Posts Tagged ‘prof meets gun’

Prof Meets Gun 4: UD Visiting Gun Show, Range

Monday, June 16th, 2008

The author of University Diaries, UD, will be going to a gun show, and plans to contact someone about a trip to the range.

She compares two extreme viewpoints there.

First Amitai Etzioni, a GW sociologist:

If one holds, as most studies do, that guns provide more danger than protection, and notes that other democratic societies greatly limit private gun ownership, one is naturally troubled by the threat that the new scholarship may help to overturn a strong and long-established endorsement of gun control laws by the Supreme Court. With so much at stake, should scholars refrain from conducting studies that might have grave unsettling social consequences?
… Would my colleagues put on their web site a study that demonstrating how to make the Ebola virus in a kitchen sink? Would they publish ways to make nerve gas in one’s basement? As I see it, when the results of a publication may well be fatal on a large scale, great weight should be given to social prudence.
… [M]y good colleagues in law schools [should] consider whether they should devote themselves to an academic pursuit other than undermining the Supreme Court rulings that have rendered gun control possible and legitimate…

To her credit, UD:

…finds Etzioni’s analogies — an individual in possession of a gun is a deadly virus, a nerve gas — as well as his aristocratic conviction that the possibly correct reading of one of our nation’s more important documents ought to be kept from ordinary American citizens, pretty stunning.

Stunning indeed, not least because Etzioni is comparing Second Amendment scholarship, not guns, to Ebola and nerve gas. We’ll assume ignorance, not malice, to be behind his comments about “most studies” and “a strong and long-established endorsement of gun control laws by the Supreme Court”.

Second, she cites GW law professor Robert J. Cottrel, who says:

[A] society with a dismal record of protecting a people has a dubious claim on the right to disarm them…. [I]t is unwise to place the means of protection totally in the hands of the state….

[T]he ultimate civil right is the right to defend one’s own life…. [W]ithout that right all other rights are meaningless.

Both of these quotes are from NRA websites; UD is not relying on one sided sources. She is honestly and thoroughly investigating guns and the Right to Keep and Bear.

Whatever conclusions she comes to, whether she elects to become a gun owner or not, she will have honestly earned her opinion, and I for one will respectfully listen to whatever she has to say.

[Series note]

I didn’t realize this was going to turn into a series. I’ve retitled the posts so far, but have left their URLs untouched so as not to break any existing links. Note that my numbers are not consistent with UD’s.

Posts in this series:

Prof Meets Gun 4: UD Visiting Gun Show, Range (this post)

Prof Meets Gun 3: On Scholars Visiting Gun Ranges

Prof Meets Gun 2: Gun Range Visit & Gun Answers

Prof Meets Gun 1

Prof Meets Gun 3: On Scholars Visiting Gun Ranges

Sunday, June 15th, 2008

The author of University Diaries, over at Inside Higher Ed, liked my description of Dad’s walking stick, but apparently she still hasn’t  made up her mind as to whether or not to go to the range and learn how to shoot, so I’ve prodded her again:

This shouldn’t be a hard decision, We’re not talking about going on a SWAT raid, or fighting terrorists, or hunting Bambi, or robbing a bank, or assassinating politicians.

We’re not talking about buying anything, not a philosophy, or a gun or, given the offers you’ve had, even so much as a bullet.

We’re talking about learning to use a hammer, or an axe, or a power saw, just enough to see what it’s like.

We’re talking about going to a carefully controlled environment, getting a few minutes of usage and safety instruction, and using a tool to punch holes in pieces of paper that happen to be 5-10 yards away.

We’re talking about finding out for yourself, something any scholar should be willing and eager to do.

Do you think you won’t be able to learn? Ignorant backwoods rednecks learn to do it quite well. You have a college degree, proof of your learning ability. It’s not math, or quantum physics, or neuroanatomy. It’s not professional basketball, or flying, or ballet. It’s not magic. You’ll do fine. (I have a niece who scorns as “stupid” arithmetic problems she can’t figure out. That’s not what you’re doing, is it?)

Are you afraid? You have likely done far riskier things in your life: driven in cars, cooked with stoves, married a man….

Is this a moral struggle? Why should anyone remotely criticize you over it? Why is this even an issue? Deciding to own a firearm is one thing. Deciding which one to own is admittedly very confusing, even for experts (which is partly why so many experts have so many guns). Deciding you’re willing to use it against another human being, now that’s a very hard question, eminently worth pondering over, at length, with much reading and discussion.

