by Peter and Helen Evans
The so-called ’debate’ over gun control would be funny if its implications weren’t so serious. They’re both speaking the same language, but they’re talking about two very different worlds. As a result, neither side really understands what the other side is talking about. The difference between the two world-views was illustrated by something that came up in a handgun safety class that we recently attended.
Our instructor was stressing the great personal responsibility that we take on when we’re handling an instrument of deadly force. He urged us not allow ourselves to act "too dumb to live." He passed out an article titled, "I accidentally shot myself last night." It was the account of someone who neglected to make sure his handgun was un-loaded before cleaning it and ended up shooting himself through the hand. Oops! The writer was honest about how "it was my own damn fault" but the instructor went on to explain to us that it wasn’t really an "accidental" discharge, which means a mechanical failure; the gun’s fault (extremely rare), but rather, a "negligent" discharge, which means an irresponsible lack of attention; "my own fault."
The anti-gun side of the gun-control question seems to believe that the world is a place where things "just happen" to them, that guns are somehow dangerous all by themselves - "accidents just waiting to happen" - and they conclude that the best way to prevent gun crime is for the government to get rid of guns themselves.
The pro-gun side of the debate sees the world as a place where it’s people who do things - that it’s the moral character of the individual that determines whether or not a gun will be used properly - and they conclude that the best way to prevent gun crime is for law-abiding individual citizens to be armed to defend themselves against criminals with guns.
The difference between these two attitudes hinges on responsibility. One is based on the sometimes-uncomfortable reality of personal responsibility, the other on the comforting fantasy of passive helplessness. No wonder the two sides don’t understand each other!
Unfortunately, the passive/helpless attitude, with the help of opportunistic lawyers, is spreading through our culture. People are blaming anyone but themselves - and suing them! - for everything from their own obesity to burning their own legs with hot coffee. The "blame someone else" activists are trying to hold the entire gun industry responsible for the behavior of a few violent criminals.
By continuing in their error of blaming the gun instead of the individual, they are unwittingly working to create the same unhappy situation that now exists in the United Kingdom and Australia. In those two countries, the law-abiding citizens have been disarmed and gun crime has, predictably, soared far beyond the supposedly ’violent’ United States.
By clinging to their irresponsibility and whining to government to "do something" these people are making themselves "useful idiots" in the unwitting service of the forces of tyranny; the same tyranny that the Second Amendment was designed to prevent.
We urge you... don’t be too dumb to live in freedom. "Stick to your guns" in the defense of liberty!
Peter and Helen Evans, "http://peterandhelenevans.com. This husband and wife team - international teachers, freelance writers and speakers - teach a philosophical approach to conservatism. They are also real estate agents in the Washington, DC area.
