« we're off! | Main | Ah...what the hell... »

December 17, 2005



Meg, you have been heard! The position you take is a very common one, understandably so.

Your attitude is very close to how mine once was. But, you should realize years have passed since then, (so let's not kid ourselves into thinking we could possible agree with each other overnight).

I could rant and rave about guns, gun rights, governments becoming the criminal, freedom and liberty (or the lack thereof). I could post stories of homeowners defending themselves from would be murderers in suburbs just like yours. I could post about a small number of Jews holding off SS soldiers with only a meager supply of arms. I could attempt to explain away every fear you might have about firearms, (fully automatic weapons included). We could discuss what "reasonable" gun control really means. On and on we could go.

But, the mind is a dangerous thing, so they say. Can you imagine a pistol on your bedstand? Can you imagine carrying one on a daily basis? Can you imagine taking the family to the range? Can you imagine going to Wal-Mart and seeing ever customer openly carrying arms? Can you imagine walking your dog with a shotgun strap to your back? Can you imagine shooting on a regular basis? Can you imagine shooting someone? What if your life was threatened? Can you imagine defending your life with a handgun? A shotgun? A .50 caliber "sniper" rifle?

The images going through your mind right now I can only imagine. Again, the mind is very dangerous indeed. Any reasonable gun debate is worthless until a very personal issue is addressed. The basics to becoming comfortable around firearms; going shooting.

It is where I started with my dad with a little .22 rifle. If you were located in Eastern Washington, my wife and I would be glad to take you. It sounds like you are down South. If you truly are willing to have this experience, I will be seeking a responsible gunowner to help. Check here also.

Truthfully, I have done gun debates so many times, I find myself repeating the same things against the same misconceptions, (or, in the case of gun control advocates, out and out lies).

If you would like to watch those debates on a regular basis, start at The Smallest Minority.

Your Conscience


Misconceptions. I enjoy the idea that people who are against gun ownership are simply misinformed. Meg has it right - the ownership of guns does not protect our liberty, it's a sad product thereof. I feel like there's a fundamental misconception of the spirit of the constitution. Jefferson and many of the other writers were big fans of the English philosopher John Locke. Locke wrote during a time of civil unrest in England, and much of what he was interested in was the ability of the citizens to rise up against a government to reestablish a system that is best for the citizens. Jefferson especially liked Locke, and the 2nd amendment can, in my opinion, be attributed to Locke. However, Locke wrote in the 17th century. Things are a bit different now. If a handful of citizens that are armed to the teeth decide that the government sucks, they can sure try to do something about it. But what are they going to do? Start shooting? How many innocents are killed during that little insurrection? What about liberty then? The truth is that by arming yourself to the teeth, you've protected yourself from an intruder, yes, but not from your own government.

I'm curious, why must Meg's mind be changed? Why can't she continue to maintain her own opinion of guns and gun control? Isn't that just another part of liberty?

Just my 2 cents.


FishOrMan ~ I really dont have any of those images. I know I would be dangerous with a gun (hell, I'm dangerous with a pair of skis! way too easily distracted and careless...I KNOW this!). Besides, I can control when and how I have a gun or not. Its the gang members, robbers, murderers and the like that I fear...even without guns, but more so WITH them. I am afraid my son will visit a friend who's dad didnt keep his gun locked up. These are the things I fear...not you, not myself, not the terrorists. And -as whacked as I believe our government truly is, especially under W- I have better ways than violence to change it. Besides, I believe any large group will have its problems...I can live with government being an imperfect but still beneficial system (read: doesnt need to be entirely overturned!). What I can NOT live with is psycho neighbors who are armed (and I think mine are, and always drunk!). As for shooting...I do enjoy it. Not a bad shot, either. But as a brand new mother, I havent had time to shower these days...much less go out shooting more. And while I would never have the heart to KILL anything, I respect people who do so in a responsible, respectful manner. As for the constitution, I think it is STILL relevant that people be allowed to own guns...even if (I think) we dont need them for the same purposes. I cant stand our government making its way into our lives...telling us not to have guns, what to do with our bodies or lifestyles. Now they can even listen to our phone conversations at will? Scary. But -as a non-fundamentalist living in the center of a Red, bible-buckle state- I've learned to take the bad with the good...and I am greatful as hell to have been born in this country rather than any other. (can you hear the national anthem playing behind me? shoot me if you see me waving the flag the way all my pro-Iraq neighbors do! wait, that was just a joke.)

