Anti-Gun Folks – Page 109 – Shall Not Be Questioned

Stopped Clock is Right Twice a Day

Coalition to Stop Gun Violence loves to see racism where there is none, so I was quite skeptical when I noticed them tweet about pro-gun activists fantasizing about killing young black men. While do believe this mischaracterizes the nature of the link I followed, I’m hard pressed to argue that the article by Gabe Suarez, passed along in an informational e-mail by VCDL, isn’t racist, or is at the least injecting race into a situation where it does not need to be injected:

Nor where everyone gets along. You may in fact be totally color-blind in a socio-ethnic sort of way, but not everyone is. So even if your liberal sociology professor thinks it is a cool thing to take a strollÂ at midnight through a ethnically homogenous part of town (different ethnicityÂ that you), it is still a stupid idea.

The problem here is that many of the flash mobs in Philadelphia are not taking place in “ethnically homogenous” parts of town. Some of them have taken place in parts of the City I would not ordinarily be afraid to walk. This not only injects race into an equation where it is not relevant, it detracts from the quality of the advice.

Avoid if you can. If you are standing around and see a group of twenty young urban thugs about two blocks away yelling, “kill whitey”, and lookin at your reflection in the store window, realize that you have not been in the sun in a while, here is my advice – “RUN”. If it looks like trouble, it probably is. The gang is not there to debate the effects of american corporate expansion on the development of the urban neighborhoods with you.

And who, exactly, would be yelling “kill whitey?” I seem to recall a number of victims of these flash mobs have been African American. These mobs aren’t going out and targeting whites. They are groups of feral teenagers targeting anyone who happens to look like a good targets for beating or robbing.

Suarez also suggests breaking the law if need be. While I don’t have any particular problem with Suarez offering this advice, I don’t think it’s wise for a high-profile group that’s as well-respected as VCDL forwarding on such advice to members. Whether a law is immoral enough to offer no consideration by a citizen is, in my view, a personal matter, as only an individual is capable of weighing the consequences of breaking the law versus that of obeying it. I believe gun rights groups should be wary of treading on this ground in areas where our opponents, the media, and lawmakers are watching.

And that’s really my issue with this. Suarez is certainly free to write racially laced and colorful narratives on how to deal with flash mobs. His choice of language and flashy style aside, I’m not sure there’s all that much fundamentally wrong with the advice. But I believe VCDL should have known better than to send this out to members. It’s certainly not out of line to speak of advice on how to deal with violent flash mobs, but in the entire world of self-defense training, I have a hard time believing this was the best anyone could come up with.

Like a stopped clock that’s right twice a day, CSGV is correct that Suarez’s article is racially charged, and VCDL never should have sent this out to members.

P.S. – If anyone can tell me what a “panga swinging killer” is, I’d be grateful. A Panga seems to be a fish, and urban dictionary was no help if it’s slang.

Someone Forgot to Pay the Bill?

Apparently CSGV was too busy wetting their pants about we insurrectionist extremists, they forgot to pay their hosting bill with GoDaddy:

Definitely amateur hour over there. I’m surprised that CSGV is using GoDaddy. Isn’t the guy that owns that a right-wing extremist? He might even be an insurrectionist, and if you talk to PETA, he’s definitely an elephant murderer. I guess CSGV doesn’t care about elephant gun violence!

You’re Probably an Anti-Gun Extremist If …

Our opponents seem to be channeling Jeff Foxworthy. Well, two can play at this game. Let’s give it a go. You’re probably an anti-gun extremist if …

You think the Second Amendment was written to protect state militia’s rather than the individuals who compromised them. Lately you’ve changed your tune, and grudgingly accepted it protects your right to have a gun in your home, but only because the activist wing-nut Supreme Court made it the law of the land.
You wet your pants at the idea that gun manufacturers are responding to market demand by making guns in different colors.
You a .410 inch hole in a target is acceptable, but a .50 caliber hole is just insanity, because you know nothing about exterior ballistics or firearms.
You think criminals are deterred by background checks. When evidence shows they can get around it, you say the solution is we need another law criminals won’t follow.
You argue that an assault rifle is distinguishable from a hunting rifle because you’re ignorant and don’t know the definition of either. Because the assault rifle looks scary, clearly it’s different.
You think firearms training should be required, but outlawed.
You call anyone who disagrees with you Â an “insurrectionist,” “mentally ill,” “extremist,” or in need of a “good therapist.”
You argue that the main purpose of a silencer is exactly what you’ve seen in movies, and believe it actually makes a gun silent.
You think children are anyone under 21, and shouldn’t be able to say gun, let along touch one.
You don’t believe there’s any such thing as a justifiable homicide if it involves a gun.
You think a citizen’s paramilitary militia is a body of completely psychotic and deranged individuals rather than people who are concerned about government following the constitution and who like to play army in the woods.
You don’t believe in “due process” for fundamental constitutional rights, at least if the amendment that protects it starts with a “2.”
You believe any flawed science and statistical analysis anyone puts in front of you because you know nothing of science and statistics and the analyses confirms your biases.
You are unconcerned about the rash of home invasions by jackbooted government agents using military tactics to serve warrants on non-violent offenders.
You label pro-gun advocates as people who are unconcerned about criminal access to guns because pro-gun advocates don’t accept you’re solutions actually work.

