Chris · December 21, 2012 at 3:40pm

Beware the conservative echo chamber!  

I hope the coming weeks prove me wrong, but I fear they won't. The local news played a clip of a pro-gun guy saying that cooler heads will prevail, people will realize these bans are crazy, and move on. I think he is wrong.

I went to a public school PTO meeting in "the heart of Texas" this morning which, while suburban, is the deepest red possible, as our county went for Romney 80-20 versus Obama.

At the meeting, the tone amongst some of these mothers was borderline panic. The principal spent 30 minutes explaining how security had been beefed up since Newtown, what security was to come, and how the district had set up several subgroups to look at options. Another 30 minutes was spent as bulletproof glass, hiring security if the district wouldn't, putting in metal detectors -- all raised by parents who felt that money could be no object to turn our suburban elementary school into a fort. A mom or two mentioned the possibility of staff being armed, which I understand will be discussed in the next legislative session.

The suggestions were tabled, and after the meeting I spoke with a few moms I have known for several years. Now, I know some "mama bear" types with CHLs. These were not those types of moms. The conversation quickly turned to voicing incredulity that a school might not be a gun-free zone, banning automatic weapons, and commenting that if you can't hit an animal with one shot in your hunting rifle, you shouldn't hunt. My comments -- about the false security of gun free zones, the fact that semi-automatics are old technology, and that it's not the guns (of which there have been millions in circulation for decades) but the people -- were received politely, but I doubt they registered.

To us and the pundits we agree with, it is sheer folly - not to mention unconstitutional - to ban "assault weapons," large magazines, handguns, and the like.

That said, I have seen the other side. To me, it's like asking 15 years ago if denying a 30-something grad student at an elite private school free contraception was a civil rights issue. That which would have been laughed at then, and was laughed at by us this past summer, was deemed not only reasonable but worth a speaking slot at the Democrat convention.

The good Texas Republican moms I spoke with today were utterly clueless about guns, well-meaning, and likely not more than a hair's breadth away from going whole hog for some sort of liberal gun-grabbing claptrap because it's for the children. I can look at statistics and see that gun violence is falling, that more guns equal less crime, and the like. I can see how the right to bear arms is in the Second Amendment, meaning it's pretty darn important in the minds of the founders. I can go to the gun range and see people that think like me, but our echo chamber prior to the election didn't keep us from being utterly disappointed when our theories that polling did not reflect the electorate were vaporized.  

There is a move afoot amongst the political and media elites to make gun control the new abolition or civil rights movement, and we'd be fools to think they are not serious. Constant pounding on this tragedy is an attempt to generate real fear among the uninformed that all of our kids are a psycho's bad day from being gunned down.  

My logic of "the gun free zone does not make you safe" does not comfort these moms.  

My observation that bigger magazines is not the issue does not comfort these moms.  

My observation that there are millions of guns in the country and statistically few deaths by guns does not comfort these moms.  

My sense is it reinforces the left's message - no one is safe, there are guns everywhere just waiting to claim your child, and no slight tweak of the law will keep a mad man at bay. Why spend millions of dollars we don't have to beef up schools, or add guns to the school, when it could all be so simple - we could just be rid of them!  It beats outfitting the kids with bulletproof backpacks!

Our adversaries are not idiots - they know the prior ban was political kabuki. They are not going to let this crisis go to waste without a fight. Think that "rich white guys" is an overused meme?  Try crazies who would prefer to put your kids at risk than give up their antiquated notion of rights. It will resonate more than we think, and God bless our Senators and Congressmen on the front lines of this battle. It will not be easy for them.

Comments:


Roberto
Joined
Mar '11
Roberto
Chris: Our adversaries are not idiots - they know the prior ban was political kabuki.  They are not going to let this crisis go to waste without a fight.  Think that rich white guys is an overused meme?  Try crazies who would prefer to put your kids at risk than give up their antiquated notion of rights.  It will resonate more than we think, and God bless our Senators and Congressmen on the front lines of this battle.  

