Eric is my niece Sonnet's main squeeze. He's a sweet-natured young man who proudly states that he owns 11 guns. I took this alarming admission in stride, because Eric is a military veteran and a skilled hunter, well versed in firearms safety. He's not dangerous.
However, in justifying his private arsenal, Eric casually articulated a dogma that's been perpetuated by the National Rifle Association and its allies on Fox News -- that the Federal government is dead-set on carrying out (sometime -- who knows when?) a secret, lightning program of universal gun confiscation. When it comes, he apparently plans to either hide his ordinance or start shootin'.
This anxiety is consistent with the limited-government conservatism (LGC) of its proponents. But it betrays an underlying -- and fairly crazy -- contradiction. After all, a bedrock conviction of the LGC community is that the government can't find its own ass with 1,000 hands. As the government grows, it becomes less efficient, less competent to carry out its stated policies and functions.
Here's the cognitive dissonance: On one hand, as big government gets bigger, it becomes more and more inept. On the other hand, this bloated ectoplasm of bungling bureaucrats possesses the surgical dexterity to somehow ferret out, swiftly seize (without resistance), and magically vanish 200 million private firearms from 315 million people in a nation covering 3,790,000 square miles.
The absurdity of this concept is all the more dazzling in light of the fact that no legislator in history has ever formally proposed either the seizure of anybody's guns or the repeal of the Second Amendment. No one. Ever.
Nonetheless, the NRA annually raises and spends millions of dollars based almost solely on this exquisitely cultivated myth of prohibition. The delusion persists despite the reality that no American -- and hardly anyone, anywhere -- has ever seen prohibition work, except in tiny, isolated communities.
Indeed, prohibition of some things -- like murder and rape -- is a great idea. But, although we execute some murderers and rapists, others keep murdering and raping, sometimes just to prove that "nobody's gonna tell me what I can't do!"
Of course, the great American example of prohibition was the Volstead Act, the banning of all alcoholic beverages between 1919 and 1933. As we know now, the passage of the 21st Amendment, ending Prohibition, concluded one of the booziest, most lawless 15 years in US history. It seemed that the more people were told not to have a little drink, the bigger grew their thirst.
Also, there's smoking. We've never tried an outright ban on smoking everywhere, but we've done all we can to prove that smoking is deadly to the smoker and dangerous to everyone else. But 20 percent of Americans still smoke, and always will. Every year, millions of young people -- who refuse to be told what they can and cannot do to their own bodies -- start smoking. So there!
America's 30-year War on Drugs has expanded exponentially the value of illicit narcotics, created fortunes for drug lords, turned dopers into criminals, and spread the plague of addiction into vast new territories. It's the Volstead Act on steroids. Today, there are millions of ruined people injecting poison into their veins solely because the government has told them they're not allowed to inject poison into their veins. So there!
Prohibition can't even get rid of measles and chicken pox. We thought we had it wiped out until a fresh bunch of zealots, even more ignorant and paranoid than the NRA, decided that vaccinations cause autism.
The prospect of official prohibition doesn't have to be true, or even credible. Even if it's just a political ploy, it triggers a primal fear. People resist compulsion, instinctively. I know I do. But sometimes, this resistance is a denial of reason that boils down to sheer bullheadedness. And sometimes, as we seek to prevent some great tragedy that's never going to happen, we invite a real tragedy even worse than our deepest fears.
According to the Congressional Research Service, in 2009 there were an estimated 310 million firearms in the United States (not including weapons on military bases), of which 114 million were handguns, 110 million were rifles, and 86 million were shotguns. The current population of the United States, according to the Census, is around 314 million.
A separate calculation by the Government Accountability Office estimated that 118 million handguns were available for sale to, or were possessed by, civilians in the United States in 2010.
It's impossible to know for certain how many guns are in private hands because there is no central firearms registry. The 1986 McClure-Volkmer Act forbids the federal government from establishing any "system of registration of firearms, firearm owners, or firearms transactions or distribution." And the 1993 Brady Act prohibits the establishment of any electronic registry of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions...........
A 2005 data review done by a panel of criminologists, statisticians, and epidemiologists for the National Research Council concluded that there is a lack of reliable data and "in some instances-firearms violence prevention, for example-there are no data at all." The NRC report said that "none of the existing data sources, by itself or in combination with others, provides comprehensive, timely, and accurate data needed to answer many important questions pertaining to the role of firearms in violent events." The panel reported that "even some of the most basic descriptive questions cannot be answered with existing data." It cited such unanswered questions as: • What proportion of suicide or homicide victims were under the care of a mental health professional? What proportion of those victims were intoxicated at the time of death? • In what proportion of spouse or intimate-partner homicides committed with a gun does the offender take his own life or the lives of the victim's children or protectors? • Did the number of people shot with "assault weapons" change after Congress enacted the 1994 ban on certain types of such weapons?
I do not own a gun, do not want a gun, but firmly believe that gun ownership is a constitutional right, I am small government, and firmly believe that whenever gvt sticks it's nose in my business things only get worse....that being said......talk to the kids @ VA Tech that are not allowed to carry guns on campus, look at the massacre in CO @ the movie theatre, also Fort Hood ............all were 'gun free zones'.......the perps knew it and took advantage of it......I am not a fan of guns in schools either but look into the small county in TX (outside of Houston I believe) that has a in school system policy of an administrator or teacher anonomously allowed to carry a gun. Only the school committe and superintendent know who is allowed to carry that gun. The public knows of the policy and more parents outside the district are trying to get their kids into that system...........i would be happy to take odds that a gun violent crime will not be committed in that school district........vermon that committ these crimes are just that ...vermon! And cowards! They will not attempt their heinous cowardly acts where THEY KNOW someone may be carrying a gun.
