Fear And Loathing And Commentary On Gun Buying

Andrew Donaldson

Born and raised in West Virginia, Andrew has been the Managing Editor of Ordinary Times since 2018, is a widely published opinion writer, and appears in media, radio, and occasionally as a talking head on TV. He can usually be found misspelling/misusing words on Twitter@four4thefire. Andrew is the host of Heard Tell podcast. Subscribe to Andrew'sHeard Tell Substack for free here:

Related Post Roulette

24 Responses

  1. Jaybird says:

    Over the last few years, we have had some *SERIOUS* failures on the part of police.

    Failures that include “doing things that they shouldn’t do” and “not doing things that they should do”.

    The narrative that you can’t trust the police on the one side and that you can’t rely on police on the other.

    It absolutely makes sense that “I have to take care of myself” is one of the conclusions that people reach after enough of that. “That involves having a gun, just in case” is not a crazy outcome of thinking “I have to take care of myself”.Report

    • Damon in reply to Jaybird says:

      Well, when the law AFFIRMS, as it has countless times, they cops have no legal obligation to individuals, you are, as they say, on your own.Report

      • Jaybird in reply to Damon says:

        I think that that wasn’t common knowledge, though.

        I’m just guessing here but I think that most folks out there had a baseline assumption that cops do have something of an obligation to “protect” and/or “serve”.

        You call the cops, they’re supposed to help.

        The recent failures of Uvalde and Floyd are *VERY* recent and *VERY* high profile.

        This info got to people who otherwise wouldn’t have encountered it.

        Note: Something not being common knowledge shouldn’t be interpreted as me saying “therefore there were no communities unaware of this knowledge”.Report

        • Damon in reply to Jaybird says:

          Then most folks haven’t been paying attention to the news I guess. I’d have to spend some time, but I’m sure I could go back, at least to the 80s and provide examples of this being in the news. Now, my experience could be different. I only read a sunday newspaper for 20 years, and the WSJ daily for a decade, but I’d wager that any reasonably educated middle class person or higher has been exposed to this fact at least once in their life.Report

          • Jaybird in reply to Damon says:

            Well, there’s “pay attention to the news” and walk away saying “there was a shooting at a high school” and there’s “pay attention to the news” and walk away saying “the deputy refused to go in and kept other cops from going in? WHILE THE SHOOTING WAS STILL HAPPENING?!?”

            I expect that most walked away with the former.
            Few walked away with the latter.

            Until Uvalde.Report

        • Pinky in reply to Jaybird says:

          I think that, even among those who knew the law, there’s been a change in expectations of how frequently the cops might not step in. That’s not an observation about whether the expectation is correct, just that it’s changed.Report

  2. Oscar Gordon says:

    Yeah, the conflating of fear with paranoia is disingenuous. Still, I’m with the author, the more training folks get, the better.

    And a funny thing happens with training, when you take it seriously, and you get some under your belt, you start to realize that that fantasy you may have had is just that. A little training is a great way to dispel misconceptions about how good you think you will be, and set firm the notion that you need a lot more training before you get there.Report

    • CJColucci in reply to Oscar Gordon says:

      I have no problem with sane, law-abiding, responsible people owning some kinds of guns suitable for civilian use, getting training, and keeping in practice. (The paperwork can be annoying, but it’s really not much different from the paperwork involved in owning a car.) I’ve done it myself.
      But unless you’re going to commit to getting good, you’re probably not helping yourself in real-world dangerous situations and you risk picking up some toxic attitudes too prevalent in the gun culture that will get you into trouble.Report

    • InMD in reply to Oscar Gordon says:

      Every class I have been to has reiterated some variation of the following points:

      -you aren’t ever as good as you think you are.
      -if you are ever tempted to voluntarily put yourself in a situation where self defense may be necessary, don’t.
      -if you are ever in a situation where it appears self defense may become necessary, and you can leave, leave.
      -even a lawful shooting will totally f*ck up your life.Report

  3. Chip Daniels says:

    The view of a gun as akin to a seatbelt doesn’t work because it doesn’t take into account the increased risk a gun brings.

    A seatbelt doesn’t increase the risk of an accident, or make an accident more deadly.
    But a gun does make the risk of a deadly confrontation higher, and make the outcome of a confrontation more deadly.Report

    • Oscar Gordon in reply to Chip Daniels says:

      And training tends to alleviate a lot of that risk, since you don’t start with the bad habits that largely drive that risk, and your trainer will try to disabuse you of the notion that you will be the next local action hero.Report

      • Chip Daniels in reply to Oscar Gordon says:

        What I was pointing out is that the analogy to seatbelts or insurance is flawed logic.

        The premise is that buying a gun is a “better safe than sorry” preventative measure, when in fact that, statistically, buying a gun makes your family less safe rather than more as it has the tendency to create the very problem it was meant to solve.

        Training can alleviate that risk, but there aren’t enough people doing enough training to make the overall risk level lower. And as we’ve seen with countless videos of police shooting people for no reason, training can’t overcome a bad mindset. If people buy a gun because they think the world is falling apart and the cops can’t protect you, that mindset will make all the training in the world irrelevant.Report

  4. Slade the Leveller says:

    Another example of the gun reflex on the right. Any sort of critique, however right or wrong, must be countered with as much derision as possible.Report

    • InMD in reply to Slade the Leveller says:

      I’ve been to the gun show that the WaPo writer attended many, many times. One of my relatives regularly has a table at it. I’d be lying if I said there wasn’t some pretty stupid right wing paraphernalia available for sale. But her take deserves derision. That show is about as anodyne and professionally run as they get. She’s the one who went in with a predetermined opinion, already intent on finding a way to paint it in a negative light, as opposed to having an open mind.Report

      • Slade the Leveller in reply to InMD says:

        No doubt the story was written in her head before she even set foot on the grounds. A more thoughtful reporter might have asked attendees if they could explain the basis for their fears.

        I have relatives who are armed to the teeth for just such a reason. They live in virtually crime free areas, in which even non-gun owning citizens go unmolested. If pressed on the point, they’ve been unable to justify the fear.Report

        • InMD in reply to Slade the Leveller says:

          I think the kind of answer you’d get is some variation of ‘better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it.’ YMMV as to whether or not you find that convincing but I think the principle of charity ought to be applied pretty liberally to voluntary ‘man on the street’ interviews of regular people. It isn’t like you can’t find plenty of instances of people in the gun control movement making less than coherent statements or who are unable to explain their positions in ways that are convincing to an open minded skeptic.Report

    • Pinky in reply to Slade the Leveller says:

      Would you also say that the Post article followed the “gun reflex of the left”, treating the gun-buyers with as much derision as possible?Report

  5. As for the word tactical, it means, “adroit in planning or maneuvering to accomplish a purpose.”

    Sure, here’s an adroit in planning or maneuvering to accomplish a purpose shirt.

    https://www.grainger.com/product/49YC57?gucid=N:N:PS:Paid:GGL:CSM-2295:4P7A1P:20501231&gclid=Cj0KCQjwk96lBhDHARIsAEKO4xYZitkjffZFti-3kTsTlqjf8Le5FDQUidp26_L-hB5PWjWCn6QFPlUaAlzmEALw_wcB&gclsrc=aw.dsReport