You are not wrong and events are moving faster than we think.  From my reading of the situation the NRA press conference tomorrow will be crucial. If there is any capitulation, any move towards "compromise" on  "sensible" legislation well then stock up now because who knows what might follow. However if there is a robust defense of the 2nd Amendment and a compelling statement on how futile it is to hope we can legislate safety by abandoning our freedoms, then... well then we can hold the line, but get ready for a fight. 

Leigh
Joined
Nov '11
Leigh

The emotional impact is huge, and with that comes the urge to do something.  The liberal/media push for that something to be gun control was utterly predictable.  Over time, it becomes more effective.

The conservative response was to predict and argue against the liberal response.

The resulting impression, I'm afraid: Liberals care about doing something to protect the children.  Conservatives care about protecting their guns.

Conservatives need to take the lead in these debates, not just react to liberal arguments.

For one: if  it is true that Adam Lanza's mother was trying to get him committed, that is the real disgrace, and conservative leaders should seize control of the debate on that point.  To the argument that he should never have had access to a gun, respond: Yes, and he should never have had access t0 a knife, or the wheel of a car, either.  If the mother felt her son was dangerous, it is shameful that nothing was done to protect her.  We might not have the answers, but we should insist on the discussion.

concerned citizen
Joined
May '10
concerned citizen

Great post.  As with so many of their causes, the Left gets their way by manipulating people's emotions and preying on their fears.  The facts become irrelevant.  That this issue can be sold as protecting "the children" is just icing on the cake for them.

These mothers were deaf to your recitation of facts.  They are having perfectly understandable emotions right now, but are allowing those to overrule their critical thinking.   Maybe we need to use our own emotional arguments to defend the Second Amendment.  The NRA magazine has a section entitled, "Armed Citizen" where they tell true stories of people who thwarted robbery, rape, or worse by using their guns.  (It's our favorite part of the magazine!)

Maybe our side can cite these kinds of true stories, and then ask people, "would you deny him/her the right to defend themselves?"  Or what?  

If facts do not register with people, then I guess we need to drop talking about the facts. We may need to adopt the manipulative strategies of the Left, and beat them at their own game.

Edited on December 21, 2012 at 7:07am

Joined
Apr '11
jt

I've been listening to SF Bay Area NPR and your experiences sound familiar. It's understood that we need to "do something" about high capacity "clips", and assault weapons.  They have some mildly pro-gun points of view but the whole underlying premise is that guns should and are going to be severely restricted.

They don't seen to be spreading fear so much as presenting gun control as the only reasonable point of view. There is no principled or practical defense of gun ownership. The best they seem to do is get a guy to say something like "I'm a gun owner but I don't see why anyone needs a [assault weapon/30 round magazine] for hunting".


Joined
Mar '12
Chris
concerned citizen: As with so many of their causes, the Left gets their way by manipulating people's emotions and preying on their fears.  The facts become irrelevant.  That this issue can be sold as protecting "the children" is just icing on the cake for them.

Importantly. these moms are, if not native Texans, women who went to college in Texas and have likely been here 20+ years since.  They were not the import northern moms who get the vapors when talking about "how things are different here".

My aunt in metro Boston had coyotes seen on her street and dogs had gone missing.  She walks for fitness, so I asked her if she carried pepper spray just in case.  She looked at me like I was a Martian - "You can't buy that at the store!  It's not legal!"  

On the gun control issue, she and people like her are likely beyond convincing with rational argument.  When it's cold here, we joke about how much colder it is up north.  Same with gun control - if our moms are saying this, how deep is the emotion and drive in places where even pepper spray is beyond the pale? 

Blue State Curmudgeon
Joined
May '11
Blue State Curmudgeon

My logic of "the gun free zone does not make you safe" doesnotcomfort these moms.  

My observation that bigger magazines is not the issue doesnotcomfort these moms.  

My observation that there are millions of guns in the country and statistically few deaths by guns does notcomfort these moms.  

Your mistake is to assume that logic and reason have any place in today's politics.  Not to sound like a misogynist, but this reflects the feminization of American politics such that every issue is to decided on the basis of emotion and every candidate elected for their ability to feel our pain.

DrewInWisconsin
Joined
Aug '11
DrewInWisconsin

Chris:

. . . and God bless our Senators and Congressmen on the front lines of this battle.  It will not be easy for them.

