One of the things that tend to get under my skin faster than most is people commenting about cultures of which they have absolutely no understanding whatsoever. This shortcoming happens to just about all cultures, and all time periods, and spans the full breadth and depth of both - historians are constantly judging the past using the current standards, and politicians, activists, and all kinds of other people are all about judging other countries by ther own country's rules. Please do not misunderstand - Americans are just as guilty of this as anyone - but it is still a significant problem, no matter who does it. Granted, there are certain things that remain constant across cultures and times... or, at least, pretty darned close to constant, but when uneducated morons start ranting and raving about the perceived shortcomings of other cultures, and expect their words to stand as gospel truth, unchallenged and unassailable... well, that is just one hell of a tempting target.

Unfortunately, SayUncle went and directed me to one such moron. Now, I am not one to visit another person's intentions, but so closely as I can follow his writings, the author does not understand American's "love of guns", and due to that lack of understanding, dislikes it, and believes it should not exist. Furthermore, due to that lack of understanding, he simply picks a cause out of the air - in this case, paranoia - and ascribes all of America's "love of guns" to it.

Surprisingly, at the time I wrote the below, his weblog post was still accepting comments, so I left the below:

It is "paranoid" to recognize, understand, and admit that crime does happen, to "normal" people like myself and my family, on a regular basis?

It is "paranoid" to recognize, understand, and admit that there are people out there who are larger, stronger, and faster than I am, and that using a small piece of equipment to try and level the playing field might be a good idea?

It is "paranoid" to recognize, understand, and admit that firearms will always exist everywhere, regardless of rules, regulations, and restrictions, and voluntarily stripping one's self of the capability to wield them yourself is tantamount to shoving your head in the sand and painting a target on your arse?

Well, hell, stuff me in a psych ward and call me Shirley, then. Of course, given your tirade and that I am one of those "gun nuts" you seem to disdain so very much, you probably would not mind the former... but that is neither here nor there.

As for why firearm owners own firearms... Well, I cannot speak for anyone except myself. My experience with them started out with air rifles in college, and joining the school's air rifle team on a whim and boredom. However, one trip to the range, and I was hooked on the focus, the attention to detail, and the control necessary to perform well - after all, trying to hit a pinprick at 10 meters is not exactly the easiest thing in the world. Once I was out of college (since they are, by and large, shooting galleries... er... "gun free zones"), I decided I would like to pick up shooting as a regular hobby for myself. However, after coming to the determination that an air rifle in the same class as the ones I had the privilege of using in college would cost more than a "normal" firearm, and be significantly less useful, I went for the slug-thrower, and the rest is, as they say, history. I started out with a pistol, have since added a carbine to the collection, and once I move to a state with a slightly better view on personal defense, I will be adding a carry pistol as well.

However, that was just the start of it. Since then, my understanding of the inherent right to self defense has progressed considerably. I am a free, independent, capable young man, and I am responsible for my own life - not the government, not the police, not some Joe Schmo down the road. In fact, now that I am married, I am responsible not only for my own life and safety, but also that of my Better Half (call me a mysoginistic twit for it, I will not mind). And I take that responsibility very seriously. In this day and age, the only effective and relatively reliable method to ensure one's own safety is to use the technology afforded to us, and since many, many criminals possess and utilize firearms (oddly, even in countries that have banned them... I wonder how that happens?), it only makes sense to level the playing field. Additionally, as I mentioned before, there are many people larger/stronger/faster than me, and the firearm provides an equalizing factor for that situation as well.

However, self-defense is not the only new reason either. Simply put, a right unused is a right lost. We Americans have the rather unique (as you have repeatedly and disdainfully pointed out) right to individually possess firearms for whatever reason we so desire, and if no one were to exercise that right, it would be lost, whether it was legally removed due to lack of interest and the "public welfare", or it simply was forgotten. Consider me a defender of the Bill of Rights, and the Constitution they were amended to.

And last, and probably least, in the grand scheme of things, I own firearms because it so disturbs and concerns hoplophobic pants-wetters like you. In fact, I purchased the specific carbine I did because the state I live in has outlawed "assault weapons", on the premise that they are dangerous and evil weapons (while still, somehow, being the firearm least likely to be used in a criminal activity). Well, that is all good and well, but my rifle, based off a still-used American military rifle, is perfectly legal in the state... while being, by and large, more powerful and at a greater range than most of the banned "assault weapons". Go change your undies over that.

Two random, unrelated, closing thoughts for you... First, America has a history of "bunch(es) of blokes with flano shirts and hunting rifles" turning back better-organized, -equipped, and -managed armies... just take a look at our War of Independence.

Second, I have always enjoyed this quote, for instances such as these:

Though it is a long step between being disarmed and being murdered - one does not usually lead to the other - but it is nevertheless an arresting reality that not one of the principal genocides of the twentieth century, and there have been dozens, has been inflicted on a population that was armed. - Daniel D. Polsby

Oh, and I was redirected here by SayUncle, who has a nice response for you, if you are man enough to read it.

However, after commenting, it came to light that he, in fact, went and shut down comments because he did not like how his argument was being perforated. Of course, a few hours after shutting down the comments, he went and wrote a stirring little post (which is appropriately dismembered here) about how his shutting down comments on that one post was all our fault, and how we are so stupid for continuing to comment on that post (even though he has not made it clear in that post that comments are closed - a common weblogger courtesy), and yadda yadda yadda... more of the standard projection habits of anti-rights individuals. Well, just to spite his spineless little ass, this post will exist as a testament that, sure, he can silence dissent on his own weblog... but that only demonstrates that he has surrendered the argument, admitted the shortcomings of his stance, and retreated to sticking his fingers in his ears and humming. Oh, and the simple fact of the internet that you can never silence dissent.

Rustmeister does a positively outstanding job destroying his guy's arguments, and I certainly will not try to steal his thunder. However, one last thought before I sign off.

Banning firearms will increase the firearm crime rate shortly, while the police crack down on those individuals who owned them before the ban, and refused to give them up. However, over time, the ban will decrease the firearm crime rate - that much goes without saying whatsoever, even though hoplophobic anti-rights activists will harp on that point incessantly. However, firearm-related crimes are not the only crimes out there, now, are they? What about all of the other numerous, sundry, and distasteful crimes out there? What happens to their rates when firearms are banned?

Well, considering the citizenship of the author who prompted this post, we will use Australia as an example: In their case, as with every other case of broad-spectrum firearm bans, the crime rate remains the same, continues its growth the same as before the ban, or drastically increases, depending on which crime we are talking about, and over what period (Source 1, source 2, source 3, source 4).

So, sure, Ken, go ahead and silence those who would point out just how flawed and specious your point of view is. We certainly do not mind. The fact is, the truth is out there, the information is out there, the trends are out there. And while gun bans may make you feel better, the simple truth is that they actually do the exact opposite, and sometimes with disastrous results. And that information will be out there whether you allow it on your weblog or not. Just try not to go around forcing your spinelessness on those of us who find it pathetic... we have no patience for that.

Trackposted to Outside the Beltway, The Virtuous Republic, Rosemary's Thoughts, Nuke Gingrich, Right Truth, Adam's Blog, The World According to Carl, Miss Beth's Victory Dance, The Pink Flamingo, CORSARI D'ITALIA, , Right Voices, Adeline and Hazel, Gone Hollywood, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.