A look at 2nd amendment fallacies
Dear Editor,

The NRA is lying to its constituents, as it is to the rest of us. Let us examine the three most cited “fear factors” that are aroused and pandered to the flock each and every time the specter of legal limitations on handgun and assault rifle proliferation are raised.

First, that handguns and assault rifles are a freedom-loving Americans’ protection against a tyrannical government. If you swallow this line, you are a fool. The swiftest and easiest manner in which to have each and every one of your constitutional freedoms removed, save those that promise a quick trial, is to brandish a weapon against any form of government. Don’t believe me? Pull a Glock to underscore your dislike of the decision to serve hotdogs at the summer block party during your next friendly neighborhood organizational meeting, and watch how swiftly incarceration can happen when the cops are motivated by a threat. Try this same act of defiance against a state or federal agency or representative, and you’ll likely end up dead, with your murder neatly justified to your widow by a court of law.

No, the notion that a gun will protect you from the government, or even keep it on its toes, has been a fallacy since Congress funded and equipped a standing army sometime in the late 1700s. Who’s going to win in a standoff? The beer-drinking fighters of some reactionary, squirrel-eating, “Grab the guns, mama, it’s just like Red Dawn out there!” militia, or the well- funded, highly organized, legally justified, jack-booted thugs from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, backed up by the armed forces? Disagree? Reference the Ruby Ridge Massacre or the incident in Waco, Texas.

Second, the supposed “common sense” that states, “an armed society is a polite society,” is exactly that, quite common and base. In fact, an armed society is a brutish society. The ability of some ignorant ass to pull a weapon on another for any reason and thereby instantly squash all of the hapless victim’s rights is barbaric. A substantial and effectively random proliferation of weapons meant to kill throughout society is the antithesis of freedom. Dislike my lifestyle or words or religion? Pull a gun and change my mind for me. It’s the redneck, I mean, American way, right?

Like it or not, the Constitution guaranties the freedoms and liberties of all Americans, not guns. While the right to bear arms is allowed for as well, consider my next point.

Third, there is a false analogy circulating that attempts to compare a car wrecked by a drunk driver, presumably resulting in the deaths of the occupants and/or other innocent motorists, with an assault rifle or handgun. Understand this, at no time in the creation of that car or truck was there an intent for it to be used as a deadly weapon. Handguns and assault rifles have only one design, and only one purpose, to kill human beings. The comparison of a wrecked car to an AR-15 is no more valid than that of bottle-rockets to MX missiles. Reference your conceal/carry training and you can’t escape the fact that strict guidance dictates, if you are to gain the state’s confidence in your ability to responsibly carry a concealed weapon, you are to be clear in the fact that it be drawn for only one reason, to apply the use of deadly force. Your F-150 manual sitting in the glovebox contains no such provisions for operation.

For the discussion on handgun and assault rifle ownership to continue in a reasonable fashion, the NRA must accept the fact that these issues can be discussed rationally only after they dispose of this load of horseshit.

– Erich Hennig, Durango

To the editor,
I write to help the public set the record straight after reading the illogic and hate mongering as written by Ari Levaux. Let’s start with his irrational statement about the NRA, since that was the main topic of his slander. Ari himself states that almost one in five hunters are NRA members, clearly a remarkable achievement of any special interest organization. For example, how many cyclists ride in Durango, and of them how many belong to a cycling organization? Probably significantly less then 20 percent yet, Ari downplays this success and even attributes it to failure.

 

Absurd.

I for one am an award-winning triathlete, but I belong to no groups related to swimming, cycling or running. Yet, I am an NRA member because I believe the Second Amendment is a very special thing. It separates us from other countries around the world, guarantees our national security from invasion, prevents government tyranny (millions of citizens have been slaughtered by their government), protects free speech and allows people to protect themselves from evil. The anti-gun crowd would have you believe you could do all this with 10-round magazines and lever action rifles. Nonsense.

The level of ignorance and paranoia they display buoys remarkable hatred and racism against people who believe strongly in their Second Amendment rights. For example, Ari calls folks who believe strongly in self defense, as “paranoid loonies.” I take my rifle to the gun shop and never feel a need to write my NRA number. For Ari to believe if he doesn’t, the gunsmith would treat his rifle any differently actually strikes me as a little paranoid.

Ari quotes statistics to support his paranoid and delusional way of thinking. He states that households with guns are more likely to injure themselves than actually protect. Where’d he get that one? Every suicide is counted. Contrary, every time a gun is used successfully to repel violence is not. From an unemotional objective view the statistics show strong overall support that guns are the most effective way to stop senseless violence. One correlation that strongly supports this: in spite of gun ownership rising sharply, violent crime has declined dramatically in this country. Other stats show that hammers alone and even fists and legs are responsible for more murders than rifles each year. Please remember, so-called assault weapons are a subcategory of rifles, therefore, an even smaller amount of murders are actually committed with them. Just check/Google the FBI’s data on violent crime and the tools used and you will see for yourself.

Nevertheless, I can’t blame Ari for his emotional and irrational interpretations of the statistics, especially after the media and politicians used the tragedy to advance their fear mongering and paranoid agenda day after day and week after week, in spite of the fact that these killers seek such infamy. The political regime in power today appears to be using a time-honored strategy of diverting attention from their flagrant failures with the economy, preventing nuclear proliferation (e.g. Iran and North Korea) etc. Stated more clearly, when leaders are failing the country, they demonize a group of law-abiding citizens and create mass hysteria to divert attention from their massive political/economic failures.

Ask, if “Gun Free” zones are so effective, should not the White House use the signs for their own security? A recent study from the Texas State Government found that individuals with concealed carry permits were 13 times (not 13 percent, but 1300 percent) less likely to commit crimes than the general population. Does it really make sense or us safer if we disarm those law-abiding folks?

I see news stories weekly where guns are used successfully to stop senseless violence. How many people have been raped, tortured and killed because they were denied the tools necessary to protect themselves? It’s amazing how these stories of heroes go untold, while one cowardly killer will be spoken of daily for months. People like Ari choose the sources of the information that support their stereotypical thinking therefore serving to fortify their irrational thought processes. They fear and are uncomfortable by information that disconfirms their convictions. Ironically, Ari calls for conversation; however, confronting the strong stereotypes of racist individuals/governments is difficult at best. Their belief system is entrenched and supported endlessly by the information they choose to attend to.

Given this climate, it should not be surprising when I say that as a Second Amendment advocate, I feel like a Jew in 1930s Germany.

– Michael W. Goldberg, Durango