With rifle-toting protesters showing up at various rallies and town halls around the country, there’s been a lot of worry – mostly on part of liberals – that these demonstrations could erupt into serious violence. I happen to think that there is real cause for worry, especially considering the borderline eliminationist rhetoric coming out of the far-right, as well as the fact that members of the far-right have by and large been responsible for a considerable amount of political violence over the past twenty years. Megan McArdle, however, is unconvinced that we’ll see any violence from these gun-toting protesters:
Numerous people claim to believe that this makes it likely, even certain, that someone will shoot at the president. This is very silly, because the president is not anywhere most of the gun-toting protesters, who have showed up at all sorts of events. It is, I suppose, more plausible to believe that they might take a shot at someone else. But not very plausible: the rate of crime associated with legal gun possession or carrying seems to be very low. Guns, it turn out, do not turn ordinary people into murderers. They make murderers more effective. […]
I suspect that, like the notion that Obama is not a US citizen, or that George Bush either planned the 9/11 attacks or allowed them to happen, this is for most people what Julian Sanchez calls a symbolic belief. They don’t really believe that these people are thugs intent on murder–not in the sense that they have, with careful thought, arrived at a conclusion that they are willing to defend vigorously. But it is pleasurable to tell yourself you believe terrible things about your enemies, and so you don’t examine the thought until someone says, “Well, how about $500 on it, then?” and you think about how much it would hurt to lose $500 on, and realize that you don’t actually have any reason to believe it’s all that likely.
Insofar that liberals are spooked by the presence of firearms at town halls or events attended by the president, it’s not because we believe that firearms possess some magical ability to turn Mild-Mannered Citizen into Bloodthirsty Domestic Terrorist. Indeed, the suggestion (or implication, really) is more than a little dishonest; very few – if any – liberals have argued that the mere presence of a firearm is enough to spark political violence.
No, liberals are worried about the potential for violence because the ingredients seem to be there. Last year’s election revealed the extent to which the conservative base is filled with angry, anxious and scared people desperate for some explanation as to why their lives are falling apart. And since Obama’s inauguration, men like Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck have successfully convinced a large swath of those folks that the Democrats deserve the lions share of the blame, not only for making their lives miserable, but for electing a socialist, communist, Nazi, America-hating liberal who wants nothing more than to take what’s rightfully theirs (read: America) and redistribute it to minorities, gays and illegal immigrants.
Now, for the vast majority of these people, this is almost certainly a symbolic belief. If push came to shove – would admit that Obama probably isn’t the second coming of Joseph Mengele, and isn’t trying to off grandma in a desperate attempt to save money. For them, this really is just something pleasurable to tell themselves about their enemies, and not something to actually act on. For a very small minority however, these fears are completely – and terrifyingly – real. In a very real sense, they are cloistered and isolated from reality. They sincerely believe that Barack Obama has usurped the presidency, and that the United States is well on the road to a totalitarian dictatorship. What’s more, their fears are bolstered by a steady stream of misinformation and fear-mongering, some of it from fringe talk-radio hosts, and some of it from prominent Republican politicians.
Of course, most of these people won’t act on their fears. But I don’t think it’s a stretch to say that there are a few folks who will arm themselves, and will try to take matters into their own hands. In fact, it’s not a stretch because it has already happened. Since Obama was elected, at least a dozen people have been killed or wounded by far-right extremists, and during the Clinton years, the country experienced one of the deadliest terrorist attacks in its history, carried out by a paranoid, racist far-right extremist.
That’s not to say that every gun-toting protester is a potential Timothy McVeigh, but to say these fears are not unfounded. It would be one thing if liberals were relying on conjecture and hypotheticals to argue that violence is a real possibility. If right-wing domestic terrorism were nonexistent – or at least extremely uncommon – then I would agree that liberals are either A) being very paranoid or B) don’t actually believe that their fellow citizens would hurt or kill someone over a political disagreement. But we know that that’s not the case. We know that there has been an uptick in far-right activity, we know that there has been an uptick in far-right violence, and we know that liberals and minorities are – more often than not – the stated targets of far-right violence. At the risk of sounding slightly alarmist, I think that we are fooling ourselves by not at least acknowledging the possibility that something truly terrible could happen.
