No Matter Why You Use A Gun, It’s Still Gun Violence.

skidspring

Yesterday I wrote a column pointing out that for the very first time in my lifetime (and I was born in 1944,) the gun-control movement finds itself on a level playing field with the other side. If anything, the field may even be tilted a bit in the favor of gun control.  Why do I say that? Because it’s pretty hard to convince the mainstream that these high school kids from Parkland are just a bunch of dupes being fed this lie and that lie by the Bloomberg-Soros cabal.

Just about everyone who is a parent knows the one thing you can’t tell a teenager is to follow the advice of his or her elders unless it’s advice they really want to hear. And let’s remember one other thing about these Parkland kids – they are veterans of a rampage assault, it really happened to them. And for all her blather and nonsense about how she’s always armed to protect herself and her loved ones from any kind of a threat, Dana Loesch has never, never found herself in a real-life situation where she actually used that gun.

We are now at the point when the gun-control community needs to come up with an argument that will convince mainstream Americans that the ‘good gal with a gun’ narrative isn’t a legitimate response to armed threats.  And with all due respect to my public health researcher friends, most people really don’t make up their minds because of evidence-based research.  As Daniel Kahneman has explained it, decisions about what to do both for the important and the unimportant things in life flow as much or more from emotions as from facts.

The scenes pictured above are where gun killings have occurred. The picture on the left is Skidmore, MO, in front of the saloon where the town bully, Ken McElroy, was shot down by several gun-wielding local residents while the rest of the townsfolk stood and watched. The picture on the right is Union Street in Springfield, MA, where someone is gunned down at least once a month.

Law enforcement spent six years trying to get someone in Skidmore to identify the killers of Ken McElroy, but nobody ever did. The cops in Springfield will tell you that what happens on Union Street is just a gang killing, and when they walk around looking for witnesses, nobody saw nuttin’, even when the shooting takes place at mid-day.

The murder of Ken McElroy is something we call ‘virtuous violence;’ i.e., using violence for positive ends.  After all, McElroy got what was coming to him, and what better way to even the score than to use a gun? On the other hand, the gang member who shot another gang member on Union Street is also committing an act of virtuous violence – the guy he shot may have welched on a drug deal, or may have tried to shake down a friend, or break into a neighbor’s house.

Murder is overwhelmingly an event that occurs between individuals who have some degree of connection to each other before the killing occurs.  Whether the connection is between people who live in the same small town or who hang out on the same corner makes no difference at all. To quote the brilliant Lester Adelson: “With its peculiar lethality, a gun converts a spat into a slaying and a quarrel into a killing.”

When the NRA talks about how ‘good guys with guns’ will protect us from ‘bad guys with guns,’ what the boys from Fairfax are really saying is that violence is the most effective way to respond to violence, and nothing could be further from the truth. If the gun-control movement wants to convince mainstream America that gun violence should not be an everyday affair, they need to address the issue of virtuous violence and argue that violence in any form, used for redressing any real or imagined threat, is a type of behavior which does not work.

Advertisements

4 thoughts on “No Matter Why You Use A Gun, It’s Still Gun Violence.

  1. Is there now a new standard that before you can talk for or against guns you need to be a “veteran of rampage assault”? You have to have had it really happen to you? If so…is Mike a veteran of a rampage assault, has it really happened to him? If this is the standard most people would have no standing when it comes to talking/writing about guns and the role they play or not play in society.

    But then again if the criteria for talking about guns is that one has to be a veteran of rampage assault, I guess a child will now have to touch the stove to know that it is hot.

    If we are now at the point that the gun-control community needs to come up with an argument that will convince mainstream Americans that the ‘good gal with a gun’ narrative isn’t a legitimate response to armed threats don’t look to Lynne Russell, former CNN Headline News anchor, for their argument. Ms. Russell and her husband Chuck de Caro routinely carry for self-protection. In 2015 that practice did protect them when they encountered a robber at a Motel 6 in Albuquerque.

  2. Well, there is a movement afoot in this country to call virtually anything “cultural appropriation” so I suppose to write about gun violence under that paradigm, one would have to have experienced it. Never got shot but since I did a fair amount of hunting Back In The Day, I guess I qualify since I was a serial executioner of Bambi. Plus, my brother in law once sent a deer slug whistling past my hunting tree with me sitting next to it. He violated one of the Four Rules.

    I think that whole notion of cultural appropriation is hogwash, by the way. The non-Italians who opened up cardboard-cutout Italian restaurants in Honolulu were good and I was glad to patronize them, but they never could quite measure up to George “Cass” Castagnola’s place back in its prime, when it was in Manoa. Or whip up a fresh marinara as good as mine using my Sicilian genes. Just sayin’

Leave a Reply