los Angeles: Abortion Doctor's killer was Militia?
- Minneapolis: Giving Judge Sotomayor a fair hearing
- National: 'Future weapons' no solution for 'friendly fire'
- Seattle: ‘Shoot to wound’ advocates have watched too much television
- St. Louis: Gun rights advocates make progress
- Wisconsin:
Copyright © F. Paul Valone All rights reserved
No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, scanning, digitizing or any information storage and referral system, without written permission from the publisher. For reprint permission, contact: fpv@fpaulvalone.com
Comments
As an advocate of gun control (regulate everything that couldn't ostensibly be used for hunting), I appreciate your simple explanation of your position.
And I agree with it (largely). The breakdown in common decency (morals) is definitely a problem.
However I do take exception with the "always been weapons, always will be" stance. With the exception of luring all your classmates into a dead-end canyon and releasing an avalanche of rocks upon them, historical methods of killing another person were intensely personal, close-up, and required a certain level of skill (swordsmanship, for example).
The ease with which a 12-year-old can clean out a supermarket with an automatic gun, is pretty much unparalleled in the history of aggression.
And that is the core issue I have with ridiculous guns like fully automatic weapons. As much as I love to shoot them myself, I don't think they have a productive place in society.
Your thoughts on this would be appreciated...
The serious hole in your logic is that just because someone else uses something to kill people doesn't justify taking it away from me. I have never, nor will I ever, murder anyone with any of my firearms. They are perfectly safe and secure in my hands and none of your, or anyone else business. That's the same as outlawing cars because of drunk drivers. Don't treat the symptoms, treat the disease, the underlying causes.
BTW, fully automatic firearms have not been available to the public since the 30's. The 'assault weapons' that everyone keeps talking about are simply auto-loading firearms, but they still fire one round per pull of the trigger...
Wow...what a one-sided "argument". I don't know what they tell you in the moonshine backwoods where you harbor your love for guns and fear of responsibility, but what you've failed to mention in your rant is that it's EVERYBODY'S fault. Yeah a freak or two snap and shoot up a school, but it's usually in some one man two cow town(much like the one you are assumably living in). While I agree that it's not the gun that lurks in the shadows and kills, it is the holder of the gun...but blind ignorance as to the populace of said killers is hardly an acceptable rebutle of why you feel you are completely entitled to your tool of pre-taxidermy. Our country was founded on the right to protect yourself and your family, but while you point your finger at one demographic, there are ten other podunk maniacs gearing up for domestic war and preparing to "do god's work" to kill the presidant of the United States. Maybe you should try explaining your reasons rather than tellling..
I was going to try to post an intelligent response to CJ and Hopit, but after several readings of what they have said, I realized they wouldn't understand anything intelligent.
So, let's try this. Bite me!
If you are for gun control, why dont you come live here in South Africa? We have school stabbings that will make Columbine look like a field trip. Home invasions that leave entire families dead. Shootouts on the highway with cash-in-transit vehicles. These criminals are very seldom caught, and if they are, conviction is highly unlikely (conviction rate of 8%). Our woman and children gang raped with husbands and fathers made to watch. We are prisoners in our own homes. If we dont like it, our goverment tells us to leave. Apartheid does not justify the horrendous crimes committed in this country.
Our Firearms Control Act does not have a single entry dealing with criminality. Only legal gun ownership. Our hunting industry has just about collapsed. An industry that brought in $1bn per year. Conservation is non-existant.
So come live here. Get a taste of what the American life will be like when liberals have their way. It sounds like you will enjoy it.
Well, I won't be as polite as SA.
I and my friends had guns in our pickups/cars at school during hunting season. Hell, I know people that went to grade school in rural Tennessee who left their guns in the CLOAK ROOM because they walked to school, and were expected to fetch supper on the way home. Firearms technology has been just variations on a theme since about 1885 or so. If you think not, google Hiram Maxim.
A small minority of the population consists of sociopaths (thank you Dr. Spock). Provided we can correct the conditions that created them, it is a self correcting problem as long as the decent majority has access to arms.
Since Hopit and CJ do not possess weapons, or skills with weapons, one wonders how they propose to disarm me.
Molon labe, indeed.
The Phrase "When guns are outlawed Only outlaws will have guns." is a two edged sword...
Blaming all gun owners for crime is like blaming all whites for slavery
Let us submit a few facts for consideration. There's somewhere between 80-120 million gunowners in this country. Between them they own 40% of the world's supply of small arms. Somewhere around 8 million of them are dedicated enough about their unalienable rights to be quite active politically.
So let's say you get your fondest dream, and outlaw civilian possession of firearms tomorrow. Let us also for the moment ignore court challenges, and the possibility of organized resistance. Just what do you think is going to happen?
We don't have to guess, though, we have very clear evidence. In a couple of states some firearms HAVE been outlawed, and the order went out to turn them in. In NO state has compliance been higher than 2%, and the average has been under 1/2%.
