Glenn E. Meyer
New member
Reading about new political books for 2014 on politico.com and saw:
Don't really know much about her. Might be interesting.
Don't really know much about her. Might be interesting.
New gun book
- Thread starter Glenn E. Meyer
- Start date
She seems to be pretty pro-gun, and she's gotten some backlash for it.
That said, being pro-gun is trendy among conservatives right now because that position raises hackles on "the left." If it didn't, would as many folks be coming out in vocal support? I worry they wouldn't.
That said, being pro-gun is trendy among conservatives right now because that position raises hackles on "the left." If it didn't, would as many folks be coming out in vocal support? I worry they wouldn't.
Gunfighter Nation....
I saw Bill Moyers interview the author of Gunfighter Nation.
It's a interesting premise & the author has a few valid points IMO but some of his political views are flawed re; crime/urban development.
I don't think it's fair or prudent to constantly blame gun owners or concealed license holders as being a "threat" to gun violence.
The real threat is the street criminals, gang members, drug dealers etc who use guns illegally. They go in & out of the US court systems and do not care about gun licenses, laws, etc.
I saw Bill Moyers interview the author of Gunfighter Nation.
It's a interesting premise & the author has a few valid points IMO but some of his political views are flawed re; crime/urban development.
I don't think it's fair or prudent to constantly blame gun owners or concealed license holders as being a "threat" to gun violence.
The real threat is the street criminals, gang members, drug dealers etc who use guns illegally. They go in & out of the US court systems and do not care about gun licenses, laws, etc.
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
Their argument is that the simple existence of guns that are legally sold at first then feeds into the criminal market place. People study what is called 'time to crime' - that is the interval from legal sale to criminal use.
If the gun didn't exist, then it couldn't make to the criminal through any path.
You need a counter argument for the legal gun existing to counter this. The antigun folks don't buy into self-defense and prevention of tyranny.
If the gun didn't exist, then it couldn't make to the criminal through any path.
You need a counter argument for the legal gun existing to counter this. The antigun folks don't buy into self-defense and prevention of tyranny.
Author's point....
The Gunfighter Nation author made the point that he strongly disagreed with the growing US "prepper" attitude & the rational behind US citizens owning firearms to address take-overs/civil disorders/tyranny/etc.
I agree with a few of his remarks to a point but he lost me when he claimed the Axis Powers(Nazi/Japan/Italy/etc) of the WWII era did not pose a serious threat to CONUS or the US coastline areas.
This has been documented in multiple sources & is common knowledge that both Germany & Japan had several plans of sabotage/arson/assassins/etc.
Who does this journalist/academic think would have dealt with these possible threats had the plans been carried out?
It was the hard work & dedication of the US armed forces and federal LE agencies/intel groups that kept these actions from becoming successful.
I'd add that I agree with the last post. To claim that "legal guns become crime guns" is bogus.
I've bought & sold many handguns in the last 20 years or so. I've never had a firearm stolen or had a gun grab.
Does that happen? Yes! Is it going on 1000s of times a day all across the USA? No!
If thefts or gun crime were major problems, I'm 100% sure the media or academics would point that out.
CF
The Gunfighter Nation author made the point that he strongly disagreed with the growing US "prepper" attitude & the rational behind US citizens owning firearms to address take-overs/civil disorders/tyranny/etc.
I agree with a few of his remarks to a point but he lost me when he claimed the Axis Powers(Nazi/Japan/Italy/etc) of the WWII era did not pose a serious threat to CONUS or the US coastline areas.
This has been documented in multiple sources & is common knowledge that both Germany & Japan had several plans of sabotage/arson/assassins/etc.
Who does this journalist/academic think would have dealt with these possible threats had the plans been carried out?
It was the hard work & dedication of the US armed forces and federal LE agencies/intel groups that kept these actions from becoming successful.
I'd add that I agree with the last post. To claim that "legal guns become crime guns" is bogus.
I've bought & sold many handguns in the last 20 years or so. I've never had a firearm stolen or had a gun grab.
Does that happen? Yes! Is it going on 1000s of times a day all across the USA? No!
If thefts or gun crime were major problems, I'm 100% sure the media or academics would point that out.
CF
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
The threat to the USA mainland issue is based on claims that Japan had plans to invade the USA but didn't because of gun beyond every tree. Thus, we need the RKBA. In the old days of TFL - folks would claim the Red Chinese were massing in Mexico and/or in container ships in Long Beach harbor - thus, we in TX better be ready!!
However:
1. That claim cannot be sourced to an original and is only anecdotal of questionable veracity.
2. Historical research into Japanese plans indicates NO plan to invade the USA. Their goals are now well known and it was to reach a negotiated settlement to maintain their hegemony in Asia.
As far as the Nazis - there was speculative Nazi propaganda before the war - see Shirer's Berlin Diary that they might jump across to Brazil and then eventually attack the USA. But it was hot air. There was pie in the sky plans for attacking us with long range weapons.
If the war lasted that long, they would have been on the end of a nuclear attack from us. That was what the bomb was originally for and the upcoming B-36.
The small number of saboteurs would be handled by police and the huge armed forces available. Thus, that isn't relevant to the defense of Conus argument for the RKBA.
This is similar to the argument that the Swiss deterred invasion with their militia style armed forces when the real reason was their collaboration at a high level and threats to blow up train tunnels that they let the Nazis use.
Next, the fact that you never had a gun stolen means what? Oh, I have a friend who had his truck full of guns stolen. The local 'tactical store' had its door broken into and lots of guns stolen. A new Academy had its roof cut through and the gun cases cleaned out.
The guns used in crime were legal at the start. The antis say - that their simple existence enables them to enter the illegal world. Thus they shouldn't exist in the legal civilian world. There needs to be a counterargument.
