Of Mice, Men and Firearms Legislation – Part One

     The issue of firearms regulation and to a more onerous degree, confiscation, is front and center once again in the litany of conversations in our Nation. It’s not a Democrat vs. Republican issue, really, it’s not, though one could make a case for framing it as a Liberal vs. Conservative argument. There are many more factors and personality propensity elements to this debate than simple polemics. I’ve had numerous conversations over the years with those who wish to tighten restrictions on firearms and their components or wish to prohibit ownership outright by the citizenry, and there are a few common threads that fall far outside of the realm of political affiliation that I have noticed in these conversations.


     Many times in these conversations the firearm adverse have been close to someone who has died at the end of a gun. Be it self inflicted, hunting accident, homicide or accidental, someone that they know has been shot and killed or severely crippled. Doesn’t mater the circumstance of the shooting, the result is instantaneous and immediate blame placed on the weapon and not the operator of the weapon or the circumstance of the shooting. Emotion overrides all and sears the aversion to firearms into that person’s psyche forevermore.


      Many people are simply raised to believe that firearms are bad. The person could have been raised by Pacifists, raised by someone who fits the emotionalism description above, someone who has simply never been around firearms, raised with a religious conviction against firearm ownership, whatever. They were just raised that way.

  Simple Ignorance

      When my wife and I first started living together I was not allowed to keep firearms in the house. She just didn’t want to be anywhere around them for any reason. I placed them in the care of a friend and started to ask questions as to why she didn’t want firearms in the house. As it turns out, she was simply ignorant of their operation and was intimidated by this ignorance. After some time and persuasion I was able to get her down to the firing range and give her a primer. (We made it a double date scenario with another couple. Sneaky, I know…) A little education and a little hands-on experience changed her mind and feelings on firearms. This leads me to a whole other set of influence or category, the most maddening of the categories…

  Indignantly Ignorant

      The indignantly ignorant are completely unreasonable, usually politically motivated and/or control motivated in their aversion to firearms. They will use relativist arguments, will display a great amount of ignorance both mechanically and philosophically of firearms and are zealous, vocal advocates of either regulation or outright confiscation of any and all firearms. They will draw others into their cause by co-opting the emotional, religious and ignorant into it. They are soft tyrants, they are cowards that wish to use the force of the State to satisfy their desire to control others to comply with their desires. In a conversation just yesterday, the words, “Your rights end where mine begin,” coupled with the statement that, “I am no gun expert. I don’t need to be, I don’t want to be, it’s fine for other people, I have other hobbies. If it’s a machine gun sub-machine gun, you don’t have to have one.” This is the definition of Indignant Ignorance. I don’t know, I don’t want to know, I don’t need to know, but what I do know is what you do and do not need, based on my willful ignorance of the subject.

 Wow. Just. WOW