I could quibble on the historical details but I don't disagree with your sentiment. There's a culture of fear in the US. I think that culture manifests in all kinds of weird ways, and one of those ways is what Oscar referred to above as the unhealthy gun culture. I also think one of the ways it manifests is the abject and completely disproportionate moral panic that ensues every time there's a high profile violent incident of any kind (mass shooting, terrorism, street crime, particularly heinous sex crime, etc.).
FWIW I think the idea that we should arm teachers is just as silly an overreaction as enacting a futile ban on certain types of rifles based basically on cosmetics. Now the fact that I'm familiar with, and I like to think part of, the good gun culture (which can be shockingly nerdy) probably makes it easier for me to take that view. I very much get why it would be harder for others who don't have that experience.
Still, I think the way to fight the culture of fear, which I agree is a problem, is to stay measured and try to take a step back before joining the mob (to be clear, not accusing you of this, just sharing my personal philosophy).
If we're talking about blowing the minds of our ancestors with ways people die in the future I think abundant, cheap, and readily available high calorie-high in sugar food would be the real alien concept. Also the guy in 1928 probably would have heard about the Bath School Massacre that happened a year before, though there was no 24/7 news cycle to terrify everyone and inspire copycats.
The world was way more violent in their times. These school shootings are terrible, just like terrorist attacks are, but we really need to maintain perspective.
I'm always startled by the lack of rigorous understanding of history that prevails in our political class and the poli-sci experts they rely on. Maybe the former has rendered the latter too ideological for real reflection. It's not like these kinds of questions haven't been asked in well recorded fashion for 2500 years. It's mind boggling to me that a memo like that gets written only after the big decisions have been made.
Either way there seems to be too much emphasis on solving big problems largely out of control and not enough on mitigating/avoiding catastrophes. We can't stop Islamist extremism, but we can probably limit our appeal as a target by applying some basic Westphalian principles. You know, stay out of other peoples' civil wars, stop putting our fingers on the scale for the Israelis and the Saudi monarchy in international affairs. I know all thats just crazy hippie talk though.
That's the case for a lot of people. It makes sense for my family mainly because my wife's company still offers a good ppo insurance plan whereas mine is just the high deductible crap.
I think done correctly this is absolutely true. Yea there's always some bums out there taking advantage of the system but since I had a kid I've been amazed at how expensive its become for my wife to keep working. From daycare costs to the tax hit I get why so many families end up with someone at home. Our system is horrendously outdated.
Didn't see your comment until just now but this is one of the reasons I think the left ought to be more skeptical about gun control as typically proposed. There's a history of the authorities chosing not to protect trans people, gays, racial minorities, and others from private violence. I don't want to make criminals out of people in those kinds of situations and I've never understood the enthusiasm for effectively doing that.
I guess this is what I don't understand about an AWB though. What would the purpose be if it leaves just-as-effective weapons for mass shootings legally on the market?
This is inaccurate. To legally buy a firearm from a dealer in another state the firearm needs to be transferred from an FFL dealer in the state of purchase to an FFL dealer in the state where the purchaser is a citizen. The in-your-state FFL dealer is subject to the laws of that state and it's illegal for that FFL dealer to transfer you something outlawed in that state.
Now maybe there's something to the idea that people in more controlled states go to less controlled states to find someone who will do a straw sale. However you can't just walk into a store over state lines and buy something you can't in the state you live in.
@oscar-gordon is right about the ease with which AR type rifles can be fabricated and it's only getting easier. There's already a whole industry out there dedicated to builds. Unskilled people complete 80% lowers (the regulated part) with drill presses in a couple hours then buy the non-regulated parts. I don't know how you stop people from being able to create pieces of guns. The machinary behind it isn't nearly as complex as people think.
The real reason I don't see an AWB doing anything though is that it doesn't ban semi-automatic handguns (which, post Heller, is probably unconstitutional). Media attention to ARs aside, I believe semi automatic handguns are still the most used in mass shootings. High capacity magazines are widely available and they're not any less deadly in close quarters.