All right, congratulations. You've just with the stroke of a pen probably created at least 78 million ticked off, heavily armed felons. Who ya gonna call, ghostbusters? (continued)
Because you got a BIG problem. Past events suggest that the overwhelming majority of those people are going to get MORE politically active, and work diligently to get that law changed. And the people responsible run out of politics as permanently as possible. With that many motivated people - guided by the very successful and experienced cadre of current activists - they will form a force such as hasn't been seen in American politics for generations.
So if things are played out in the political arena as I suspect, you are gonna lose, not only on this topic, but EVERYTHING. If you and your ilk are stupid enough to push things to the point of violence...
Between the police and the military, you have 4 million potential enforcers - some of whom will join the resistance. God help you. A few hundred IRA folks held the British security forces at bay for the better part of a century, and forced a political solution. They had nothing like those numbers - or equipment and training.
I don't see any point in arguing with someone who thinks every gun that cannot "ostensibly be used for hunting" should be banned. Why anyone sides against the peaceable person who wants a gun for self defense is a mystery to me and, at this stage, I don't care. Ordinary citizens are finally realizing the anti-gun propaganda of the past decades is lies, half-truths and distortions. The straw house where the hoplophobes have stored their hopes is being blown down by the big bad gun owners.
Get over it; get used to it.
CJ, the trouble with the "up close and personal" excuse is that you seem to want the bigger, more vicious attacker to win in every instance. Why would you condem your mother or your wife to the nonexistant mercies of the criminal and consider that an improvement over the current state of affairs? Are you so certain that you will always be big and bad enough to overcome anyone who would do you harm?
Yes, a 12 year old with a SEMI AUTOMATIC gun can shoot a number of people, so what, a 12 year old driving a gasoline tanker can engulf an entire school in flames. Why would you, as a parent, allow a 12 year old access to either one.
Wow. Truly interesting comments. The two that interested me, in particular, were CJ and Slim, the former because it is the classic gun control position, and the latter because he has lived that position. Next column will continue the dialogue on these positions. Work schedule is extraordinarily difficult at the moment, so think Friday.
Thanks always for your interest ...
FPV
As interesting as Hopit's rant is [not], he uses the bigoted pejorative:
"usually in some one man two cow town(much like the one you are assumably living in)"...
and
"there are ten other podunk maniacs gearing up for domestic war"
He conveniently neglects that most of the horrific murders occur in large <blue> cities and that the purps are usually Big Gov supporters posing as something else other than what they are. Ted Kazinsky being a prime example of a Lib ludite gone to seed.
It would appear Hopit's views are less about gun control and more about tagging people that don't agree with them as "people with green teeth". He should talk, his choice of elocution leads me to believe he would rapidly tergiversate when confronted with reality that, yes... there are dentists all over America... get over your mental stereotype disease.
At some point, my liberal brethren will realize the reason for having guns is to keep the ability to throw out an oppressive government in the hands of those most likely to be oppressed - us. Yet there are those that have shown they are so anti-social they should never be allowed to posses firearms (felons, people with a history of convicted violent crimes, people who are mentally ill). To quote the first Spiderman movie "with great power comes great responsibility". Gun owners must keep vigilant watch over their weapons to ensure they are in the hands of the ones incapable of accepting the responsibility or the gun owner becomes responsible for the outcome. My gun safe is great as is my concealed-carry permit. It's always sad when an innocent child dies from a drive by shooting or a grandmother is killed in her own home. It's more terrifying to me that a fascist mentality wants to control everything on all political sides, liberal, conservative alike.
Your arguments are protozoic compared to a single tear from a mother's eye. You know why she's crying. You both are with positive intent, but you must realize You can't stop others from killing. The only option you have my children, is to positively teach yours. Go now and Live.
That's funny, you accuse the gunman of having liberal values.
Yet ALL these mass murders are right wing nutjobs who share YOUR values.
James Von Brunn, Richard Poplawski, Scott Roeder, Jim D. Adkisson, George Jo Hennard, Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols. These are all YOUR PEOPLE.
They, like you, worship guns. They murder as many people as they can because they are part of your bankrupt conservative morality.
"Stop cowering"
That's where this gets really funny, where the author somehow imagines himself as intimidating. And THIS is the guy arguing for the idea of a gun in every home, the sad clown who likes to fancy himself as scary. Lovely. I'm a gun owner, and I love target shooting, but nuts like this, with their misguided concepts of "morality", give all of us a bad name. The real shame of it is that Rogaine Man up there lives here in Charlotte.
Look at this: www.shipleylegalfund.com You won't believe your eyes, If a FBI Agent gets busted for dealing firearms, you can be next. ATF does not know the meaning of Dealer or Collector. If your hobby is collecting guns you better read this. Thank you.
Just because something is dangerous doesn't mean it should be banned. Cars cause far more deaths on our roads than guns ever could yet we hand over the keys to them by the thousands to people who have the IQ of a goldfish.
You simply can't legally take away small arms even if they aren't used for hunting (it is a constitutionally protected right something gun control advocates like you choose to conveniently ignore or distort).
