“In discussion of the atrocity in Norway last week, there is one subject which has been notable by the almost total silence about it: guns.”
The writer assuring us of this is British philosophy professor A C Grayling, and he apparently doesn’t frequent anti-gun websites like those of the Brady Campaign or the Violence Policy Center. He’s also blissfully unaware of blame apportionment going on by politicians like Carolyn McCarthy and Frank Lautenberg, who say a U.S. magazine ban is just the ticket for stopping foreign terrorists from going on mass murder sprees. And forgetting what’s being said on this side of the pond, is it unreasonable to expect someone passing himself off as an authority to be ignorant of recommendations from the U.K.’s The Guardian that “tighter gun controls…must surely be part of the repertoire of increased security measures to which Norway should eventually turn”?
That is, if he truly is unaware that his opening premise is demonstrably false…
Here’s where he’s going with this—and where he’d like to force us to go—well, not him personally, but other men with guns he approves of;
Guns should be the subject of worldwide outrage. Their manufacture and sale should be a human-rights abuse, on which we pour vilification and horror. They should be illegal for all but properly constituted, trained and controlled agencies of governments, provided of course that the governments in question are themselves properly constituted and controlled by democratic means in a society where the rule of law obtains.
“Provided of course.”
In a way, Grayling’s done us a favor by putting all his cards on the table. How often do we hear gungrabbers chastise and ridicule gun owners as a bunch of paranoids for saying their end game is a total gun ban? If you worry about the “slippery slope” of one gun ban leading to another to total disarmament, you must be nuts—no matter that there’s plenty of documentation of “gun control leaders” recommending just that.
“Highly dangerous killing instruments,” Grayling continues. “Language matters: let us no longer use the word ‘gun’ but that phrase ‘highly dangerous killing instrument’, and perhaps perceptions will change.”
Perhaps. As long as what we’re referring to is state-employed tyranny enforcers, I’ve got no problem with that. But as for this…uh…”highly subversive useful idiot’s” disarmamentt demands, there’s really only one proper response:
No. The longer answer is two words, and starts with “F.”
UPDATE: Just noticed Vanderboegh also took this punk apart.
I’m scheduled to join Mark Walters again tonight at 9:00 PM Eastern on Armed American Radio to give a “Project Gunwalker” update. Click here to find a station near you or to listen live from your computer at the appointed hour.
Help wanted–inquire within
Regular readers: If you agree that mainstream press coverage of the gun rights issue demands a counter-balance, please help me spread the word by sharing Gun Rights Examiner links with your friends via emails, and in online discussion boards, blogs, social media sites, etc. Then get more commentary at The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance.
And don’t forget to check out my War on Guns Resistance Radio show, weekdays at 7:00 AM Pacific and 10:00 AM Eastern on NBC 1260 Scottsdale, or by listening live, through weekend encores, or downloading archived programs.