I strongly suspect there's a regional bent. People in the urban Mid Atlantic aren't really worried about federal tyranny. Too many people work for the government, either directly or through contractors. But there are enough islands of poverty and urban decay that violent crime can feel closer than it actually is. Even when it's phyisically close it usually isn't demographically.
The NRA certainly isn't pushing for administrative improvement but the bigger issue is federalism. Many states also have their own background check requirements and a lot of the agencies that administer these transactions aren't exactly well run or tech savvy. Things get lost, certain types of findings don't translate well across jurisdictions. Dumb yes, but there's more to it than the federal gun lobby.
Quite the opposite. It's because they don't think state power is capable of protecting them from violent crime (which in certain respects they're right about) but they also grossly overestimate the threat, especially at the individual level. It is not an arms race against the police. its an arms race against largely imaginary criminals/highly unlikely events that the police insist lurk around every corner.
Again, Oscar can correct me if I misread him, but this corner of the gun culture doesn't say 'I need this to battle the police.' They say 'If the police need this, and I can't rely on the police, I also need this.'
Re-read what I wrote. Obama being a normal Democrat, doesnt mean that all is healthy in our executive branch, or that as a polity, we aren't prone to irrational levels of hysteria.
Fair enough in a vacuum. But none of this happens in a vacuum.
Edit to add, I too strongly dislike our culture's naive views on violence and wish we could change that. I don't think more criminalization will meaningfully impact that problem.
For the last year I feel like I've been getting an education in what living in a deep red state must have felt like in 2008. And that's not to compare Obama and Trump on politics or competency. It's more that I am confronted daily with a level of hysteria that doesn't make much sense to me at the individual level, especially from people I once thought rational.
My hope for the Trump administration was that the idiocy of it so delegitimized the presidential soap opera that our politics has become that we found our way to a more levelheaded, less news cycle driven type of politics. That was pie in the sky to begin with. The more I think about it, the more I realize destroying the presidency probably would come with its own set of disasters. I have no solutions, other than maybe read less and drink more.
Well we may just have to disagree. In my various adventures in American gun culture I haven't found loads of sympathy for survivalists or Branch Davidian types (though it is out there and my guess is that its more prevalent in other regions). What I do hear a frustrating amount of is people echoing the kind of extreme self-defense philosophies and paranoia about crime regularly expressed by the police.
I've never been an NRA member and their handling of left wing protest and episodes like Philando Castille has further illuminated what they are.
But really you don't see any dissonance here? What kind of #resistance gives up its right to be armed to those it claims must be resisted? And anyway, see my comment to Morat above. I don't want to go down a path arguing arguing a position I don't really hold. There's some serious inconsistency (or at least lack of introspection) between saying the government is corrupt and being woke about police abuse in one breath but then calling for new policies that would empower and exacerbate those people/problems in the next.
I have mixed feelings about the 'resistance to tyranny' thing. To the extent there's something to it I think it's that firearm ownership in our culture/system is a stick in a bundle of rights that's hard to mess with without implicating a lot of other things. But let's just put that aside.
What's in practice being demanded is more mass criminalization. I do think there's some serious dissonance in saying that the government is fascist or supports the agenda of fascists but then demanding that government is given a while host of new law enforcement powers.
Well I don't think more guns are a solution.
There is a part of me that's started wondering if a nationwide approach isn't the best way to go. I'd be curious to hear what other people on the firearm rights side think about that.
On the mass shooting issue I think the best thing we can do right now is set up something better and more reliable than NICS. If existing systems were being administered properly they could have prevented or at least made far more difficult quite a few recent incidents. The Texas shooting last year and Dylan Roof immediately come to mind.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.
On “Morning Ed: Society {2018.02.26.M}”
As always no one really knows, but we can all be certain a better and more just society will result.
On “Alrighty GOP, It’s Go Time, Let’s See What You Got!”
Most of the options aren't mutually exclusive. Both good and bad things can be true at the same time.