And unlike Mr. Odinson, I have provided links to show our opponents actually do believe those things. I was going to link to the 50 Caliber Terror website, but I notice, like most of the rest of the gun control movement, it’s become defunct.

Take Us Seriously

I think what Joe Huffman hit on is one of the primary reasons the entire Ezell case has been so satisfying to gun owners:

It was a pleasure to read. There was agreement with so many things we have been saying for decades. That the anti-gun people have dismissed these arguments almost without discussion that to now have a court rule with is an extreme pleasure. Most importantly they explicitly and repeatedly use the First Amendment as an analog to the Second Amendment. I will not restrain from saying, â€œWe andÂ many others told you so!â€

It’s always hard to place exactly what fires people up so much about this issue, but if I had to pick one thing it is not being taken seriously by the media, by politicians, or by any of the powers that be for quite some time, and especially during the 90s, and early part of the last decade.

Imagine you are quite familiar with, and well-educated on a certain pet topic. Imagine the media and all the talking heads on TV love to opine about your pet topic, but continuously mischaracterize things, get things wrong, often times even demonizing you for having an interest in it. Imagine politicians listening to the media and talking heads, and lining up to pass laws that affect you based on their own ignorance of your pet topic. I don’t care what the topic is, that’s a recipe for a high degree of frustration and anger at the people and system that’s doing it.

When I look at our opponents, the ones I have the highest degree of tolerance for are the ones who take the topic seriously. Having an opinion different than my own, I don’t find that remarkably frustrating. While I doubt it will solve the problems they would like, I can at least understand why someone might think universal background checks is a good idea. I can even understand why someone might take the position, as much as I might disagree with it, that the Second Amendment is obsolete and should be repealed.

Take the topic seriously, educate yourself, and come up with good arguments. My chief problem with our opponents is that so many of them are ridiculous figures. Just take a look at CSGV’s Twitter feed, or look at the crazy on their Facebook page. Read japete’s rambling word salad, to see what I mean, or some of the ridiculous arguments Chicago had made and is still making in Ezell. Look at the number of anti-gun bloggers who are creative trolls. Look at figures like Katrina Confiscator in ChiefÂ Ray Nagin, or Mayor “Shove a Gun Up Your Butt” Daley. These two guys are total buffoons. They make a pretense of being serious, but they’re not. They disrespect the topic, even for their own side.

I would be the first to admit we have buffoons on our side too, but what I don’t see from the gun control side of things are people who are serious about their topic, arguing passionately, and rolling their eyes or otherwise engaging, educating and challenging the lesser intellects in the movement in an attempt to build a better one; forming a stronger intellectual basis for moving their issue forward. Where’s the folks asking CSGV what they achieve demonizing and denigrating 40% of the US population? Where’s the folks criticizing Brady for flunking Obama when he’s their best hope of hanging onto anything? Where’s the folks asking Joan who’s she’s really winning over, or what intellectual foundation for her movement she’s building by ringing that bell?

This is not the team you’re going to go to the playoffs with folks, if you believe in more gun control. If this were a sport, I’d be at the point now I’d be sandbag it a bit, just to be sportsmanlike, but this is much more serious than that, so let me be the first to say I’m pleased when they need juice the most, we’re facing tired and unskilled second stringers. But even in this current situation, 34-7, end of the 4th quarter and just outside our opponent’s endzone, it’s telling they still don’t take us seriously.

Laddite

Miguel has coined a new term. Here’s some more example of Laddite activity. Meanwhile they are flushing pro-gun comments down the memory hole. And they wonder why they are inconsequential in the new media space. An echo chamber might be good for keeping followers appropriately frothing at the mouth, but it does no good for the overall health of your movement when dealing with people who are not mouth frothers.

We certainly have our own mouth frothers, but on the whole, we’re a lot better at making reasonable arguments than they are.

One Thing to Like About Florida Gag Law

It’s pissing off the right people, and there’s something to be said for that. I will still oppose it on constitutional and civil liberties grounds, but if makes editorial boards of papers like the Boston Globe wet themselves, I’ll still enjoy the spectacle:

But there are good reasons why the American Academy of Pediatrics considers inquiries about guns to be important in protecting children. Doctors can advise inexperienced parents on ways that young children might accidentally play with guns, or that older kids might be tempted to use them.