And even if we leave this aside, I would hope we can come to a consensus that carrying a gun to a town-hall meeting or non-gun-related protest should be unacceptable. It’s a blatant attempt at intimidation, and inimical to any form of democratic debate, even the debased form that takes place at these meetings. Nobody–not the Panthers, not the NRA, not the militias–should carry guns to a health care protest.Report
“And even if we leave this aside, I would hope we can come to a consensus that carrying a gun to a town-hall meeting or non-gun-related protest should be unacceptable.”
Bingo.Report
As McArdle said, it’s mainly just dumb because protesting in general is pretty pointless. But since it’s no threat to the President, is it really that big of a concern? If so, why not call for a repeal of the laws that make it legal to carry a gun in public?Report
I can dream, Mike. I can dream. 😉Report
The only time I carry in ‘public’ is when I go to gun shows… it just seems like it would be more trouble than it’s worth. Now concealed carry…that’s a whole different story.Report
From my perspective, concealed carry worries me more than open carry.
A guy with a gun on his hip has it out there. He’s obviously making a point. He’s the right-wing version of those PETA chicks pretending to be caught in glue traps.
A guy who wants to shoot somebody? He’s got his gun hidden somewhere.Report
Huh, that reads differently to me. Guys who are openly carrying seem like they are into a little intimidation and showing off. They want us to know they are armed. That seems less stable and more a concern then people concealing their guns.Report
Mike, I don’t know how ‘dumb’ protesting in this instance is, simply because the POTUS and the wacky Left seem to be over-reacting!
I know my congressman, Charlie Wilson, is hiding from the ‘mob!’Report
How often do protests really change the direction of the government?Report
some historians have argued, not unconvincingly that the protests of the 1960s helped make government at both the local and ultimately national level more conservative. I know you meant how often do protests turn the direction of the government IN THE DIRECTION INTENDED BY THE PROTESTERS, but backlash is always possible.Report
The wacky left may be overreacting, but what do you call bringing an AR-15 to a healthcare town hall?Report
What’s the solution? What can be done to prevent far-right violence against the left? I mean, even if the fire-arms were prevented from being carried, would the far-right be even more dangerous, concealing their weapons and acting on their anger?Report
An example could be made, I suppose. An Emmanuel Goldstein, maybe.Report
More Americans will die violent deaths in American cities in one day than all those Americans who will die violent deaths at the hands of either the radical right or the lunatic left in a decade.Report
So long as that city is not Oklahoma City.Report
Francis, the qualifier was ideological not religious (see Jayna Davis’s The Third Terrorist)Report
Mr. Cheeks,
Politically motivated violence is intended to silence and intimidate your opponents and end rational political discourse. Do you agree that this makes it more germane to the subject at hand than everyday “city” violence?Report
AC, dude, it’s not possible to engage in dialectics, rational or otherwise, with the left/socialists/Marxists/ect. ….eristics!
But, as J. Prine once said, “Jesus don’t like killin’ not matter what the reason’s for…”Report
Yes, we need a Goldstein. I also wonder how we are going to protect Limbaugh and Beck from violence caused by left-wing rhetoric.Report
I can see some left-wing, latte-drinking, Berkenstock wearing, drugged out, communist hippie-type, after reading Frum, beating Limbaugh to death with bong as Rush is teeing up at the ninth.Report
with a bong, dammitReport
I’m pretty sure most people don’t think fire arms are appropriate props to be brandishing around at what are ostensibly meetings of civil society because of the chilling effect having a weapon has on your opposition (in plain words: intimidation) rather than because anyone’s afraid they’re going to actually shoot things up.Report
“because of the chilling effect having a weapon has”
To paraphrase Obama “If they bring a knife, we bring a gun” — he didn’t say what to bring if they bring gun first — a bazooka?Report
Mike,
I think you’re confusing the President with Sean Connery in The Untouchables. 🙂Report
No, he was just playing Sean Connery in real life — http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2008/06/14/obama-if-they-bring-a-knife-to-the-fight-we-bring-a-gun/Report
What’s your beef with figurative speech?Report
The constitutional right to bear arms was to stop British Fascist tyrants tyrannizing the community. Now you have American Fascist tyrants tyrannizing the community not just over the health care issue but on a remorseless daily basis and particularly in the African-American communities. The right to bear arms has turned into the right to be a thug!Report
Buy a gun yourself. You don’t want the scary people to be the only people with guns.Report
Why are we, or McArdle, only concerned with violence directed at the POTUS? If something does happen, I’ll bet it is against a lower level official or at a random event far away from the major events.Report
What about the daily violence committed against women and the unborn through abortion? *ducks head*Report
I am from Pennsylvania, long one of the easiest places to get a carry permit. So as soon as I turned 21, I applied for mine. I got accepted, of course, and went to the sheriff’s office to get it. The sheriff, an awesome character named Smokey, started handing it to me, then snatched it away. “Listen,” he said. “You can basically carry a gun anywhere in the state now.”