"
@chip-daniels
I could quibble on the historical details but I don't disagree with your sentiment. There's a culture of fear in the US. I think that culture manifests in all kinds of weird ways, and one of those ways is what Oscar referred to above as the unhealthy gun culture. I also think one of the ways it manifests is the abject and completely disproportionate moral panic that ensues every time there's a high profile violent incident of any kind (mass shooting, terrorism, street crime, particularly heinous sex crime, etc.).
FWIW I think the idea that we should arm teachers is just as silly an overreaction as enacting a futile ban on certain types of rifles based basically on cosmetics. Now the fact that I'm familiar with, and I like to think part of, the good gun culture (which can be shockingly nerdy) probably makes it easier for me to take that view. I very much get why it would be harder for others who don't have that experience.
Still, I think the way to fight the culture of fear, which I agree is a problem, is to stay measured and try to take a step back before joining the mob (to be clear, not accusing you of this, just sharing my personal philosophy).
On “The unreview”
I have nothing to add to this discussion but I love that part. The first two Hellraisers are great.
On “Alrighty GOP, It’s Go Time, Let’s See What You Got!”
If we're talking about blowing the minds of our ancestors with ways people die in the future I think abundant, cheap, and readily available high calorie-high in sugar food would be the real alien concept. Also the guy in 1928 probably would have heard about the Bath School Massacre that happened a year before, though there was no 24/7 news cycle to terrify everyone and inspire copycats.
The world was way more violent in their times. These school shootings are terrible, just like terrorist attacks are, but we really need to maintain perspective.
On “Linky Friday: Apple Pie”
I'm always startled by the lack of rigorous understanding of history that prevails in our political class and the poli-sci experts they rely on. Maybe the former has rendered the latter too ideological for real reflection. It's not like these kinds of questions haven't been asked in well recorded fashion for 2500 years. It's mind boggling to me that a memo like that gets written only after the big decisions have been made.
Either way there seems to be too much emphasis on solving big problems largely out of control and not enough on mitigating/avoiding catastrophes. We can't stop Islamist extremism, but we can probably limit our appeal as a target by applying some basic Westphalian principles. You know, stay out of other peoples' civil wars, stop putting our fingers on the scale for the Israelis and the Saudi monarchy in international affairs. I know all thats just crazy hippie talk though.
"
That's the case for a lot of people. It makes sense for my family mainly because my wife's company still offers a good ppo insurance plan whereas mine is just the high deductible crap.
"
I think done correctly this is absolutely true. Yea there's always some bums out there taking advantage of the system but since I had a kid I've been amazed at how expensive its become for my wife to keep working. From daycare costs to the tax hit I get why so many families end up with someone at home. Our system is horrendously outdated.
On “Alrighty GOP, It’s Go Time, Let’s See What You Got!”
@veronica-d
Didn't see your comment until just now but this is one of the reasons I think the left ought to be more skeptical about gun control as typically proposed. There's a history of the authorities chosing not to protect trans people, gays, racial minorities, and others from private violence. I don't want to make criminals out of people in those kinds of situations and I've never understood the enthusiasm for effectively doing that.
"
I guess this is what I don't understand about an AWB though. What would the purpose be if it leaves just-as-effective weapons for mass shootings legally on the market?
"
@morat20
This is inaccurate. To legally buy a firearm from a dealer in another state the firearm needs to be transferred from an FFL dealer in the state of purchase to an FFL dealer in the state where the purchaser is a citizen. The in-your-state FFL dealer is subject to the laws of that state and it's illegal for that FFL dealer to transfer you something outlawed in that state.
Now maybe there's something to the idea that people in more controlled states go to less controlled states to find someone who will do a straw sale. However you can't just walk into a store over state lines and buy something you can't in the state you live in.
"
Why would you go lighter on handguns out of curiosity?
"
@road-scholar
They're no more effective for mass shootings than any number of common handguns. The VA Tech shooter used a glock.
"
@oscar-gordon is right about the ease with which AR type rifles can be fabricated and it's only getting easier. There's already a whole industry out there dedicated to builds. Unskilled people complete 80% lowers (the regulated part) with drill presses in a couple hours then buy the non-regulated parts. I don't know how you stop people from being able to create pieces of guns. The machinary behind it isn't nearly as complex as people think.
