Well. there's a bit of blue sky off to the northwest, so there's hope yet!
Meanwhile. over at Snowflakes in Hell, Sebastian has found the one person who proves categorically that I'm wrong about firearms being a 100% polarized issue! Okay, snarky comment aside — and hey, I haven't made any snarky comments in quite a while...sigh — believing in the standard distribution curve is probably more valid than believing in the Easter Bunny, and there is a constant need for contrarian opinions...remember, speak truth to power! My opinions are based on decades of time in the trenches, which doesn't necessarily translate into me being 100% right 100% of the time.
I would like to point out that in the first few decades of the battle against the antigunners, the pro-gun strategy was to "prove" to the uncommitted middle — the 80% bulge in the middle of the curve — that we were sane, responsible, thoughtful citizens deserving of our gun rights. How'd that work for us? The problem was that we kept giving incremental ground to prove we were "reasonable;" the amazing thing to me was that the other side has never given one single inch, not even the smallest increment.
I tend to believe in the words intoned by John Houseman as the crusty contracts professor in the Paper Chase movie years and years ago: "Contracts are the basis of all civilization." And a contract is a meeting of the minds, where the parties involved have discussed/argued/whatever the issues and moved to mirroring positions of agreement. At any point in the past 50 years, including now, we could have come to a meeting of the minds with the other side, had they been willing to modify their positions in the slightest. They haven't done such, because this is a religious, rather than a political, war. It is and always has been not about guns, but about control.
As far as the great bulge in the middle, it is better understood as a weathervane, blowing first right, then left, driven by prevailing winds in the media, in entertainment, in the fleeting currents of popular culture. Ted Nugent's unrelenting, entertaining, line-in-the-sand personality has done more to sway the middle to our side than all the thoughtful reasonableness of the last 50 years. Again, my opinion...your mileage may vary.
5 comments:
We are "sane, responsible, thoughtful citizens deserving of our gun rights" and we're not giving up one more inch. We've given up too much. Its time to retake the ground lost.
Alas, we are but children cavorting about the campfire while those with the real power are pondering and coalescing, awaiting the moment when one of them looks up with a beatific face and says, "Of course! We have it!" Meaning they will have the databases, the detection technology the psychotropic pharmaceuticals, the weapons, the full acceptance of B.F. Skinner's prophetic Beyond Freedom and Dignity, and finally the undeniable urgency, and then we, our children or our grandchildren will be nudged for good into whatever fantasy life toward which we or they are already leaning, and...
Happy zombies. That's the goal, isn't it?
Oh, and by all means read Dennis Lehane's Shutter Island. You'll see the connection.
You are absolutely correct about "The Nuge" thank God for Ted Nugent and all he's done for all of us in the silent majority!
Also until I read your post it hadn't dawned on me about the fact that the anti's have never given an inch and we give all. Guess that doesn't say much for my powers of perception.
I fear now that we are being lulled into a complacency that the left wing admin has so much on there plate that they will leave us alone, but I believe that they will come at us with several flanking maneuvers, ie: ammo availability, international politics (Mexico) to reinstate the AWB, or even a capitulation to the UN which could negate all of the afdvances we've made recently.
DanD
I've been of the mind that the "environmentalists" and "global warming" crowd practice their activism as if they were part of a religious movement. Global warming (climate change, or whatever marketing slogan they're going with today) is a movement that is also essentially about control. The anti-gun crowd is roughly populated by the same cohort as the global warming crowd, ergo it's really all about control and nothing whatsoever about the "cause" they are promoting.
I would disagree with the assessment that this is a "religious war". It has transcended "religion" and moved right into being a "cult". There, the "believers" simply trust whatever they are told by their "enlightened ones".
On the other hand, defenders of the Bill of Rights and the Constitution, are assigned that same designation as "believers", by the "left". We are also put there for our positions on other issues. The fact is, we do not "believe" in our principles, WE KNOW THEM TO BE FACTS! They are the "believers". If you want examples, just listen to the members of the current administrations cabinet. All they can ever say when they try to force any of their ill-conceived policies down are throats is "We BELIEVE that this is the right thing to do".
Conversely, each time some one from the right speaks, they speak in terms of data, (real) science, historical information, facts, and other "absolutes". There are some exceptions to this, but that's only because those deviating have mostly placed themselves on the wrong side of the arguement, in the first place, I think.
On gun control, that's the difference between John C. Lott and say, Mayor Bloomberg.
Never give up anything, when you're right!
Life Member
Post a Comment