"I've said it before, but it bears repeating: the only thing that will stop an armed attacker on the spot is a person with a gun of their own. Gun haters realize this as well, which is why they rarely ever suggest disarming the police. They, too, rely on the gun to protect themselves from harm--they just feel all high and mighty because they outsource the task."
... so sayeth the Munchkin Wrangler, who also said the gun is civlization. LINK
He is right on both. Hoplophobes DO want to outsource that task. The gun is civilization.
War on Guns guy calls these outsourced task individual, "Only Ones". They are law enforcement officers, and some of the consider themselves the "only ones" trained enough and authorized enough to be trusted with guns. Law Enforcement types don’t all have this attitude, but enough do to matter.
But the point is not the gun. The hoplophobe consider this outsourcing of the task to be the point of civilization. Defending yourself with violence is something barbarians have to do. Civilized people shouldn’t have to do that sort of thing.
And that is what separated us from the hoplophones.. This concept may be the true root of the disagreement. They want the world to work like they picture it in their minds, where gallant protectors defend them from harm, and they are very good at providing this benevolent protection. I want to live in that utopia too. But WE know that the world doesn’t work that way. That there can’t be enough of them. That giving a group that ultimate and sole power to protect can corrupt and that then we may need protection from the protectors. That we have individual responsibilities to look after ourselves and not be any extra burden on others. That the world is dangerous at times despite what we do to try to make it safer, and that people are imperfect creatures.
It’s a theory at least. But what do I know?
Whatcha bet that the anti-gunnies are also for other top down protection for our own good measure, generally, and pro-gun types are more of a live and let live? That anti-gunnies want to also ban smoking in public, while pro-gun types are more live and let live and if they don’t smoke, don’t mind if YOU smoke in front of them. Anti-gunnies have Radon detectors in their basements, pro-gunnies don’t worry about it. Pro-gunnies I bet for a large part think that if they are paying for the medical payments that they should be able to drive a motorcycle without a helmet if they choose, while anti-gunnies strike me as the types that insist on helmets. On BIKE riding children. Or even NON bike riding children. Heck ALL CHILDREN CHOULD BE REQUIRED BY LAW TO WEAR A HELMET 24/7 UNTIL THEY ARE 21 YEARS OLD. They could get HURT if they don’t.
All generally, of course. I’m sure there are anti-gunnies out there that smoke, in their basement, before riding around on their bike without a helmet.
But, generally, there seems to be a root cultural difference.
That difference is as American as anything, dating back to the Puritans vs. Rugged Individualists like Hawkeye ala James Fenimore Cooper. (and it probably isn’t JUST American.) The whole "make a Utopia by passing binding rules" vs. "Leave me to mine as long as I don’t cross you and yourn." Cultural difference we’ve been arguing about for 500 years. And people switch sides on different issues, but they generally stick to one style. They certainly stick to one side on one issue, and it take a tremendous effort to convince them of the opposite someday. That whole Puritan vs. Individualist subject is a big essay in itself, and it is less gun related...
Maybe some other time.
But both sides have trouble even conceiving the position of the other side. Well, the Indivualist side can sorta see what the other side is thinking, but they'll never really understand why. The 'Puritan' anit-gunnies, looking for their Utopia are totally myopic and can't even conceive why anyone WOULDN'T want to live in teh Utopia they have conceived, and if you just join their side and try a LITTLE bit harder... Their dreams are realized. Indiviudalist just see fantaists and want no part of THAT vat of Kool Aid..
New USAF Combat Tactic: "Fire & Flee" - Buried in this article about using B-52s and C-17s as "bomb trucks" is a nugget that the F-22 and F-35 can only carry two antiair missiles apiece. In a fig...
18 minutes ago