And really, I don’t have a problem if this was all doctors did, provided they also inform the parents about the dangers of bathtubs, swimming pools, and dangerous household chemicals, which kill far more kids accidentally every year than guns do. Homicide is not, and can’t be an excuse for doctors to ask parents about guns, because it will do nothing to prevent or ameliorate that kind of social ill.

Let us also not forget what the American Academy of Pediatrics position is on firearms ownership. It’s not just about advising parents of the dangers, and helping them minimize them. It’s about promoting prohibition, and using their exalted profession to bring down social shame on patients for gun ownership. I don’t agree with this gag law, but consider this a shot across your bow, AAP.

If You Watch Nothing Else This July 4th

Unfortunately, I can’t embed the video, but go watch this symposium between Prof. Robert Churchill, author of To Shake Their Guns in the Tyrant’s Face: Libertarian Political Violence and the Origins of the Militia Movement, and Joshua Horwitz, co-author of Guns, Democracy, and the Insurrectionist Idea, and also Executive Director of CSGV. This is great insight into the kind of philosophy Horwitz promotes. He is truly an enemy of liberty.

UPDATE: The more I look at Horwitz’s insurrectionist idea, the more I’m impressed at his straw working abilities. This is one of the most elaborate and impressive straw men I’ve seen erected. The idea he’s arguing against isn’t even really something most of us believe. It’s a caricature erected only in Horwitz’s mind.

More Independence Day Insurrectionism

Rumor has it, on this day, 235 years ago, a bunch of right-wing militia whack jobs signed their name to this document which supports this insane insurrectionist idea promoted by the NRA:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Sometimes I really believe our opponents would probably rather still be British. It’s hard to believe the ideas they peddle without thinking that. Of course, they will never say that, because that puts them further outside the mainstream than they already are. But it’s hard for me to see how you accept the United States of America when its founding document is essentially a justification for violently overthrowing its previous government.

Attempt on WaPo Tank Diving Record

The Brady’s seem to be hot on the Washington Post’s trail to see who can get the deepest in the tank for the Administration. An Administration, I would point out, the Brady’s haven’t liked very much. Paul Helmke notes:

Rep. Issa and others can point fingers at the ATF for mounting a failed mission, but it is Congress that prevents the ATF from getting an annual inventory from dealers on guns sales to address the problem of guns “disappearing” from gun shops with no record of sales. That stops the agency from quickly shutting down corrupt shops.

Except this isn’t about corrupt shops, and none of those advocated policies would have done anything to reduce the damage done by Fast and Furious. Remember, ATF leadership was encouraging straw sales, sales suspicious enough to make the dealers call ATF to report them. ATF told the dealers to proceed, apparently without much real effort to track those firearms or arrest the buyers. There’s no policy prescription in Brady’s current formulary that would have done anything to stop a government agency from deliberately letting guns walk, in the hands of criminals.

That the Brady Campaign would continue to make excuses and deflect on this issue tells me gun violence is not their real concern. Their only interest in gun violence is to the extent that hobby horse can be ridden to justify more restrictions on the Second Amendment.

Chest Beating by the Brady Campaign

The Brady folks would love to have you believe they are winning the Second Amendment battle. To help spread this meme around, Mother Jones is clearly willing and able to lend a hand. My belief is this meme is aimed at potential donors. Brady doesn’t want donors to believe they are on the losing side of history, because who wants to fork over large sums of money to a group who’s cause is going nowhere?

But the Brady folks are making the mistake of believing that the number of battles you win or lose determines who wins the war. Anyone who knows anything about the history of this country knows that’s not the determining factor; it’s which battles you win or lose. Mother Jones notes:

The gun group’s vice president, Wayne LaPierre, said at the time that theÂ Heller ruling would be “the opening salvo in a step-by-step process” to kill off most of the nation’s gun control laws.

Well, three years later, gun control is alive and well despite more than 400 legal challenges based onÂ Heller,Â according to a new report (PDF) by the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence.

Only a fool would believe that Heller meant we’d have gun control on the ropes in three years. They also make the mistake of surmising our movement’s next step, believing we’ve already taken many of them. That next step was eliminating the gun ban in Chicago, and we were successful at achieving that. Now the next step would seem to be getting recognition of some form of right-to-carry outside of the home — the “bear” part of “keep and bear arms”.

The Brady’s here are, to put this in another context, noting that General Washington is losing more battles than he’s winning. That might be literally true, but that’s not how wars are fought and won. That’s now how a litigative strategy is fought and won either. There will be many many cases that are lost, especially in lower level courts, but as long as we win the important ones, we’ll achieve robust legal protections for the Second Amendment.

Ironically, the best hope the Brady folks can hope for is a second term for Barack Obama, where we’ll all be biting our fingernails praying for the health of Justices Roberts, Alito, Thomas, Kennedy and Scalia. If Obama gets to pick any of their replacements, there is a good chance the Second Amendment will be judicially erased from the constitution.