Gun prohobition is not a solution.......knives, bats, auto's, poison they are all potentialy assult weapons, ....oh and lest we forget .......jet airliners loaded w/ passangers and jet fuel ..........give it some thought.
Yes, a while after having written the comment I was wondering if I should start asking my American friends if they own a gun, something like a little research to get a basic stats --at least from my friends-- about this.
@Susan I'm sure most Americans don't own guns. I'll try to find the stats on that. In states like New York, there are very strict laws surrounding gun permits, which are not cheap and have to be renewed regularly. Also the permits that residents of New York obtain only allow them to keep a gun at home or at work, not to carry it on them.
You must be one of the few Americans who doesn't own a gun. I appreciate your not owning one.
I don't get involved in the debate about gun ownership, and didn't and don't want to get involved in any discussion about the results of owning guns and using them in the 21st century.
However, I enjoy Clint Eastwood movies and TV shows. I just refuse to understand the fact that it seems like in some places nothing has changed since the times those movies and TV shows are depicting.
Setting aside the emotional component--as if anyone possibly could--the NRA's assertion that adding more guns to school grounds is absurd. Many gun fatalities come from accidental use of nearby guns or one's own gun being used against the owner. So let's make guns more accessible by putting them at the doors to schools rather than in someone's home. At least gun manufacturers will sell more guns...
The one big difference I can see regarding Prohibition is, prohibition and drug laws are targeted at substances that harm the user first--bystanders are harmed if users become mobile. Guns are designed to harm someone or something else as their first and most important use. There is a difference between the protection of self and the protection of others: gun control falls into the latter category, I believe, and therefore people who do not own guns should have a signifiacnt say in the matter.
And Diane Feinstein the 'esteemed' Senator from California is married to a man who amassed part of his fortune by legally trading in fire arms and munitions which are mfg'd in China......he is an accomplished arms dealer / broker..........and she is sponsoring an assualt gun ban bill..............oh the hypocrisy of it all........I love these people in DC who think they know far better and what is good and just and fair for thier constituents.
I don't own a gun or really get involved in the debate about gun ownership. However, I did have to look into the issue for a piece for a client. Interestingly, guns themselves are often the objects of crime. "About 1.4 million firearms were stolen during household burglaries and other property crimes over the six-year period from 2005 through 2010," according to the Justice Department's Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). "This number represents an estimated average of 232,400 firearms stolen each year- about 172,000 stolen during burglaries and 60,300 stolen during other property crimes."
"However, in justifying his private arsenal, Eric casually articulated a dogma that's been perpetuated by the National Rifle Association and its allies on Fox News"
David,
Can you identify who on Fox News has articulated the dogma you stated? I don't think that I have heard that.
Also, regarding government, your cognitive dissonance example seems to make the argument that larger government, which becomes more inept, must as a consequence also become more benign, or at least incapable of oppressing it's citizens. Government is very capable of being inept is some areas and oppressive in others.
Like the casual baseball fan who doesn’t understand the infield-fly rule, normal voters – with bigger fish to fry – don’t enjoy the arcana of politics.
EBN Dialogue enables and encourages you to participate in live chats with notable leaders and luminaries. Not only editors and journalists, but the entire EBN community is able to comment and ask questions. Listed below are upcoming and archived chats.
Archived Dialogues
Thailand Stages a Comeback Join EBN contributor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday August 23, 2012, at 11:00 a.m. EST for a live chat on how electronic manufacturers in Thailand have shored up their supply chain to reduce the impact of future natural disasters.
Euro-Crisis: What It Means for High-Tech Firms Join EBN Editor in Chief Bolaji Ojo and Contributing Editor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday, July 12, at 10:00 a.m. EDT for a Live Chat on high-tech and Europe's economic difficulties.
Microsoft Surface: Potential Winners & Losers What are the implications for the electronics industry supply chain of Microsoft Corp.'s decision to launch its own tablet PC? Join industry veteran and EE Times' systems and OEM expert Rick Merritt on Tuesday, July 3, at 12:00 pm EDT for a Live Chat on this subject.
Join EBN contributor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday August 23, 2012, at 11:00 a.m. EST for a live chat on how electronic manufacturers in Thailand have shored up their supply chain to reduce the impact of future natural disasters.
Peter Drucker famously said "Trying to predict the future is like trying to drive down a country road at night with no lights while looking out the back window." Yet in the razor's-edge world of electronics—with a lean supply chain and just-in-time demands—the need to know the future is vital.
You've heard the saying "the No. 1 supply chain risk is your people." That hasn't always been the case. But today's complex global supply chain requires a new type of multitalented employee. It's one who understands, finance, marketing, economics, is savvy with technology, graceful with relationships and can think analytically.
Where are these people? Are universities properly preparing the next generation supply chain professionals? How do train your existing workforce for these new, demanding positions?
Brian Fuller, editor-in-chief of EBN, will lead a 60-minute Avnet Velocity panel discussion that will ask and answer these and other questions swirling around today's supply-chain talent challenges.
To save this item to your list of favorite EBN content so you can find it later in your Profile page, click the "Save It" button next to the item.
If you found this interesting or useful, please use the links to the services below to share it with other readers. You will need a free account with each service to share an item via that service.
Tweet This