Your Conscience

Well said. I think that when this country devolves into a police state lead by some fascist/dictator/whatever, it will be on the heels of a public election and much fanfare. Arming the general citizenry just guarantees that there will be less of them running around. I'm not going to tell someone else they can't have a gun, but I also don't want someone telling me that they own a gun to "defend liberty". I just don't buy that.


Meg, VERY nice job of explaining and defending your point of view. Like you, I'm no expert on this, but I fall just about where you do on the spectrum, I think, and like "Your Conscience," I don't think your mind needs to be changed as long as you remain willing to listen to (or read) the differing views of others. Well done.


Does whether the right to arms defends liberty or is a product of liberty make a difference? I can say the same about free speech, freedom from self-incrimination, etc., etc.

Besides, I'd consider having the ability to defend myself, family and others with the best tool at my disposal to be liberty


Paraphrasing Joe Huffman:
Can anybody demonstrate, in all of human history, a time when taking handheld weapons away from law abiding people has ever made them safer?

Diesel Dan

Yawn back atcha, Mr. Conscience.

Meg's mind does not need to be changed. She supports the right of law abiding, thoughtful, and careful people to bear arms for their self defense. I believe she also sees the good side of carrying a weapon for self defense: She can't believe it's to protect from the terrorist from afar, because she seems to know, without coming right out and saying it, that her own kind of personal terror is right next door, probalby drunk and fondling their weapons, or watching her new child to see when they might snatch her baby, or waiting outside her window until she is in the shower.

Meg, the rest of the world is not like your neighborhood, your town, or your state. I have very little fear of those that are lawfully carrying firearms in Washington state being reckless and stupid with them. The record bears that out. Year after year goes by with no mention that I see of anyone with a concealed weapons permit carelessly firing wildly, or shooting up a bunch of folks in anger or drunken stupidity. We don't even have to take a class or show proof of knowledge of the use os deadly force in our state, but, somehow, it has remained a very safe place to carry a weapon, and have others carrying weapons, too.

As far as liberty is concerned, I ask you to fight for the right to bear arms, because all of the liberties spelled out in the constitution are worth fighting for, or none are. We can speculate all day and night about what the writers' intentions were, or their 18th century mindset, but one thing is for sure: Once a right is written in that document, it is intended to be permanent, then as now. I'd fight for the right for the communist to have their beliefs, the Pagan to practice their religion, the protestor to curse the president, or the parent to talk their child out of joining the military voluntarily. In this country, you don't get to pick and choose which rights are better, and which ones to just get rid of. Keep that in mind next time you say somehting negative about the government in public, or refuse to allow a police officer to search your car without a warrant.

They are all precious, every last one.

Lizzy B

Ah, Meg, always a lightning rod... That's what you get for going to my hubby's blog! Nice to see you back in cyberspace by the way. Kirk tipped me off that you are here now! Congrats on your re-location and on the birth of your son. He's a cutie pie.

As for the Gun Rights issue, I am a pretty strict constitutionalist so I support the right to keep and bear arms. My husband has had some influence on me to the point of my wanting my own firearms. Mainly because I can't use his home defense weapon because I am nearly a foot shorter than he is. We do not live in a neighborhood and have many people walk by and/or through our property. My husband travels a lot and I would often feel unsafe. Having my revolver and knowing that if it comes to that I will defend myself with a clear conscience has made me so much more comfortable when I am home alone and hear rabble-rousing outside my home.

One of the beauties of this coutry is that we are all entitled to our own opinions and are able to express them without the fear of punishment and imprisonment. Long live the Bill of Rights in its full and uncorrupted form!

The comments to this entry are closed.