When I consider who we have on the front lines, I think it will not be easy for us.

Crow's Nest
Joined
Mar '11
Crow's Nest

Completely agree, Chris. And not only have we seen this time and again from this administration, we've seen a similar responses abroad the world over: Australia and the UK come to mind as nations which have responded to a murderous rampage with draconian gun control policies and which got immediate public support.

Public officials are supposed to be responsive in a moment of crisis, but they are also supposed to legislate not from fear but rather from sober far-sighted consideration. Fat chance of that happening in soccer mom land (for all the reasons you describe) or from the crop of pols that gave us Jim Messina with his delicate milky-white hands displaying "Obama, Care" in black marker.

Alas, instead of refining and enlarging the public's views and reminding it of its long term interests, we have an administration that will use this tragedy, and the trauma and anger in its aftermath (not only the "we've got to do something" urge, but especially with the killer himself dead, the "we must blame someone!" urge) to restrict firearms ownership. As though that was the cause of and responsible for the massacre....


Joined
Sep '10
Patrick in Albuquerque

Visit your gun show NOW.

Nick Stuart
Joined
May '10
Nick Stuart

"If it makes us safer, it's worth it" brought us the TSA and airport strip searches of 12 year olds in wheelchairs.

Same thing will obtain with firearms if we don't fight it.

Western Chauvinist
Joined
Dec '10
Western Chauvinist

Blue State Curmudgeon

My logic of "the gun free zone does not make you safe" doesnotcomfort these moms.  

My observation that bigger magazines is not the issue doesnotcomfort these moms.  

My observation that there are millions of guns in the country and statistically few deaths by guns does notcomfort these moms.  

Your mistake is to assume that logic and reason have any place in today's politics.  Not to sound like a misogynist, but this reflects the feminization of American politics such that every issue is to decided on the basis of emotion and every candidate elected for their ability to feel our pain. 

Let me defend you against charges of being a misogynist. I'm a woman with two daughters. I think this reflects the feminization of American politics (culture), such that every issue is to be decided on the basis of emotion and every candidate elected for his/her ability to feel our pain.

American liberalism is almost entirely comprised of cheap counterfeits. Counterfeit compassion being primary among them. But, hey, as long as it makes you feel good...

We are in so much trouble. 


Joined
Dec '10
Stephen

I feel as if the ground is falling away beneath me. I was, until recently, a pretty mainstream person. I have not changed, but in very short order I am an extremist. I'm talking just a couple of years. I think that within another couple of years I will be toxic to my friends (I work at  University). This is all very strange.

How did I go from being Ronald Reagan to Ted Nugent without changing anything I believe or espouse?

~Paules
Joined
Jun '10
~Paules

I think it was the late, great Jeff Cooper who coined the term "hoplo-phobia."  A phobia is defined as an irrational fear.  When a phobia spreads through the mass culture, it becomes a panic.  One of the characteristics of a panic is that it allows emotion to prevail over logic.  The deliberate dissemination of panic to promote a political agenda is known as evil.  Individuals who participate in evil are called evil-doers.  When laws promote evil, we are not morally obliged to obey them or those who promote them.  Such is the logic of the situation.     

Crow's Nest
Joined
Mar '11
Crow's Nest

Western Chauvinist:

Let me defend you against charges of being a misogynist. I'm a woman with two daughters. I think this reflects the feminization of American politics (culture), such that every issue is to be decided on the basis of emotion and every candidate elected for his/her ability to feel our pain.

Good on you, WC, for recognizing this and not shying away from saying so.