“Yeah,” I said. “And that’s the way it ought to be!”
“Sure,” he said. “I agree. Only one thing: Don’t be an asshole.”
“Huh?”
“You can carry it into a bank. Don’t.”
“OK.”
“If you are driving through Allegheny County or anywhere near Philadelphia and you get pulled over for speeding, they are going to ask if you have a gun in the car. Tell them the truth. More than likely, they are going to try to take it from you. They aren’t allowed. Give it to them anyway. Call me. I’ll get it back for you.”
“OK.”
“DON’T BE A JERK.”
“OK, Smokey. I get it.”
“Seriously. If you are an idiot, you are going to get arrested. Or shot. And it will be your own fault.”
The world needs more Smokeys.Report
Buy a gun. Whilst holding it you can watch the trust decay in communities on TV. You won’t feel scared anymore and most of all you are being a good little American minding your own business!Report
I’m from Colorado. I own four guns. My Coloradan friends think that my guns are okay, as these things go, nothing to write home about. Well, the mauser taken off the body of a dead Nazi sniper is pretty cool. The others are nothing to write home about. They discuss stuff like their desert eagles and their winchesters and whatnots. We play poker in a room (garage, really) where there are at least 4 guns in various places.
I have a friend who moved here from New Jersey. I brought him to play poker once. He freaked when I mentioned the various guns that were in the room at some point later. “What???” I pointed out that I was a gun owner “WHAT????”
I’m guessing it’s a cultural thing.
I can appreciate that you think that my lifestyle is dangerous to you and your children. I assure you, you have nothing to fear from me.Report
It’s really the bullets that kill you.Report
Do you guys think it’s right to protect yourself from arrest for not paying taxes?Report
Is it really so difficult to understand the contradictory nature of a right that allows one individual security, or peace of mind, at the expense of another? This right to bear arms rests on a belief in magic; namely that there can be an infallible process for detecting sociopaths and preventing the supply of arms to them. Belief in magic is always an abdication of responsibility.Report
Belief in magic is believing a law will keep guns , or some other such deadly weapons, out of the hands of criminals and psychopaths.Report
Besides, if you took guns from all the psychopaths, many of our law enforcement officers wouldn’t be able to protect themselves.Report
“Do you guys think it’s right to protect yourself from arrest for not paying taxes?”
Only if you have some kind of nuclear weapon you can threathen them with.Report
Make your mind up. Fallible law or no law.Report
Or better still trust or no trust.Report
For the record, I trust that you are an adult who is capable of making his own decisions and I trust that you could own a firearm without harming yourself or others.
It seems that you don’t trust me.
Is that a me problem or a you problem?Report
You need to display the gun as you’re never really sure when someone will point out your small penis.Report
For the record, my really small penis has not been pointed out by anyone without permission to do so. Never once. I live in a “will issue” state, though.
Is that something that people have to worry about in states with heavy gun control?Report
It’s easier for me to sympathize with Vicki Weaver than Lon Horiuchi.Report
FYI – McArdle has a follow-up post this monring on the subject that is fantastic. Here’s a bit:
“And if you think about it, you already know this. You have access to fatal weapons every day. How often, after a fight with someone, have you been seriously tempted to run them over with your car? Or grab a knife from the rack in the kitchen and brandish it at them? Put rat poison in their morning coffee? Or take an exacto blade to their throat while asleep? The men in the readership, at least, could be fairly confident of their ability to stab their spouse to death whenever she says something really awful. Yet none of you have done it. Virtually no one else has done it, either, except for people who were already clearly deeply troubled–either abusive, or mentally ill. That’s why not a lot of hunters report getting into disputes with their friends or family that suddenly, unexpectedly, and tragically, turn violent.
