Gun control advocates really do not understand the fire they are playing with, with much of what is being proposed. How many millions of Americans are you prepared to imprison? How many are you prepared to kill? What is the count of ruined lives, broken families, and ruin are you willing to inflict to try to achieve your rainbow farting unicorn utopia where every gun turns into a flower? Widespread disrespect for the law by millions of Americans is not going to bring that about, and in fact, may only serve to create larger unregulated markets, and far more willingness to engage in law breaking people would not be willing to engage in under normal circumstances.As I have said for years, the controlling word in the phrase "gun control" is control, not gun. I've followed with interest many of the threads on various forums arguing about "terminology"...if, for instance, we all agreed to call black rifles "modern sporting rifles" or we were careful to never refer to firearms as "weapons." I used to agree pretty wholeheartedly with those arguments, but over the years I've come around to a different view. Our enemies aren't antigun, they're anti-people-with-guns. It's not the guns they hate...it's us.
How many articles and interviews have you heard recently with a person saying, "Boy, I'm glad I didn't have a gun when such and such happened, or I'd've have shot everyone dead!!!" I've seen a lot and it puzzles me. I get mad just like everybody else, but it has been a long time since I truly wanted to kill someone. Heck, I've been really pissed off when I was carrying a gun, and it never occurred to whip out my piece and blast away.
The reason there is no middle ground (and Mike Thompson, now would be a good time to take notes) is this war is between to fundamentally opposed world views. After living n New York City and spending a lot of time in California, I've come to see the fight as one between the adults and the perpetual children of the Nanny State. Those "children" envision a world where they are free to endlessly "act out," every person his or her own Lindsay Lohan., forever.
An adult in the room inhibits all that fun acting out, because the very presence of the adult casts into question the idea and the ideal of a perpetual adolescence. Our Founders envisioned a government working with adults, who understood the great issues of the day and were willing to step up and take their place in the country. The current Administration would like nothing better than a nation of permanent adolescents and those who owe their existence to the government, because those two groups are easy to please. It's like Alf the Wonder Beagle...no matter how mad she is at us, she can be bought off with a piece of bacon.
Anyway, enough armchair philosophy! Here are a couple of articles on the media. The first is why journalists so often get guns wrong:
The shooting at Sandy Hook has brought gun policy to the forefront of our national conversation. President Obama has pledged to act aggressively on the issue, having laid out a comprehensive plan, including new weapons regulations as well as law enforcement and public awareness programs, in the hope of reducing gun violence. This will be a marquee issue in Washington and throughout the country over the next several months, and media coverage will only intensify. With that said, too few journalists have a solid understanding of guns and gun violence. Here are three major things the media gets wrong.Obviously, read the whole thing. The second is more along the lines of the canary in the coal mine, on the collapse of even the pretense of a free media. From Ace of Spades:
And I've mentioned this before, but I'm truly alarmed about it: What we are witnessing is the full and seamless fusion of media power with government power. The media used to hide it a bit, in their actions; they would temper their scorn of conservatism, throw them a bone now and again just to prove they were capable of such a thing. No longer.
The media no longer hides it in their actions. They are fully fused with the Obama Administration and DNC. The only way in which they do hide it is by simply lying when confronted about it: They'll issue a snide denial, then go about doing precisely what it is they were accused of doing.At my Friday "Stuck In Las Vegas" party after SHOT, my Sweetie asked Steven Hunter, who of course won a Pulitzer Prize while he was at the Washington Post, what happened to responsible journalism...how did we get from "objectivity" to Pravda in record time? The short story (as she related to me) was that Steve said the huge influx of young people into journalism after Woodward/Bernstein/Watergate essentially stressed, and eventually cracked, the old news cult of objectivity. The newcomers were activists, and they saw journalism as a tool of activism — and a way to make good money from it. Hope I got that right, Steve!