The academics and media point this out about guns all the time. It is standard academic antigun literature.
However:
1. That claim cannot be sourced to an original and is only anecdotal of questionable veracity.
2. Historical research into Japanese plans indicates NO plan to invade the USA. Their goals are now well known and it was to reach a negotiated settlement to maintain their hegemony in Asia.
As far as the Nazis - there was speculative Nazi propaganda before the war - see Shirer's Berlin Diary that they might jump across to Brazil and then eventually attack the USA. But it was hot air. There was pie in the sky plans for attacking us with long range weapons.
If the war lasted that long, they would have been on the end of a nuclear attack from us. That was what the bomb was originally for and the upcoming B-36.
The small number of saboteurs would be handled by police and the huge armed forces available. Thus, that isn't relevant to the defense of Conus argument for the RKBA.
This is similar to the argument that the Swiss deterred invasion with their militia style armed forces when the real reason was their collaboration at a high level and threats to blow up train tunnels that they let the Nazis use.
Next, the fact that you never had a gun stolen means what? Oh, I have a friend who had his truck full of guns stolen. The local 'tactical store' had its door broken into and lots of guns stolen. A new Academy had its roof cut through and the gun cases cleaned out.
The guns used in crime were legal at the start. The antis say - that their simple existence enables them to enter the illegal world. Thus they shouldn't exist in the legal civilian world. There needs to be a counterargument.
The academics and media point this out about guns all the time. It is standard academic antigun literature.
kilimanjaro
New member
A local shop here just lost their license due to missing guns and paperwork. One reason was that 10 guns, count them, 10 guns, had been traced from a crime to the shop.
The shop had sold easily 2,000 guns a year for 65 years.
The shop had sold easily 2,000 guns a year for 65 years.
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
A shop I used to like in Oregon - same deal years ago. Funny paper work and that was that.
Another gun shop nuance is that, IIRC, about only 5% of LGS contribute to most of the time to crime incidents from new purchases. But the ATF has been slow or reluctant to act against them. I'd have to dig out the details.
Another gun shop nuance is that, IIRC, about only 5% of LGS contribute to most of the time to crime incidents from new purchases. But the ATF has been slow or reluctant to act against them. I'd have to dig out the details.
Japan....
Not to jump off topic to far but I saw a recent TV doc about national parks & park rangers where the subject came up.
Reportedly, US intel agencies(FBI, War Dept, ONI, OSS, etc) uncovered a plot to spread wildfires & selected arson targets in the US timber & NW area(WA, OR, ID, etc) to cause thousands of acres in damage.
The Axis powers(Japan) were going to deploy airships & large balloons to start fires in remote areas.
I would agree that full scale "invasions" or Pearl Harbor type attacks were not put into place but the US Army & OSS did prepare for more events along the US west coast.
I'd add that civil disorders like Super-Storm Sandy or a ill-prepared area like NOLA(Katrina 2005) are very realistic for many US citizens(license holders/gun owners).
"Help" might not coming running to the rescue or 911 may not answer after a major event.
Not to jump off topic to far but I saw a recent TV doc about national parks & park rangers where the subject came up.
Reportedly, US intel agencies(FBI, War Dept, ONI, OSS, etc) uncovered a plot to spread wildfires & selected arson targets in the US timber & NW area(WA, OR, ID, etc) to cause thousands of acres in damage.
The Axis powers(Japan) were going to deploy airships & large balloons to start fires in remote areas.
I would agree that full scale "invasions" or Pearl Harbor type attacks were not put into place but the US Army & OSS did prepare for more events along the US west coast.
I'd add that civil disorders like Super-Storm Sandy or a ill-prepared area like NOLA(Katrina 2005) are very realistic for many US citizens(license holders/gun owners).
"Help" might not coming running to the rescue or 911 may not answer after a major event.
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
That was a last ditch and rather nutty attempt by Japan to float some balloons over. I don't recall airships and they didn't have a large airship program.
One poor soul got blown up in the NW when he went to poke at one of the balloons that actually made it.
The Japanese did have a well worked out plan to attack the Panama canal with planes launched from giant subs but that was called off as the war ended.
Anyway, defense against foreign invasion isn't going to be a selling point for the modern RKBA. Social disruption like after Katrina or the LA riots is a better one, I agree. I recall for Schumer and Bloomberg, a NY Times photo of a guy sitting in front of his ruined house in Long Beach, NY with a pump shotgun after Sandy. Long Beach was the home town of much of my family and I spent much time there.
One poor soul got blown up in the NW when he went to poke at one of the balloons that actually made it.
The Japanese did have a well worked out plan to attack the Panama canal with planes launched from giant subs but that was called off as the war ended.
Anyway, defense against foreign invasion isn't going to be a selling point for the modern RKBA. Social disruption like after Katrina or the LA riots is a better one, I agree. I recall for Schumer and Bloomberg, a NY Times photo of a guy sitting in front of his ruined house in Long Beach, NY with a pump shotgun after Sandy. Long Beach was the home town of much of my family and I spent much time there.
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
Thread drift - my fault for responding to it.
Let's get back to the book.
Let's get back to the book.
The linked story says the book is about motives of the "political left" to grab guns. I'm not always comfortable talking about "left" and "right" when it comes to specific issues like gun control. It sounds a lot like name calling. Hopefully, the book will have some meat to it.
Glenn -- I wasn't trying to be critical. I thought maybe there was a back story somewhere. I see that from time to time and try to determine the story.
Glenn -- I wasn't trying to be critical. I thought maybe there was a back story somewhere. I see that from time to time and try to determine the story.
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
No problem. I agree that emphasizing the 'left' is not a particularly good strategy.It does work for targeted fund raising and book sales but making the RKBA a political niche area is counterproductive.