It would be a very good thing if we could take guns out of the hands of criminals. But they really don’t seem to make ordinary people any more murderous. (Possibly more effective suicides, but this is hard to assess, since the gun suicides may just be more determined people who would otherwise choose another, equally effective and irrevocable method). There is more we could be doing to keep criminals from getting guns–unlike most second amendment supporters, I would support extending the requirement for background checks to private sales. And perhaps there should be a presumptive temporary revocation for those who have restraining orders out on them. But with 220 million people in this country and a very long border, no gun control scheme is going to make much difference in the availability of guns to people who really want to have them.”Report
I’m familiar with the arguments about outlawing guns and then only outlaws having them, but I like Ole Smokey’s arguments better. “Don’t be a jerk.”
Jaybird’s got the right tactic. Be responsible.
The guy taking an AR-15 to a public event may be exercising his right, but he’s certainly not being responsible.Report
I would prefer that everyone who qualifies as “responsible” purchase a gun.
I want a whole buttload of “negative externalities” out there for the irresponsible folks with guns.Report
To build on what Dan Miller said waaaaaay up at the top, even if it’s legal to do so, it is still wrong to carry a gun to any civic event, much more one attended by the POTUS.
Even if the people who do so do not pose an imminent threat to the President’s person, they are making an inherently menacing point by bringing the weapon. It is implied that they are armed, and that they consider said arms a part of their opposition to the government. The association between armed opposition and the President is uncivil in the extreme, and does not comport with the behavior of responsible, adult American citizens.Report
Ultimately though it seems to be more about the openness of the gun than it’s actual presence i.e. it’s intimidating to the opposition. So in that respect i think if you’re going to say no to it you really have to ban guns from being carried in the open completely. Otherwise there are always caveats. Someone might carry a gun to an away football game of their favorite team. Their kid’s Pinewood Derby race. Etc. If an openly carried gun is inappropriate in any situation where possible conflict exists, then it seems sensible to just ban the practice all together.
I think it’s still important to remind people that these guns are being carried outside of these townhalls. No one is taking one inside therefore the threat to others’ free speech is non-existant.Report
Where is the difference between the sociopath who believes they are outside the social contract and has the right to personally determine right and wrong and the so-called normal individual who pretends this too? How can adult responsibility, therefore, be properly exercised?Report
That’s between you and God, my man.Report
I happen to think that there is real cause for worry, especially considering the borderline eliminationist rhetoric coming out of the far-right, as well as the fact that members of the far-right have by and large been responsible for a considerable amount of political violence over the past twenty years.
To just what are you referring?Report
I’d wager he was referring to abortion clinic bombings, Oklahoma City, Holocaust Museum to name a few.Report
Yep. That should go down well with the kids who’s mother has just been killed by a stray bullet in some drugs turf war!Report
Legalize pot!Report
Sometimes I wonder if the intention of carrying these weapons isn’t just to intimidate any supporters of health care reform who might show up at the event.Report
Yep. Plenty of gun and substance abuse makes America strong!Report
Perhaps you could look into passing laws.
Maybe, if you passed enough laws, you’d be able to lock up enough people to finally live in a society where you could finally trust your neighbors again.Report
Yes. I will continue to push along with others to have laws changed to reflect shared moral positions. I will do this because I believe Liberty, or Freedom, can only exist by society imposing tolerable limits upon itself. The contradiction and impotence of Libertarianism is believing you cannot have laws because that means imposing morals on others without their consent. So hey ho you have to be cool about the drug dealer selling crack cocaine, or guns, to your kids at the school gates! It’s unworkable and it’s a nonsense.Report
…can only exist by society imposing tolerable limits upon itself.
I always read this as “me imposing tolerable limits on you”.Report
So, libertarians believe we shouldn’t have laws? I didn’t know this.Report
The wacky thing about the most, let’s be kind, “heartfelt” arguments against libertarians is that I can’t tell if an outraged Republican is making them or if they’re being made by an outraged Democrat.Report
I dunno, is it possible that those strapping pistols to their hips are just taking precautions to guard against more violent acts by BO’s Core or Union thugs?
It’s a shame that in Barack’s America you have to protect your First Amendment right to free speech.Report
Preventing widespread abuse by human beings of other human beings (like slavery and gun murder) relies on constraints to liberty agreed by majority and not individual consent. Libertarians meanwhile struggle to understand that Libertarian constraints (no limits to personal liberty without consent) are actually an attempt to impose a value system on Liberty without anybody’s consent. A direct contradiction in terms!Report