Furthermore how do you distinguish between a hunting rifle and a sniper rifle? They both use the same action, same ammunition, and look in many cases almost identical. Just like with the assault weapon ban what constitutes an assault weapon? The ban only disallowed weapons with certain cosmetic features (so it was really just a "look that weapon is scary looking" kind of weapon ban). Furthermore why should I only be able to use my weapon for hunting? Do I not have the right to defend my home, family, friends from armed criminals?
As an armed liberal, I'm glad to see you recognize that guns are a culture. But I have to differ with you about where the moral attitude problem lies.
It's been my observation that the kids with the strongest, best-internalized values come from "liberal" or ex-hippie homes AND from church-goin' folks.
The problem children, however, invariably come from families that LACK a self-description. Ask their parents for a political opinion and you will almost instantly find a low-information, NON-voter.
That apathy about anything larger than themselves is part of the navel-gazing, Britney Spears-obsessed glam culture filling our kids' heads with crap through the demon-box. These are parents who ignore their kids because they have their own "needs" to attend to.
Amazing. And true! To all the liberals, I suggest you realize one thing: your rights end where mine begins. I am not interested, nor do I believe in your opinions. Please stop trying to force them on others. You don't like guns? Don't buy them. I on the other hand will continue to enjoy my freedom that has been guaranteed under the 2nd Ammendment.
If you banned firearms the people who want to take others lives will just move on to other horrific ways. Can't buy a firearm then they would just build bombs. I'm sure you can go to your local wal-mart and get supplies to do it. Just about anything in your home can be turned into a weapon. So banning firearms is a dead end street. It is just another way to control masses and take freedoms.. I mean temporary privileges away from law abiding citizens. The law abiding are punished because of criminals, what sense does that make?
Full Auto firearms are legal in many states with the right paper work, time, & money. Many of these owners use them as investments or is just a hobby. They are investments because there are only a limited amount of full auto firearms in the US because of the NFA of 1934, Gun Control Act of 1968, & Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986. The only crimes that have been committed with LEGAL full auto firearms were by off duty police officers I believe.
Got a few questions for that gun-nut.
Why is it the homicide rate by gun in the UK is so much lower than that in the US? Could the UK's gun laws be a cause?
This guy ought to take some time off from the firearms freakshow he seems to enjoy so much and answer that question in one of his columns, instead of writing a meaningless letter to "liberals", the definition of which of which he doesn’t seem know or understand.
Liberals are not interested in controlling anyone's life. Period. Now, I for one, dislike this guy’s gun views, but that's about it. He's entitled to his views but writing nonsense about liberals is something else.
Anyway, what's this crap about the Thirty Years War? What's that supposed to mean? Is the author thinking of starting a religious war based on supposed restriction on gun ownership. He he joking? I hope so.
Christ, he sounds like one of those gun-toting nutters who show up and these health care town halls. Jeezuz!
Who is the coward, the one who doesn't need a weapon to feel safe or the one who does need a weapon to feel safe?
To Carl W. Goss:
Since you bring up Britain, here is a short sample of the many articles I have saved which demonstrate that British gun control is having the exact opposite of its intended effect. Contact me by separate e-mail if you would like the links. FYI, these are BRITISH headlines:
Britain's drug and gun culture 'as bad as U.S. crime show The Wire', say Tories (Daily Mail, 8/26/09)
The most violent country in Europe: Britain is also worse than South Africa and U.S. (Daily Mail, 7/3/09)
Push to get weapons off city streets (thisisderbyshire, 3/7/09)
(“[the amnesty] was in light of current high-profile incidents involving knives and guns in Derby, including the Kadeem Blackwood shooting in November...”)
True, “liberals” aren’t interested in controlling other people, but then, the the U.S., the name “liberal” has been perverted. In truth *I* am a liberal; *you* are a facist.
Paul Valone
P.S. The Thirty Years War allusion refers to culture, not violence, you i
Mr Valone writes about the United Kingdom, "in this most perfect of gun control laboratories – an island nation with strict laws and tight borders". This astounding statement makes you wonder what sort of research, if any, he puts into his articles.
According to BBC report this year, "The UK could be home to almost three-quarters of a million illegal immigrants, a study for London Mayor Boris Johnson suggests"
I'm surprised he didn't choose another first world island nation which is much better at border control, Japan. On second thoughts I'm not surprised he didn't choose Japan, sort of ruins his argument somewhat.
Actually, I'm quite happy you bring up Japan. There, weapons of all types, including swords, have been all but banned since 1588.
Cultural differences, however, make comparisons impossible. Gun violence is indeed low, but so is every other type of violence. Muggings, for example, occur at fractions of either our rate or that of the Brits. Beyond lower cultural aggressivenes, Japanese live in a police state, where police, with broad powers of search and seizure, closely surveil neighborhoods through a system of police boxes call "koban."
There is, however, one type of violence in Japan which exceeds ours: While gun suicides are 1/50th of ours, TOTAL suicide is twice as high, suggesting two conclusions: Japanese aggression is inward-directed, and substitution of other weapons is easily accomplished. Read David Kopel's "The Sumirai, The Mountie, and the Cowboy: Should America Adopt the Gun Controls of Other Democracies?
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!