But simply borrowing one and trying it out? pfft.

Go to the range. Ask questions. Use a tool. Learn.

Be free.

(That comment is still awaiting moderation.) It’s up now.

[Series note]

I didn’t realize this was going to turn into a series. I’ve retitled the posts so far, but have left their URLs untouched so as not to break any existing links. Note that my numbers are not consistent with UD’s.

Posts in this series:

Prof Meets Gun 4: UD Visiting Gun Show, Range

Prof Meets Gun 3: On Scholars Visiting Gun Ranges (This post)

Prof Meets Gun 2: Gun Range Visit & Gun Answers

Prof Meets Gun 1

Prof Meets Gun 2: Gun Range Visit & Gun Answers

Friday, June 13th, 2008

A couple of days ago I pointed at UD, an academic who was planning to visit a gun range to, you know, actually get some actual facts, rather than just go with the antis told her.

Here UD comments on her experience.

Two things: first, she’s having to deal with the obligatory canard that wanting to shoot guns is all about penis envy.

Second, she’s asking her readers for advice on whether or not she try shooting herself. She gets some very good, very positive answeres.

Five people, four of them local, have offered to take [UD] shooting at a range.

Before she talks about that, she wants to thank all the gunnies (This is one of many new words UD has learned; and here’s a new phrase, courtesy of one of the readers of her other blog: freaking the mundanes. Which in this case refers, I guess, to UD freaking out gun control people.) who’ve written comments here or who’ve emailed her to express appreciation for her willingness to get closer to guns rather than, as she’s done before this, rail against them at a distance. She’s been delighted by the helpfulness, courtliness, and humor of many of these responses.

Almost every single person I’ve ever seen or heard says exactly the same thing about their first contact with gunnies. As Heinlein says, “An armed society is a polite society.”

No one advises her not to shoot, except for one clown who warns her that she might end up as the president of the NRA (a ha-ha-only-serious comment if there ever was one). The anti-freedom crowd has zero presence in this discussion.

My answer on both points:

You should go shooting exactly because you “have reservations”.

Face your fears. Resist peer pressure. Take command of your life.

If you can get about without a minder, you can handle a gun safely. For inspiration, watch this girl go through a tactical shooting exercise. If she can do it, so can you.

Since you’re fending off attacks by your peers on the “necessary and boring” sexualization of guns, let me provide you with my standard response to charges of “penis envy”:

My father owns a walking-stick made from a bull’s penis stretched over an iron rod. He is the only person I know who can, heh heh, beat off an attacker with his penis.

I admit that my own, personal penis is pitifully inadequate for self-defense purposes.

Clearly, women should be left defenseless, since they are anatomically unsuited for it. Plus, it makes them so much easier to subdue.

It’s also true that the elderly and handicapped do not deserve the right to self-defense, since their wang-fu will likely be inadequate for a variety of reasons. We don’t need such human rubbish, anyway.

And I admit, I’ve always found it disturbing that we must publicly brand our police and military as puny weaklings by issuing them handguns and rifles.

Go to the range. You’ll have fun.

Welcome to freedom.

By the way, from comments there, in one of the comments I found this excellent article with links to sources rebutting most of the gun control propaganda. It’s an absolute gold mine. Strongly recommended.

[Series note]

I didn’t realize this was going to turn into a series. I’ve retitled the posts so far, but have left their URLs untouched so as not to break any existing links. Note that my numbers are not consistent with UD’s.

Posts in this series:

Prof Meets Gun 4: UD Visiting Gun Show, Range

Prof Meets Gun 3: On Scholars Visiting Gun Ranges

Prof Meets Gun 2: Gun Range Visit & Gun Answers (This post)

Prof Meets Gun 1

Prof Meets Gun 1

Friday, June 6th, 2008

An pro-gun-control English professor is off to the range, specifically to educate herself about guns.

Good for her; I’m looking forward to her reports.

I hope she can also get her husband to go, eventually.

[Series note]

I didn’t realize this was going to turn into a series. I’ve retitled the posts so far, but have left their URLs untouched so as not to break any existing links. Note that my numbers are not consistent with UD’s.

Posts in this series:

Prof Meets Gun 4: UD Visiting Gun Show, Range

Prof Meets Gun 3: On Scholars Visiting Gun Ranges

Prof Meets Gun 2: Gun Range Visit & Gun Answers

Prof Meets Gun 1 (This post)