Cornelius Julius Sebastian
Joined
Jun '12
Cornelius Julius Sebastian
~Paules: I think it was the late, great Jeff Cooper who coined the term "hoplo-phobia."  A phobia is defined as an irrational fear.  When a phobia spreads through the mass culture, it becomes a panic.  One of the characteristics of a panic is that it allows emotion to prevail over logic.  The deliberate dissemination of panic to promote a political agenda is known as evil.  Individuals who participate in evil are called evil-doers.  When laws promote evil, we are not morally obliged to obey them or those who promote them.  Such is the logic of the situation.      · 3 minutes ago

Jeff Cooper of Scout Rifle fame?  Very appropos if so. 

dittoheadadt
Joined
Oct '10
dittoheadadt

Regarding gun-free zones I found this passage from a recent John Fund column to be extremely important in countering emotional, ignorant, claptrap:

"The Aurora shooter, who killed twelve people earlier this year, had a choice of seven movie theaters that were showing the Batman movie he was obsessed with. All were within a 20-minute drive of his home. The Cinemark Theater the killer ultimately chose wasn’t the closest, but it was the only one that posted signs saying it banned concealed handguns carried by law-abiding individuals. All of the other theaters allowed the approximately 4 percent of Colorado adults who have a concealed-handgun permit to enter with their weapons."

Astonishingly, and in further evidence of the abject morons we have to battle on this issue, "...shortly after the Cinemark attack in Colorado, the manager of the nearby Northfield Theaters changed its policy and began banning concealed handguns."

~Paules
Joined
Jun '10
~Paules

Cornelius Julius Sebastian

~Paules: I think it was the late, great Jeff Cooper who coined the term "hoplo-phobia."  A phobia is defined as an irrational fear.  When a phobia spreads through the mass culture, it becomes a panic.  One of the characteristics of a panic is that it allows emotion to prevail over logic.  The deliberate dissemination of panic to promote a political agenda is known as evil.  Individuals who participate in evil are called evil-doers.  When laws promote evil, we are not morally obliged to obey them or those who promote them.  Such is the logic of the situation.      · 3 minutes ago

Jeff Cooper of Scout Rifle fame?  Very appropos if so.  · 3 minutes ago

The same.


Joined
Mar '12
Scarlet Pimpernel

This might be a good issue to fight back, and to play the long game.  The Left has captured the schools.  The GOP controls many legislatures just now.

How about inserting something about self-defense, citizenship, and guns into the high school curriculum--including an individual liberty friendly understanding of all of the above.

Beyond that, how about adding a gun knowledge section to teacher certification.  Again, the curriculum would be developed in coordination with the NRA.

This is the model that the Left has used with great effect for the past century.  It's time to use it for ends that are not Left wing.

Edited on December 21, 2012 at 5:25pm
BlueAnt
Joined
Aug '10
BlueAnt

Chris: 

There is a move afoot amongst the political and media elites to make gun control the new abolition or civil rights movement

It's already going public.  They are comparing gun control to the move to desegregate the south.

ZeroHedge has a rather, uh... colorful, response to the idea.  The most CoC-compliant synopsis:

The article attempts to promote the idea that desegregation was achieved due to the actions of the Johnson Administration, who supposedly used the threat of cancelled supplemental funds to state schools as a means to force them into enrolling black students.

The goal here is to promote a worshipful attitude towards the Federal Government as the sole arbiter and savior of the people.  It’s funny, but I thought it was the dissenting protests of millions of civil rights activists that ended desegregation, NOT Lyndon Johnson, who by all accounts was a racist who only wanted to use the black community as a voting bloc to revitalize the Democratic Party. 

Point being, legislation didn't change the culture that produced segregation, and it won't change the culture that produces mass murders.  But it will infringe on important Constitutional rights.

Chris O.
Joined
Jul '10
Chris O.

Something seems different this time and I can't help but wonder if it is simply geography. Notable incidents in Kentucky and Colorado took place far away from the liberal elite and media. Connecticut is a lot closer to home.

I don't like thinking that way, but I can easily envision many of the same individuals' reacting to those tragedies by thinking them a product of a gun-happy culture present in flyover country. Now, of course, it has to be the weapons themselves because it couldn't be a failure of community or a failure of policy or even a prevalent parenting culture that eschews authority in such matters.


Would you like to comment on this Conversation?

Become a Member for $3.67 a month.

Join the Conversation
Already a member? Sign In
Loading

Start your shopping here!

Help support Ricochet by making your purchases through our Amazon links.

Welcome Visitor!
Join  or  Sign In

Become a Member to enjoy the full benefits of Ricochet:

Ricochet: The Right People, The Right Tone, The Right Place.  Join today!

Already a Member? Sign In