Facebook anti-gun control posts, when one has many liberal friends, reliability produce two responses.
Response #1: You Are A Bad Person
The politest form of this is You are naïve with your abstract romantic notions of freedom and don’t realize the real world implications of guns and violence. A less polite version, your fetish is probably hiding at best some latent insecurity and possibly dangerous violence. Sometimes this is a thinly veiled threat: Your posts / comments etc. could be misinterpreted and, well, who knows what bad stuff could happen? And disbelief. Lots of disbelief.
I really don’t have a counterargument for Response #1. Having been raised a doctrinaire Canadian liberal, I thought like this for a couple of decades. My Canadian friends might take some small measure of pride that I lectured my new American friends on the moral superiority of my native land for about 5 years after I got here, about 30 years ago.
Then I started listening a bit.
What I discovered was a large number of people who were indifferent to gun ownership, supportive but not owners, and gun owners themselves who were not bad people. In fact a bunch of them were good people.
This wasn’t supposed to be.
But I still didn’t accept the merit of the 2nd Amendment and the NRA. It just seemed – well – common sense that some maybe small percentage of people would go loco and with easy access to guns, more fatalities in anger would occur.
But huge geographic areas and demographics in America are awash with guns and yet experience Canadian rates of gun homicide (but sadly, not gun suicide). It turns out that chainsaws don’t turn people into chainsaw murderers, and chainsaw owners have a healthy respect for the potential dangers of blade with a sharp gas powered spinning chain.
Response #2: Gotcha
Let me lawyer you into a box using whatever the approved talking points the nanny statists are peddling lately.
An honest, compassionate, fact based discussion about reducing gun violence would mention that the problem areas are black males aged 18-30 shooting other black males in a handful of cities and males of all ages and ethnicities committing suicide. Everywhere. With semi-automatic handguns. 9mm Glocks. Bought legally.
Such a discussion would not include stories about loco bible clingers from Missouri and skinheads from Alabama shooting up schools with fully automatic assault weapons loaded with extra-large magazines, bought without a background check on a laptop from an online store while at the gun show loophole booth at a gun show.
For the simple reason that this doesn’t happen.
And the professional nanny statists are always watching, hoping it will happen. Gotcha.
If you are unfamiliar with guns it is not that easy to spot the constant deceptions. If you are it is hard to fathom how easy it is get away with lies.
You are in fact less safe from a crazy mass murderer in a designated gun free zone. Fortunately, you are quite safe in general in the US from crazy mass murderers.
Assault weapons are not real things. Legislation conjured up from whole cloth created a whole new section, that still doesn’t exist, in gun stores called the “Assault Weapons Counter”. The weapons that have been designated as assault weapons, but are not, are rarely used in homicides or suicides.
Automatic weapons are not easy to get. They are even more rarely used in homicides or suicides (see Glock, 9mm).
Gun ownership in America has been increasing for 20 years, as gun violence has been dropping.
There’s no practical difference between 10 magazines with 8 shots and 6 with 15.
Especially in a gun free zone. Like the ones loony mass murderers prefer.
The gun show loophole, such as it is, is not commonly exploited.
A serious discussion would recognize the impractically of forcefully disarming people of 300,000,000 guns. And the uselessness of the current proposals. A serious discussion would make using a gun in self-defense or owning a gun used in a homicide punishable with prison.
Fortunately we’re not having a serious discussion.
Not everyone values freedom. I can make a strong case for the merits of a culture and system of dependency / security. Especially in a place like Canada or Norway with lots of natural resources and a small population. I generally don’t, because the nanny state and liberals have that one covered.
It might be useful someday to share some information about the gap between promise and reality. It’s not small.
Having tried both, I prefer freedom. And I understand how it is taken.