The real reason I don't see an AWB doing anything though is that it doesn't ban semi-automatic handguns (which, post Heller, is probably unconstitutional). Media attention to ARs aside, I believe semi automatic handguns are still the most used in mass shootings. High capacity magazines are widely available and they're not any less deadly in close quarters.
"
I strongly suspect there's a regional bent. People in the urban Mid Atlantic aren't really worried about federal tyranny. Too many people work for the government, either directly or through contractors. But there are enough islands of poverty and urban decay that violent crime can feel closer than it actually is. Even when it's phyisically close it usually isn't demographically.
"
The NRA certainly isn't pushing for administrative improvement but the bigger issue is federalism. Many states also have their own background check requirements and a lot of the agencies that administer these transactions aren't exactly well run or tech savvy. Things get lost, certain types of findings don't translate well across jurisdictions. Dumb yes, but there's more to it than the federal gun lobby.
"
Quite the opposite. It's because they don't think state power is capable of protecting them from violent crime (which in certain respects they're right about) but they also grossly overestimate the threat, especially at the individual level. It is not an arms race against the police. its an arms race against largely imaginary criminals/highly unlikely events that the police insist lurk around every corner.
Again, Oscar can correct me if I misread him, but this corner of the gun culture doesn't say 'I need this to battle the police.' They say 'If the police need this, and I can't rely on the police, I also need this.'
"
Re-read what I wrote. Obama being a normal Democrat, doesnt mean that all is healthy in our executive branch, or that as a polity, we aren't prone to irrational levels of hysteria.
"
Fair enough in a vacuum. But none of this happens in a vacuum.
Edit to add, I too strongly dislike our culture's naive views on violence and wish we could change that. I don't think more criminalization will meaningfully impact that problem.
"
For the last year I feel like I've been getting an education in what living in a deep red state must have felt like in 2008. And that's not to compare Obama and Trump on politics or competency. It's more that I am confronted daily with a level of hysteria that doesn't make much sense to me at the individual level, especially from people I once thought rational.
My hope for the Trump administration was that the idiocy of it so delegitimized the presidential soap opera that our politics has become that we found our way to a more levelheaded, less news cycle driven type of politics. That was pie in the sky to begin with. The more I think about it, the more I realize destroying the presidency probably would come with its own set of disasters. I have no solutions, other than maybe read less and drink more.
"
This is true and it's part of why comparisons to the UK and Australia are so misleading. They didn't solve a problem. They never really had one.
"
Well we may just have to disagree. In my various adventures in American gun culture I haven't found loads of sympathy for survivalists or Branch Davidian types (though it is out there and my guess is that its more prevalent in other regions). What I do hear a frustrating amount of is people echoing the kind of extreme self-defense philosophies and paranoia about crime regularly expressed by the police.
"
I've never been an NRA member and their handling of left wing protest and episodes like Philando Castille has further illuminated what they are.
But really you don't see any dissonance here? What kind of #resistance gives up its right to be armed to those it claims must be resisted? And anyway, see my comment to Morat above. I don't want to go down a path arguing arguing a position I don't really hold. There's some serious inconsistency (or at least lack of introspection) between saying the government is corrupt and being woke about police abuse in one breath but then calling for new policies that would empower and exacerbate those people/problems in the next.
"
I have mixed feelings about the 'resistance to tyranny' thing. To the extent there's something to it I think it's that firearm ownership in our culture/system is a stick in a bundle of rights that's hard to mess with without implicating a lot of other things. But let's just put that aside.
What's in practice being demanded is more mass criminalization. I do think there's some serious dissonance in saying that the government is fascist or supports the agenda of fascists but then demanding that government is given a while host of new law enforcement powers.
"
Well I don't think more guns are a solution.
There is a part of me that's started wondering if a nationwide approach isn't the best way to go. I'd be curious to hear what other people on the firearm rights side think about that.
On the mass shooting issue I think the best thing we can do right now is set up something better and more reliable than NICS. If existing systems were being administered properly they could have prevented or at least made far more difficult quite a few recent incidents. The Texas shooting last year and Dylan Roof immediately come to mind.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.